5 comments about Julius Caesar (Shakespeare Made Easy).

1. Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar in about 1599. The play was the first of three Roman plays. Shakespeare based the source material for the play on a translation of a work by the Greek philosopher and biographer Plutarch, called "The lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans". Shakespeare, like Plutarch, praises and criticises the actions of the main characters in the assassination of Julius Caesar. However, the historical events in the play are fairly accurate, although the playwright sometimes changed the sequence and timing of events and added his limitless imagination to produce a timeless play that has been enacted and enjoyed by millions of people worldwide over the centuries.
   
   The play is set in a period of political instability in Rome. The people of Rome celebrate Caesar victory over Pompey, their former leader. However, there are officials that are concerned about Caesar's growing power. The Romans were then aware that absolute power is open to abuse (there are people today who still do not know this simple fact). Among those concerned about the growing power of Caesar are Cassius and Brutus, who are both followers of Caesar.
   
   Cassius persuades Brutus that something needs to be done to thwart Caesar's growing ambitions. Brutus has a problem with his conscience but ultimately decides that it is in the best interests of Rome that Caesar is eliminated.
   
   Caesar receives warnings about the impending danger. During a festival that Caesar attends, he is warned "Beware the Ides of March". Caesar, however, dismisses the Soothsayer's warnings. When the Ides of March arrive and while Caesar is due to go to be crowned, warnings in the form of storms, bad omens and his wife's horrible dreams initially persuade Caesar to stay at home. However, Caesar decides to go after being advised that if he did not show up, Senators might change their minds about crowning him emperor. On entering the capitol, the conspirators stab Caesar to death.
   
   Mark Anthony, a very close ally of Caesar, initially pretends to go along with the conspirators but he is determined to avenge his death. When Brutus addresses the confused crowd to drum up support for the assassination, Mark Anthony cleverly and expertly manages to turn the crowd against the conspirators and incites them to riot. With popular support in Rome, the triumvirs Anthony, Octavious and Lepidus plan to fight Brutus and Cassius. Brutus's conscience still troubles him and he sees Caesars ghost. Fighting takes place and Cassius and Brutus are defeated and both commit suicide to save their honour. The triumvirs then seize power after avenging Caesar.



2. I really enjoyed reading this edition of the play. Each scene is proceded by a summary of the secene and followed by commentary on the scene, and there are notes alongside the text explaining unusual words/phrases. As an actor, I have been reading Shakespeare for quite awhile, and I still found this book very helpful. If you are new to reading Shakespeare, I particularly recommend this because you will find it very helpful.



3. "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare proves to be an amazing read if one thoroughly enjoys the challenge of deciphering the selective form of writing and occasionally complicated dialect. This classic play is based on the true, factual account of the assassination of Julius Caesar as it truly took place in 44 B.C. Of course, Shakespeare has completely made the story his own through the use of comic relief, characterization, and wonderful original composition. Julius Caesar, the ambitious and prideful dictator of Rome, has returned home from a victorious battle against his fellow Triumvirate, Pompey. As he celebrates and relishes his absolute power, little does he suspect the growing opposition of conspirators, some of whom he would never expect. This read is certainly worthwhile if one has a good taste for tragedy and does not mind a challenge.



4. The Arden Shakespeare series is the best, for either the beginning of scholarly research, the average needs of the English student, or as a resource for the informed theater professional. My only note of caution is for a casual reader who may find the extensive footnoting more of an interruption than a help. Love this book, love them all.



5. My aim is to cover shakespeare this year with my 9th grader (I home-school). I purchased this book along with "Twelfth Night". I am so happy I did. The whole original text is included along with a translation of the play in todays english. At the end of the book there are MANY, MANY exercises and tests for the student to complete to ensure they have understood what they read. With this book, you can literally give it to your child and leave them to it. Obviously, you may need to give some guidance along the way, but it will be minimal. A homeschooler's dream because there is very little lesson prep. I will definately be buying other titles in this series!

5 comments about Exit Strategy (Nadia Stafford Series, Book 1).

1. I LOVED THIS BOOK! IT WAS SO EXCALLENTLY WRITTEN, THE CHARACTERS SO DEVELOPED! I READ THAT ARMSTRONG IS CONTRACTED TO WRITE TWO BOOKS IN THIS SERIES, BUT THE FIRST WAS SO GOOD...I REFUSE TO THINK THAT NADIA'S STORY WILL END AT TWO.



2. Unbelievably, I think I loved this book even more than Bitten and Broken. And the only thing I want to know is, when's the next one?!?!?



3. While the book opens strikingly similar to a Barry Eisler book, the rest of it is refreshing. I really enjoyed the 30-something female. Kelley Armstrong takes the time to develop the character and leaves you wanting more about her other character Jack. Jack's speech pattern is annoying, but that's part of his character.
   
   A good read (for a non fancy book), especially if you're a fan of Kelley Armstrong, Kim Harrison, Victoria Laurie, etc.



4. I love this book! I am a fan of Ms. Armstrong's Otherworld novels as well, but Exit Strategy is my favorite novel of hers. Although I am not usually a fan of crime thrillers, mysteries, or suspense type novels, I still adore this book because the characters are so well written and believable. I have read this novel several times now and it just never gets old to me.
   
   I am also really excited because I just read on the author's website that the sequel, Made to be Broken, is coming out next year... I can't wait! :)



5. 
   I love compelling beginnings, and with two murders in the opening chapters--one from the victim's point of view and the other from a hitwoman's viewpoint--I knew I'd be in for a good read. After her mission, Nadia Stafford returns to normal life as owner of a nature lodge in Ontario, unaware that a serial killer's creating more victims in American cities. This changes, though, when an associate shows up to ask for Nadia's help in stopping the "Helter Skelter" killer.
   
