2 comments about One Step Forward: The Life of Ken Dahlberg.

1. ONE STEP FORWARD is the life story of Kenneth Henry Dahlberg, one of whose claims to fame is being an 9th Air Force triple ace in World War II. Yet, as revealed in this 2008 volume from I WAS THERE PRESS, Dahlberg's fighter pilot exploits were just part of a well-lived, productive life.
   
   A transplanted Wisconsinite, Dahlberg was drafted in 1941 and eventually was assigned to the 354th FG, 9th AF in England. Flying P-47s and -51s, Dahlberg downed 15 Luftwaffe aircraft, earning a DSC among other awards. Shot down three times, he was a POW for the last three months of the war. He later served in the Minnesota Air National Guard and was quite successful in business, one of his company's products being the Miracle Ear hearing aid.
   
   Dahlberg accomplished a great deal in his life. It's unfortunate authors Al Zdon and Warren Mack didn't do a better job of relating that story. In particular the section on Dahlberg's military career, which should be the most exciting part of the book, is clumsily written and shows an unfamiliarity with military life. Describing Dahlberg's first combat mission, they state he flew "plane F in the third wing." Most likely, Dahlberg was in the third FLIGHT his squadron - the 353rd FS - put up. The squadron codes for the 353rd were "FT" so the correct designation for Dahlberg's P-51 on 12 June was FT*F. Later on, they state he flew a P-47 "with the letter O on its side. Again, the correct designation is FT*O. Several times the authors refer to machine guns and gun cameras being mounted "on" the airplane's wing rather than "in" the wings. Typo...perhaps? "Bomb racks" are termed "attachments for bombs" and so on.
   
   Depending on the reader's knowledge of military aviation, the above points may pass unnoticed. Yet I do feel that section of the book is disjointed and reads poorly.
   
   So, a mixed call on ONE STEP FORWARD. I was very impressed by the life Dahlberg has led; he's a wonderful representative of the Greatest generation. It's just unfortunate the authors didn't research their subject better.
   
   *****
   Note: This book is hardcover not paperback.



2. One Step Forward The life of Ken Dahlberg
   
   
   I was not to sure what to expect from a WW II veteran's life. The story kept me interested thru out. The book is about Ken Dahlberg life from childhood to the founder of company called Miracle Ear. Oh, by the way, he was a triple ace in WW II, shot down three times and held as a prisoner of war in Germany. Ken Dahlberg is now over ninety years old with no signs of slowing down!
   My favorite part of the book is his military career. He tells about how he almost did not graduate flight school. What he thought was his last day he snapped a barrel roll in his plane. The instructor asked and Dahlberg replied he thought he failed and wanted to try it in his last day of flying a military aircraft. The instructors made him a flight instructor and finally sent him to combat.
   The description of his becoming a triple ace is remarkable. I know there are only a few triple aces. Dahlberg is pretty humble in his skills as a pilot. When he was shot down, during the Battle of the Bulge he was rescued by a tank crew. Dahlberg and the book writers went to visit the soldier who saved him sixty years later in the hospital . The soldier told his story of the rescue and later passed away from cancer.
   Dahlberg went back to France and revisited the French family that hid him from the Germans after he was shot down. In the book, there are photos of the villa, and Dahlberg with the wooden stick hut slept in.
   Most of the book is about WW II combat experience and there are parts on how he got started in business after the war. I found it amazing that Dahlberg had started with nothing and worked hard and sacrificed to become a successful business person. He never forgets the sacrifices he and his fellow soldiers made to this country.
   Reading One Step Forward the life of Ken Dahlbeg will make you understand why World War II Veterans are called the greatest generation because they gave it all for this country. The book is very excellent reading and captivating.
   
   MAJ (ret) Eric Shuler NJARNG
   OIF 2004-2005
   
   
   

5 comments about Five Years, Four Fronts: A German Officer's World War II Combat Memoir.

1. This was indeed a brief view of the war by a German officer's point of view. Grossjohann served in the Polish, French, and Russian invasions and fought American troops on the Western front. He states that the German Army had very capable officers with dedicated soldiers. However the quantity of enemy never disappeared, and as casualties mounted, fewer and fewer officers were available to command the lesser number of soldiers. It was surprising that Grossjohann was in an officer's training course at the end of the war, when these soldiers were so desparately needed at the front.
   
   The stories in this book never caught my imagination. They relate the story of an officer in an infantry division fighting both a terrible enemy and bureaucracy. In fact, much of the book relates a few experiences plus his disgust at his fellow officers. This is probably the experience of most German officers in the war. However, this was not page flipping material. An OK read.