   Authorities and professional assassins believe the killer's a hitman, which is causing a major headache for both sides. Hitmen are being picked up by cops, there's a work slow-down and worry that livelihoods will dry up altogether. If it wasn't for Nadia, I wouldn't care about the plight of hitmen, but author Kelley Armstrong has created such a unique, conflicted, and complex character, I had to know how Nadia would deal with the situation.
   
   Other hitmen are recruited to help, but since these people aren't team players by nature, this leads to more interesting conflict, not to mention some memorable characters. With every chapter, the suspense grows stronger, relationships more intense, the hunt more dangerous, and the stakes higher. By the last third, it's nearly impossible to put the book down.
   
   Although I had problems with one or two points of logic, EXIT STRATEGY is a suspenseful, memorable read, and I look forward to reading more about Nadia.

5 comments about Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy.

1. "The big daddy of the conspiracy books on the JFK assassination, and one that can't be taken lightly. A sheer tour de force that may be the final word until 2039--when government files on the case can be unlocked."
   
   If you want a thorough examination of the assassination then this book alone is comprehensive; of course I wouldn't stop researching more evidence on the subject.



2. Jim Marrs did his homework on this book. It is more of an encyclopedia than a book. Any 'lone assassin' believer, if he or she is willing to read this book, should come to understand the complexity of this case.
   However, don't read this book if you are expecting to be told who killed JFK.
   People, start to think for yourselves!



3. CROSSFIRE discusses all the many links to the Kennedy copnpiracy in a lucid, straight forward way. Your head will spin.



4. If you really want to know what happened on November 22, 1963 in Dallas and why the President was murdered, then get this book. Jim Marrs does not give us another crazy theory about what took place that day. He thoroughly interviewed many witnesses and wrote what they said they saw and heard.
   He spent 25 years investigating all aspects of the assassination. He informs the reader of the political climate at that time, and what policy changes President Kennedy was making and planning to make that angered the establishment. He talks about people in high places who not only feared the President, but hated the Kennedy's. Marrs writes that a cover-up of the assassination actually began before November 22, 1963. Read the book and make up your own mind. The documentation and evidence presented will astonish you!



5. An excellent, sanely written overview of all the evidence concerning the Kennedy assassination.
   
   This book is written by a professional Dallas-based reporter who knows what he is talking about.

5 comments about Someone Would Have Talked: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the Conspiracy to Mislead History.

1. I would say that this book is one of the most informatively detailed accounts of the actions conducted by the assassins during the two years prior to November 22nd. Larry Hancock creates a timeline for the reader and lists the players from both the CIA and the Cuban exiles involved in the plot.
   
   For anyone who wants to learn more about what happened--and even various likely scenarios, this is a book you must read!



2. Larry Hancock is a top tier researcher who has fashioned a work which will be around a long time.
   His propensity for exacting detail reflects great credit on him and the JFK research community.
   
   Bob Dorff



3. My respect for Vince Palamara's review and the Lancer site aside, I was disappointed with this book. Yes, Hancock is very knowledgable about all the "swirling" peripheral events, but stating the associations in a format of "logical" proof does not make it so. I believe it it so, also, but as I once wrote on the Lancer site this thing was set up so there would NEVER be enough proof of anybody's involvement - not the Secret Service, not the Dallas Police, not the Cubans, not Mongoose, not Ed Landsdale or David Atlee Phillips or Win Scott or James Angleton or Allen Dulles, not LBJ, not even Oswald or Ruby...and not J. Edna either. So the book is an exercise in preaching to the choir, for the most part. Those who feel it is true already pretty much know it and those who are not convinced will not find this convincing.
   For the amount of money I spent I expected more photographs. A "rogues gallery" of snapshots was disappointing.
   Applying the same logic that I would to Oswald's defense (had he had the opportunity to have it), I would not think all of this "guilt by association" would get past a preliminary hearing. Oswald's motive - carefully constructed by his 'handlers' - went down the toilet once he talked in the Dallas Police station; this book's crowd had motive and little else. At least little else provable. Johnny Roselli once told Bill Bonanno that he was one of the shooters, in the storm drain. Yes, he talked - but does anybody really believe that? So we continue to go 'round. Interestigly, you probably could pin an obstuction of justice charge on Allen Dulles, had he lived to see the Church investigations, for lying to the Warren Commission. But we'll not know anytime soon and this book does not prove anything other than good knowledge of its subject. It isn't enough.



4. Emotions always run high when conspiracies are the topic of discussion. In today's intellectual environment, where a priori conclusions are often "supported" by carefully screened facts, where value systems are "vindicated" by spin (and sometimes outright fabrication), where myth so easily assumes the stature of truth, it is rare to find an author who has the discipline and integrity to limit his or her presentation to what can only be supported by verifiable fact. It is particularly difficult to do this when one's personal investigation leads overwhelmingly to a final conclusion which angrily demands presentation, yet the last step cannot be taken without abandoning the realm of verifiable fact and entering instead the realm of highly probable conjecture.
   
   Yet this is exactly what Mr. Hancock has achieved with his book "Someone Would Have Talked". In one sense, reading the book leaves one very dissatisfied, because so many loose ends cannot be tied up - a complete, final and cathartic picture of the JFK assassination is not (and cannot be) presented. On the other hand, what IS presented is the most rock-solid investigation of the JFK assassination I have found to date. Mr. Hancock refuses to present the slightest detail he cannot prove, and what he does present leaves the Warren Commission and the idea of Lee Oswald as a lone shooter forever on the junk heap of history.
   
   For example, my own readings compel me to believe that LBJ knew about the plot beforehand, and probably was in on the planning. I would not be surprised to learn that Mr. Hancock privately agrees with me. But the only aspect of LBJ's involvement presented in his book is the cover-up after the fact. Why? Because the evidence for the cover-up is solid, while the evidence for complicity is not. That's not to say that such evidence does not exist. But Mr. Hancock distinguishes between "evidence" and "proof", something many conspiracy writers easily confuse.
   
   This is serious research and scholarship, and probably not recommended for people who are just starting out on their (inevitably) long journey away from the cover-up fabricated by the government. The more one already knows about the events in question, the more compelling this book will be. Beginners are probably best advised to start elsewhere. But for those who are prepared to have the "official story" once and for all relegated to the realm of historical fiction, this is a "must read".



5. Let me try to be constructive without being overly critical in saying what this book, Larry Hancock's Someone Would Have Talked, is and isn't. First, it isn't a work of original research; much of the theories, allegations and evidence cited have been around for awhile. You will not find a smoking gun here. Second, you will not find an objective author; it is assumed from the start that JFK's death was part of a conspiracy. Thirdly, you will not discover a detailed and methodical analysis of the evidence. Be prepared to be bombarded by a plethora of names, organizations and events - confusing to keep track of - that in one way or another, past researchers have linked to the Assassination.
   
   What you will find is a handy compendium of some of the more intriguing unresolved miscellanea from the Warren, Church, HSCA and related investigations of the Kennedy Assassination, cobbled together and centered around a shady character with anti-Castro, CIA and mob connections named John Martino. But Martino's role in the books serves as no more than a framing device for the author's version of the most popular whodunit theory of a Mob, Anti Castro Cuban, CIA nexus that has prevailed since at least the 70's.
   
   But ignore the theory: this is a valuable book for researchers, not alone for it's breadth of post-HSCA evidence that has come to light, but a great source of promising areas for follow-up research as well. Indeed, Hancock bullets many of these intriguing new items. He might as well have listed some of the other dubious evidence which, like many authors of such books, he does not question the validity of. For example, one might conclude that Oswald couldn't have been on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting since he was seen by so-and-so in the lunchroom a few moments before and after, with or without a coke in his hand. What the Warren Commission asserted about witness error as to time and memory cannot be dismissed out of hand without significant proof to the contrary.
   
   SWHT bolsters the view that Oswald was clearly being used by intelligence groups, whether willingly or naively on his part, for unclear purposes, more than likely the `dangle' the author suggests. But when Hancock once more dares venture into the Oswald-Imposter theory to create a fall-guy, we get back into the gray areas of nebulous hearsay. And the online exhibits and photos the author provides on his accompanying SWHT website do not go very far to enforce his views. For example, the Photos meant to back up Deputy Craig's Oswald look-alike at the TSBD and the mysterious Rambler are like your average Grassy Knoll shots -- not to mention your typical UFO pics: blurry and ambiguous and of better use for a `Where's Elmo' puzzle. And the exhibits are mainly of historical interest and do not really go all that far to tying the purported conspirators to Oswald, the Manlicher, bullets, wounds, or whatever crime-scene evidence one chooses to believe is important.
   
   Moreover, like most conspiracy theorists with pre-conceived notions, contrary evidence that would spoil the theory is completely neglected. For example, Hancock does not believe Oswald fired at JFK, nor was knowingly part of the assassination conspiracy. He doesn't really say what he thought he was a part of. He certainly doesn't answer the lingering questions about what Oswald was doing in his Garage that morning - same garage where the Manlicher was -- when he got out the `curtain rods', nor where the curtain rods went and why he denied carrying them to work that day. Nor does he attempt to resolve his picture of Oswald's choir-boy innocence (vis-à-vis killing Kennedy at least) with previous evidence of his predilection toward assassination such as that of his taking a shot at General Walker - evidence much more solid than any presented to the contrary. And of course the author completely ignores the best scientific evidence so far presented that there was a conspiracy - the acoustics tests indicating a shot from the Grassy Knoll. Since the conclusion these tests help to draw was that that shot missed, it did not fit in with the author's view of a fake autopsy as part of LBJ's cover up and so he ignored it. Nor for the same reason apparently was the excellent work from Posner and PBS Frontline of Zapruder all but proving the single bullet theory, discussed.
   
   Still, the worth of this book is not in the theory. It is in the many promising leads of Ruby and Oswald associations with CIA, FBI, Mob, Ant-Castro Cuban and most especially, each other.
   
   What needs to happen now is for someone to take up just one of these leads and drill down. To prove the conspiracy, the focus must be on a small piece rather than the Big picture. We have had far too many books on the Grand Conspiracy; now that a consensus has been built on who was involved and why, it is time to prove the link with the planners by following up in detail on one of these important leads that link Oswald, Ruby and the conspirators in those last few months in Dallas.

5 comments about Ultimate Sacrifice: John and Robert Kennedy, the Plan for a Coup in Cuba, and the Murder of JFK.

1. I finished this book. Took awhile, but did it. Close to 900 pages. "We'll explain further in another chapter," or words to that effect were sprinkled throughout and wore thin, but explain they did. I've wondered, over the years, why RFK wasn't more aggressive about pursuing the truth and why he presented obstacles to Garrison's investigation, etc--and this book explains all that and more. The theories make sense, and the documentation is laid out nicely. And next to Bugliosi's bag of hot air and overwrought opinion, Ultimate Sacrifice looks even more important. I see it's now available in paperback, so the investment is halved. I'd say it surely deserves a spot on serious researchers' shelves.



2. As with most books about the JFK Assassination, 'Ultimate Sacrifice' suffers from its own evangelism; having decided on a theory, the authors opt for proselytizing over objectivity. Authors Waldron and Hartmann start by taking themselves and their theory much too seriously, trying to convince the reader of the correctness of their conclusions by presenting a gigantic load of so called facts to overwhelm the reader. Most of these "facts", however, are far from substantiated, coming as they are from the usual secondary sources rather than original research, while ignoring much good evidence that detract from them.
   
   There are way too many assumptions of unproven allegations in this book for me to take the authors' conclusions seriously, despite the new evidence they provide from some admirable original research to try to back them up. To take just a few examples:
   
   1. The authors accept without question that Oswald was an American agent before he went to Russia. They cite the usual suspicious, yet inconclusive evidence about this such as the 'phony' suicide attempt, Oswald seen with unsavory characters while in Japan, an alleged false defector program the US was supposed to have run, and just the general feeling that it seems to make sense. And yet, the authors completely ignore the much greater evidence opposed to this inference found in the well-researched chapters on Oswald's time in Russia in the Mailer biography, much of it coming from KGB sources who had been watching him constantly. Indeed, not one shred of spy-like behavior was made evident too them by their subject during his entire stay.
   
   2. The authors believe Oswald did not take his Marxism seriously, but was only pretending to be a true believer as part of his cover. Were this true, Oswald must have been the best method actor of all time, never getting out of character, even with his wife and close friends. And oh yes, all those commie books in his room were `planted'. Amazing analysis!
   
   3. The authors decide to accept with little question the interpretation of the ambiguous ballistic and medical data of the assassination that best fits their theory, namely that the fatal shot came from the Grassy Knoll, while discounting the Single Bullet theory. Once more they completely neglect the most scientific data available that counters this notion: the Barger Acoustic analysis done during the HSCA hearings. Nor do they cite the excellent analysis of the first shots in the Zapruder film done for the Frontline special on Oswald that clearly shows the flap of Connelly's collar being flipped up as the bullet -- the same bullet that emerged from Kennedy's throat -- passes through into his shoulder.
   
   There is much more of this type of thing, too much so for me to find much value in what evidence the authors do present. I say this believing indeed that JFK was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy involving elements of Cosa Nostra and CIA. But the breadth of scope of their arguments is just too much for the lack of depth of the evidence they provide.
   
   Do not mistake me, there is some value in this book. The research on the Tampa and Chicago threats is intriguing. The details on the CIA-Mafia assassination plots is both informative and believable. And the presentation of Ruby's ties to Organize crime is the most convincing and thorough I have seen. Unfortunately, when the authors try to cover all the mysterious associations of Johnny Roselli, the Mafia point man on the assassination, they mainly rely on a single secondary source, All American Mafioso by Charles Rappleye and Ed Becker while completely neglecting to cite the most curious close friendship he maintained with top CIA officer William K. Harvey, point man for Executive Action assassinations, until his death. The same tactic of using a very small number of JFK assassination books to back up their arguments is used to show the actions and meaningfull associations of the other mobsters involved in the conspiracy as well.
   
   What is needed in the field of JFK assassination research is not more rehash of old and untested data to backup new conspiracy theories, but a well constructed analysis focused on manageable areas of the assassination using original research, including validating rather than blindly accepting evidence cited in previous works. At times Ultimate Sacrifice does attempt this, but far too seldom; and in the end, the books bites off more than it can chew and concludes very little.



3. 
   A clear, understandable recital of the facts. Well documented.
   One of the best-if not the best,I've read on the subject.
   There is a great deal of material, but can be digested.
   Clear and precise in showing WHY and HOW things happened on Nov 22, 1963.



4. Anyone who wants to know what really happened to JFK should get this book. More solid research than any other book on JFK. Amazing revelations.



5. I'm only a third of the way through this nearly 1000 page book, but it's extremely impressive. Packed full of details, this book does an excellent job of laying the groundwork for a satisfying and wholly credible conspiracy theory. According to this account, the root of the JFK assassination can be found in RFK's (and JFK's, to lesser extent) pursuit of the mafia, beginning in 1958 (see 'The Enemy Within' by RFK for more). And the book provides even the background of this public investigation (NYC mob boss Anastasia's barbershop murder...increasing mafia power and influence, resulting in increasing mafia murders as a result of mafia infighting for a share of the expanding pie, ect...). The official version- the 'lone nut theory'- is so weak as to be laughable, yet it still persists. Professional mafia-hired hitmen assassinated JFK and Oswald was a patsy. If this wasn't the case, then why would Jack Ruby (who had a long and deep relationship with the mafia) assassinate Oswald? To kill a communist???...because he loved JFK??? Ruby killed him because they (the mafia) absolutely needed to shut Oswald up...that simple. This book is very well-written, researched, and documented. Highly recommended.

5 comments about Tears of Autumn: A Paul Christopher Novel.

1. I first read this in 1975. I started reading in the early evening, read it straight through to the end. Stunned by the breathtaking authenticity, I read it through again, immediately, entirely.
   
   When I looked up, the sun was shining through my window. I had been at it for over 16 hours.
   
   This book became my benchmark for its genre.
   
   I am a student of the CIA, especially the 1960s evolution of the Agency. Today the head of the Clandestine Service (also then euphemistically called the Deputy Director of Plans, and today called the Deputy Director for Operations) would never dream of meeting a CIA officer in the street, but in the 1960s it was a practice. The episodes in the Congo were authentic. The tradecraft was authentic. The rivalry between the Agency and the military Special Forces continues to this day.
   
   The book is probably authentic to a fault. One reviewer complains that the reader is kept in suspense because the author keeps secrets already know to his characters from the reader.
   
   But isn't that what secrecy is all about? Even the reader, after all, is not entitled to know everything. Need to know. I found that an outstanding literary device, given the genre of the book.
   
   There's more on this theme. McCarry's next book, The Secret Lovers, actually takes place before The Tears of Autumn. But the two stories dovetail together, and this second (but chronologically earlier) book deliciously dovetails with The Tears of Autumn, and even innocuously explains secrets that were left hanging in the Tears of Autumn.
   
   McCarry was actually a field officer of the CIA, operating covertly in Europe, Africa and Asia. He knew of what he wrote. His description of Feung Shui, the powerful concept of Chinese geomancy, is absolutely spot on. Ask any Asian.
   
   Finally, McCarry's style of leaving all emotion out of his principal character, and his overall writing style, strengthens the overall proposition of the tale. This is an intelligence report. Delivered by an intelligence operative. Take it or leave it. Yes, it reads like a Haiku should -- all the emotion is provided by the reader. The truth itself needs no embellishment.
   
   -- Tonet



2. Reading the synopsis of this novel I nearly skipped it because I didn't want to read another crackpot Kennedy assassination theory. However, I have recently become a fan of Charles McCarry's Paul Christopher novels so I gave it a go anyway. I have to say I didn't read this as quickly as is my wont, and it is a dense novel with many characters. However, the end result is a very credible story of who might have been behind the murder; but more than that, it read true as to the background of characters and settings from Italy to Viet Nam to the Congo in that period.
   
   I only recently became aware of some of the revisionist history being written concerning the assassinations of the Ngo brothers in Viet Nam and how that was a real turning point in the war, with everything downhill from that point on. McCarry was writing a lot of this as fiction 30 odd years ago. Interesting. He presents an understanding of Vietnamese culture I had never encountered before, and it was very enlightening.
   
   Filled with nefarious characters, a "rendition" kidnapping, revolutionaries, double agents and intrigue aplenty, there is also a nicely detailed love story of Paul Christopher and his Molly that fills out a tale that has the feel of real people and places and real history being made. I am working my way through the series, and although what was recent history when written in 1975 is now almost ancient history, it is a good starting place to enter the world of Paul Christopher and Charles McCarry. Well worthwhile.



3. Shortly after JFK is assassinated, U.S. secret agent Paul Christopher suddenly realises he knows who ordered the president's death. We don't know how, we're just told this as a fact. To my mind this is rather a big flaw in what is supposed to be a thriller. From that moment on Christopher quits his job, ignores his bosses and roams around the world tracking down the people he knows can help him. Along the way we learn an awful lot about Vietnamese society and how the concept of the family lies at the heart of the nation's identity. This part reads like an encyclopaedia. Christopher has various adventures, runs around with guns, is shot at, has his car blown up, arranges a kidnap or two, and yet despite all these supposedly exciting scenes the narrative is flat and unexciting. Just as the hero knows from the start who was behind JFK's death, the reader of this book knows that nothing will happen to the agent and that he will end up solving the mystery.



4. I only recently discovered McCarry's political thrillers, but he's been around for decades. This book, though, was really a disappointment to me. First published in 1975, it follows the adventures of McCarry's series character, CIA agent Paul Christopher, as he seeks the shocking truth about the JFK assassination.
   
   Well ... let's face it, in the ensuing years, we've all been beaten to death with theories about JFK's death. Maybe "The Tears of Autumn" was thrilling and shocking when it came out 33 years ago, but now it feels like a hoary tale indeed. And the conclusion (spoiler alert!) -- that the Diem family of Vietnam killed him for his complicity in the assassination of their family members in Vietnam -- hardly seems worth a blink in an era when people blandly accuse the president of masterminding the deaths of thousands of innocents in downtown Manhattan in casual conversation.
   
   McCarry writes brilliantly, but "The Tears of Autumn" is too dated to be more than a curiosity.
   
   Reviewer: Elizabeth Clare, co-author of the historical novel "To the Ends of the Earth: The Last Journey of Lewis and Clark"



5. This is an outstanding tale of significant believability. Even from the span of time from when it was written to today. How did McCarry slip under the radar?

5 comments about Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team.

1. Vengeance succeeds on many levels. It could easily stand as a classic tradecraft work about espionage operations or as a fictional spy thriller. It is action packed and a real page-turner. I was disappointed when it ended.
   
   Terrorism succeeds, when it succeeds, by using violence to send a public message to one's opposition. It amounts to negotiation by murder and bomb blasts. The message being: "If we aren't safe, you aren't safe either." That was the message that the Black September organization sent to Israel with their 1972 Munich action, and it was the same message that the Israeli state sent back to Black September via Avner's hit team. Terrorism is warfare by symbolic violence, although it's more than symbolic if you're there when the bombs go off or the shooting starts.
   
   As to whether all aspects of Vengeance are literally "true," I admit I have my doubts. But so what? It has verisimilitude where it counts and whether this or that specific detail is literally true or is a mishmash of several events or characters combined is largely irrelevant. The ongoing terror campaigns going on all over the world today show that the morally ambiguous world that Avner and his opposition existed in 1972 hasn't changed that much. And it probably never will.



2. I read "Notes on a controversy" at the end of the book first, because this justification of the text by the author deals with the issue of veracity. The book has apparently been attacked on this score, and of course the very nature of the subject excludes the possibility of total and certain verification of all the facts, but the author makes a convincing case of the techniques he used in circumventing this problem and checking out his main source's story. That story itself is gripping, not only because it describes in thriller-like fashion the actions undertaken by an Israeli hit team against the masterminds behind the killings of Israel's Olympic team in 1972, but also because of what I would call, perhaps oddly, its humanity: the personal torment felt by the members of the hit team is faithfully portrayed, and is perhaps the most unforgettable part of the narrative. One closes the book with the uneasy feeling that there really is no way to avenge, let alone deter, the monstrous deeds perpetrated by terrorist scum. But I do not share a shred of the hit team's doubts that their actions were fully justified. This book is an eye-opener on the nature on terrorism, but also on the ruthlessness demanded of those who are called to combat it. The book leaves one with few illusions about "the secret world" either, which adds to its aura of truthfulness.



3. George Jonas's "Vengeance" is the book from which Steven Spielberg's "Munich" was derived. Both concern the Israeli hit team sent into the cold to track down and kill the authors of the 1972 massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes. While reaction to the movie focused on the moral ambiguity of it all, we see here that this is at best a minor angle in the book, and at worst, a willful distortion by critics.
   
   The as-told-to story of Avner, the team leader's pseudonym, "Vengeance" details how the team is formed and begins work in Europe. With massacre perpetrators mostly dead, the hits are aimed at those higher up: those who hatched the plot, the leaders of international Palestinian terror.
   
   Some, openly terrorists, live in hiding or in countries sympathetic to terror. They travel surrounded by bodyguards. These are considered hard targets. The Israeli team is not given permission to go to Arab or Communist countries.
   
   But some are soft targets: Palestinians with covers as journalists, diplomats, intellectuals or professors, whose involvement with terror remains secret - the Sami Al-Arians of the 1970s. Trusting their covers, they live openly in cities like Paris or Rome, walk the streets alone, have fixed addresses, and generally don't carry guns or take attention-getting secret-agent precautions.
   
   The hit team - assembled at the government's highest levels and severed from Mossad to preserve deniability - flounders at the outset. They can't locate their prey. Their big break comes through a chance contact: Avner reconnects with a childhood acquaintance, now a hanger-on of the Baader-Meinhof Gang, who, believing Avner to be a radical terrorist, introduces him to bigger wheels in the underworld of terror.
   
   Avner discovers that terror, a big business, has developed a certain amount of outsourcing - organizations that, for hefty sums of money, secure safe houses, deliver arms, supply explosives, provide lookouts, do surveillance, arrange transportation, help with getaways and bury bodies. Providing networks terrorists couldn't possibly match, they free the latter to plan hits and getaways without worrying about logistics. The support networks also provide an extra cut-out level for the terrorists. They aren't picky about who they work for. Most important for Avner and his team - cut off as they are from Mossad and its resources - they even leak information on other terrorists' whereabouts.
   
   Tapping into these networks - penetrating the terror world by impersonating terrorists - Avner hits the gold mine allowing his team to find and kill Israel's enemies.
   
   At first they are so successful they marvel at how easy it is to find and kill a man. Almost too easy. Later, snags emerge. The hard-to-find people are still hard to find. A couple of missions don't go smoothly. Their Mossad liaision hints they're not moving fast enough. The team begins to press, attacking with less planning and caution. They are compelled to involve themselves - and their precious underworld contacts - in a major Israeli commando raid in Beirut, blowing the team's cover.
   
   Their mood darkens as three team members die, two by assassination, leading survivors to wonder if they've been sold out by the very people who sold others out to them.
   
   Yes, they contemplated the morality of it all - having to become terrorists, complete with constantly changing fake passports and shadowy changes of address - to fight terrorists. But their conclusion is that they're not like terrorists at all. Terrorists kill schoolchildren - the infamous Ma'alot massacre comes to mind - while the hit team kills terrorists, delivering justice crude, justice extralegal, but justice nevertheless. At the explicit orders of Israeli Premier Golda Meir they avoid killing bystanders, family members and anyone not on their hit list. By and large, they are successful. They go outside their orders only marginally: assassinating a Dutch hit woman who seduced and killed one team member, probably on behalf of the Palestinians, and assassinating a PLO replacement for an earlier target.
   
   Avner's greater concerns are more specific. He is haunted by insecurity as a "yekke", an Israeli Jew with German roots, in Israel, a country dominated by "Galicianers", or Polish Jews, who, Avner feels, form a ruling clique reserving power and privilege for themselves. He and his teammates are all "yekkes", picked because they can blend in in Western Europe, but they all worry about being left hanging once their mission, and usefulness to the state, conclude. Avner's own father is a former Mossad agent, now embittered by his treatment. Avner worries the same thing will happen to them.
   
   Gloom and paranoia set in as his teammates die. At mission end he returns to his wife and baby and decides he's had enough of this kind of life. His fears materialize when his superiors, refusing to let him go, take back $100,000 that had accrued in a Swiss bank as his pay. Avner accuses them of threatening his family in an effort to force him back into the fold - and notes his own countervailing "I know where your children go to school" threats against an Israeli security man in New York City he suspects of involvement.
   
   Finally they leave him in peace, but penniless and forced to take menial jobs. Avner's decision to go public about his mission is clearly payback for this, a quest for recognition, and maybe for some money as well..
   
   Avner and Jonas conclude the mission in the end presents no moral dilemma. Yes, the terror world replaces the dead terrorists and, yes, terror continues. But the people who were killed, deserved it. A message is sent that attacks on Israel and Jews no longer go unpunished, and that the Jewish state will go after those responsible, wherever and however.
   
   He and his teammates ponder the morality of what they're doing because they are indeed normal human beings, not, unlike their adversaries, hardened killers. They ultimately believe in their mission. They see themselves as disciplined soldiers fighting for a democratic state. They fight an extralegal war because the world, again and again, has offered little or no justice for Jewish terror victims while encouraging, tacitly or actively, their murderers. In the 1970s Palestinian killers are let go, again and again, by appeasing Western governments, and commit more murders. Israel has no choice but to pursue them alone, by any means necessary, to show the world no one can strike with impunity at Jews ever again.
   
   The book is convincing, possessed of details large and small about how teams of this sort operate. You can't help but be fascinated in learning Mossad's technique for doing a hit. Each step is developed with supreme calculation and attention to detail: small caliber, low power, quiet weapons, with safeties never used, rounds left unchambered, weapons never drawn until it's time to shoot, no shooting except to kill, and shots always fired in pairs.
   
   Particularly convincing are details about bureaucratic infighting. The team, say, balks at participating in Beirut, not only because it will jeopardize their own work, but because, having taken the risks and done the work to plan an operation, they want to be the ones to do it and get the credit, secret though it is, inside Mossad - quite recognizable human behavior.
   
   Overshadowing the book is the whole question of whether Avner is who he says he is, whether the book is true; is distorted; or is an out-and-out lie. Israel can't be expected to acknowledge its truth, if it's true; even few people within Mossad were party to it; and outside intelligence experts would have no way of assessing the truth of what is explicitly an ultrasecret mission.
   
   Jonas says he believes Avner, in the end, not because of his own attempts at verification, but because Avner knew how the light switch in the lobby of a particular Roman apartment building worked. The detail most straining credibility, in my opinion, was the terror outsourcing network; it's a deus ex machina, these shadowy all-powerful guys who are on your side if you can pay them and know how to find them. And Avner stumbles over them because of a chance relationship with a childhood friend. It's so convenient, maybe too convenient. But it is still plausible.
   
   At the end, this book is vivid and compelling, one you can't put down.



4. "Vengence" is an insider's account of the formation and actions of a counter-terrorism team. Unlike the fictional Bourne series emphasis on hand to hand fighting skills, the bulk of the subject's work involved obtaining information, being smart with it, and executing the target. Who can you trust and how much of what they are saying is true was always the key question which would make the difference between being killed and making the kill. A very tense and disquieting story which reads fairly well for a non-fictional account, I recommend it to anyone interested in gaining insight into the dark side of war.



5. When I was thirteen years old (circa 1985), I saw a book on the shelves of the famous "A Clean Well Lighted Place for Books," located in the Larkspur Landing Shopping Center, Larkspur, CA. It was the picture of the Israeli Uzi on the cover that caught my attention. Like many 13 year old boys, I was fascinated by sub-machine guns and automatic pistols. I bought the book because of the cover, but I was in no way ready for the tale I was about to be told. It was the tale of the Israeli Mossad avenging the deaths of the athletes that had been murdered at the Olympic games in Munich (circa 1972). The book read like a Ludlum novel, only this story was true! Contrary to the cover, all the assignations were carried out with .22 caliber ordnance (the choice of Mossad assassins), and not by the 9mm Uzi. This book opened my eyes to a historical tragedy that happened while I was still in diapers -- a tragedy not mentioned in American High School textbooks. And it gave me a fine respect for the prowess and professional nature of Israeli Intelligence (HaMossad leModi'in v'leTafkidim Meyuhadim).

5 comments about Dark Need: A Novel of the Darkyn.

1. I thought that this was a great read. The characters were fantastic together, the storyline had a nice flow to it and never got boring. However, I think it is not fair to market these books as romance. They are more of a dark fantasy, with romance being a subplot among other subplots. Readers that expect to read romance when it's just her and him within the four walls will no doubt be dissapointed. I also agree with other reviewers that John Keller has to go. There are way too many characters running around as it is. I think that Viehl writes very well, and she created a vivid and realistic world that is extremely interesting. One should really give these books a try and not base that decision on all the negative reviews which are often unfair, as it seems that some people just skimmed through without actually reading it. I am glad that i did!



2. This is the third book in the Darkyn series. Dark Need features Sam, a homicide detective and Lucan, the executioner of the Darkyn race. Sam is called into investigate the murder of a young woman left posed on a bench across the street from the club Infusion that Lucan owns. The young woman has a medallion around her neck that has Lucan's name on the back. This brings Sam to investigate Lucan as a possible suspect in this murder. When Sam goes to meet with Lucan, he discovers that she is the twin look alike of his old love, Frances. He is immediately drawn to her and her to him.
   
   This book was my favorite in the series. The author brings in the characters from the first book, Alex and Michael. I like the way she has progressed their love story throughout the first three books. Each book however, features a new romance with Alex and Michael as a secondary romance and their continuing saga.
   I enjoy reading this series and look forward to each new book. These books have a different take on the vampire scenario and the Darkyn male characters are not always what you think they will be.



3. In Dark Need we catch up with Lucan the Darkyn assassin who we first met in If Angels Burn. Homicide detective Samantha Brown crosses paths with Lucan during the course of her investigation into a bizarre drowning. As the number of killings increases Samantha becomes even more deeply drawn into the world of the Darkyn and their enemies - the Brethren. But she also has enemies of her own.
   
   Lucan has a darkly wicked sense of humour and is perhaps the most overtly sexual of the Darkyn we have encountered so far. His relationship with Samantha is complicated, in that as much as he wants her, he tries to push her away. The reason for this becomes clear at the end of the book, but it makes for a strange courtship. I'm aware from reading other reviews that some readers found this unsatisfying, but I think it's a case of having to look at the reasons for a characters actions, rather than just the actions themselves.
   
   One thing I did find confusing was how Alex knew about the bad guy. At the climax of the story she calls out his name but I'm not clear on how she knew who he was.
   
   There is a continuation of several plot threads from the two previous books including Michael and Alex, Alex's research and John Keller's quest. Indeed the more John tries to escape from the Darkyn/Brethren conflict the further he seems to entrench himself in it. I think this is more of a standalone story than Private Demon (book 2), though you will get more out of it if you're familiar with the backstory.
   
   Some new plotlines are started here - we learn more about Tremayne's condition, the changelings are introduced, and some new characters are mentioned. Notably Locksley (who has been mentioned several times but as yet hasn't made an appearance), and we first meet Jayr and Byrne (Evermore Book 6).
   
   I would warn that whilst the main story of this book is concluded, there is quite a plot twist at the end. So if you're a fan of the series I'd have book 4 (Night Lost) on hand.
   
   Also available
   Book 1 - If Angels Burn
   Book 2 - Private Demon
   Book 4 - Night Lost
   
   Coming Soon
   Book 5 - Evermore (current release date January 2008)



4. The book started at good pace. The action seemed to gradually speed up until I couldn't put it down until the end. Wonderful read. Have to go back and reread the others again.



5. Sadly, that's my opinion of the third book of the Darkyn series. The book remains great, but hte previous two books were more solid than this one. I had some problems with this book, for instance: I didn't got Lucan's beahviour. He was crazy for the lady, but he kept pushing her apart. Especially at the end, when he's also a little on the b*stard side. I supposed he had some ulterior motives for douing so, and that was what kept me from hating him. The only problem with that is, that for the benefit of the "surprise" they don't tell you what he's planning, so much of his actions doesn't make any sense.
   
   Also, there's the problem with the killings that happen on the book (Alert! Minor spolilers ahead). On the previous books everything is neatly explained, but in this one... who did the killings and why? I got the suspicion that it was Leigh, because he simply hates Lucan, but it is left dangling without explanation. Maybe it will get resolved on some other book, the following, maybe.
   And how did we do that? The victims were sort of convinced to do what happened to them, they had to obey the voice that was telling them to get themselves killed. Come to think about it is Richard who has the power of a commanding voice, but he wasn't even there when the killings happened. And Leigh's power is to show the sins comitted for a person...
   This part of the book needs further explanation on following books.
   
   The rest of the book I truly enjoyed, as did the previous ones, and I really want to read the following ones!!!
   The only problem that I had is that this one didn't seem to end as neatly folded as the previous. And I'm not talking about the cliffhanger end, but about the fact of the killings, the fact that we don't know how Sam got her power from (yes, the author says she got it when she suffered a nearly death experience, but it looks like a Darkyn power, doesn't it? And she hadn't had contact with Darkyn blood prior to Lucan, has she?), and why Lucan decided to give her (SPOILER) ALex's blood instead of his own? What does that make Sam, Alex's skygenis? I suppose that, hopefully, we will see more of it on following books.

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.

5 comments about The Romanovs: the Final Chapter.

1. This is the so-called "sequel" to Robert Massie's masterpiece "Nicholas and Alexandra." It is an excellent book about the imprisonment and murder of Russia's last Tsar and his family. If you want to learn about this important event in Russian History, please do not waste your time with Greg King and Penny Wilson's "The Fate of the Romanovs." This book, "The Romanovs: The Final Chapter" by Robert Massie is the book you should read. It also dives into the myth of Anna Anderson and proves she was a fraud.



2. Massie is a master historian and storyteller, and this book is nearly impossible to put down. Though reading Massie's prequel, 'Nicholas and Alexandra', is not essential to understandng 'The Romanovs: The Final Chapter', it is highy recommended. Beginning with the murder of the Romanov family, then moving to the discovery and exhumation of their remains, forensic and DNA analysis and the ensuing religious and political debate over their disposition and burial, Massie weaves an accurate historical narrative that reads like the finest detective thriller. Throughout, he carefully explains-in laymen's terminology-basic aspects of genetics, DNA analysis and forensic medicine. The true identity of 'Anastasia' claimant Anna Anderson is finally revealed in this book through a careful analysis of her life and the historical and genetic evidence. A wonderful read, and extremely informative-highly recommended!



3. This is a book you expected Massie to write.....since Nicholas & Alexandra was written in (I think) 1969, an update since 1991 was critical. It gives you an idea what was being discovered in DNA research and proving the bones found were who they were. Its a book a Romanov observer should have, or at least read to glean the information from. Worth it, for sure.



4. This book begins with the execution of Tsar Nicholas II of Russia and his family.
   From there the author recounts the latter-day effort, abetted by DNA testing, to find and identify the remains of the victims. And he discusses at great length the women, particularly the one known as Anna Anderson, who claimed to be Grand Duchess Anastasia, the Tsar's youngest daughter. The remains of the Tsar's son and one daughter, whose identity is disputed, were never found -- hence the Anastasia legend.
   This is a true-life mystery story in the finest tradition. My only quibble is that significant portions of this work first appeared in the New Yorker magazine, where they obviously were subjected to that publication's procrustean editing process. Other portions of the book escaped the condescending, self-conscious editing that characterizes so much of the New Yorker's non-fiction. There is one author but two styles. See whether you can detect the dividing line.



5. In this book, the author totally convinces the reader that the Romanovs were indeed murdered and their bones positively identified through scientific means. The author also proves to the reader that Anna Anderson, who posed as the duchess Anastasia, was an impostor. There is also some interesting information on living Romanov heirs who believe that the monarchy will be reestablished in Russia. I would recommend this book to those interested in Russian history.