2. There are any number of German memoirs from World War II. Most of them involve a German soldier who served with some storied unit (Grossdeutschland Panzer Division, SS, etc.) and fought in numerous campaigns, and somehow survived. This book is different: the author served five years with several different infantry divisions, and had a pretty mundane career, starting out a senior NCO and being promoted ultimately as far as Major. His superiors apparently thought well of him, because he was taking a class in how to command a regiment when the war ended, but his rise wasn't that meteoric, either. The title of the book is a bit deceptive: the author served only briefly in Poland and France, did two tours in Russia (separated when he got wounded, to end the first tour) and then fought out most of the rest of the war in Southern France and Germany.
   
   The interesting part, at least as far as I was concerned, involved how mundane and average his experience was. He fought with some skill, apparently, but wasn't a great hero or anything, and didn't win any major battles. The largest weakness of the book is the author's apparent lack of any notes or references from his service in the war. This means that on a couple of occasions (especially in Russian) he dismisses weeks of combat with a vague reference to "heavy fighting" instead of giving you any details.
   
   For what it's worth, this is a good book. If you're looking for something about the rest of the German army, other than the glamor units, this is probably something you should look into.



3. The author made a complete hash of his story. His combat narratives are along the line of the Russian shelled the town all night and leveled everything but we held on. Or the Russians shelled the bridgehead all night and we weren't able to hold on. Riveting stuff. The author also takes time out to make sure you know he is quite the ladies may but with simple minded language more fitting for a [...]girl's diary. The little secret of the book is the author didn't see that much action. He basically missed Poland, served a short uneventful tour in Russia then a long tour with a training unit in occupied France, then back for a tour in Russia then back to Southern France before the invasion. The US pushed his unit out of France in short order and the war ended. Oh yes we did that because we had so much equipment and that made up for the fact our troops weren't very good. The excuses of a real loser. Give this a pass, it has no value either as history or autobiography.



4. An incredible book that reveals the humanity of the 'enemy'.It makes the Germans humans, who also had feelings and fears just the same as their Allied counterparts.Traditionally, growing up in an Allied country one is tought that the Germans were all evil personified. This book gives insight to the fact that the German soldier was just an ordinary human being, being sent into battle to fight a politicians war.



5. An interesting and easy to read first person perspective from a former German officer. Grossjohann enlisted in the late 1920s and finished the war in 1945 as a major. It provides insight into what it was like to fight at the tactical level in Poland, the Russian Front, and the west. He fought against the Poles (limited action), the Russians (quite a bit), the Americans, and the French. Provides insight into the steadily decreasing capabilities of German units as the war progressed.
   
   Unfortunately the book is a bit disjointed as it jumps from experience to experience, with the odd sidebar thrown in. Fortunately there is an attempt to put Grossjohann's battles into the larger picture so the reader has some context.

5 comments about Bury Me With Soldiers: One Grunt's Honest Story About Vietnam.

1. Once I started reading this book I couldn't put it down. I know a number of people who served in Vietnam but never talk about it. I found this book to be a real eye-opener. It's a very candid, honest and often humorous account of Vietnam. It made me proud of our soldiers and ashamed of the way we treated them and welcomed them home. As a mother of a recently returned Navy Corpsman who served with the Marines in Iraq, this book made me even more determined to make sure our soldiers are taken care of, no matter how we feel about the war or the president.
   Loved the book and highly recommend it for everyone.



2. This is a rare find indeed, but alas it can happen. It is not often in my life that I have found a book where the story is told with such integrity and can still hold my interest. This book is the perfect combination of these qualities. This book confirms my belief that honesty is the only policy and that reality is more interesting than fiction.

   Coming from a generation behind the author I can truly say I am proud to be the recipient of the legacy that will be left as this generation matures. I hope my generation lives up to this legacy and maintains the respect for this country and its ideals that the author and many like him have.

   This is the type of read I long for in my neverending search for good books.Although I have little time to sit with any book this particular one forced me to sit with it until I was at the end.




3. Book Review: Bury Me With Soldiers
   Author: C. W. Standiford
   Publisher: 1stBooks
   ISBN: 1-4033-9523-3

   From the Valley of the Shadow... by Bob Gray

   I've spent the last thirty-five years avoiding books and movies about Vietnam. The few I was exposed to infuriated me for their absolute refusal to see any good in what we did, or to appreciate the sacrifice our soldiers made. It never mattered to me who ran the country, nor did I buy into the Domino Theory - a McNamara creation that proved to be, like the man, a lie. What mattered to me were the American lives lost in a half-hearted pursuit of - not victory - peace. Then I discovered the book by Wayne Standiford; Bury Me With Soldiers.

   This is the story of how one average guy - average size, average intelligence, average outlook, life, and concerns - grew up and grew old in a few months of combat. The hopeless numbness that sets in after days of going from boredom to terror in one word - "incoming!" - is chilling in it's dissection of warfare on the human spirit. We watch as a callus grows over the author's heart, and his soul goes into remission to await the all-clear siren. And mail call.

   We meet Standiford as a high school senior. A friend of his who had graduated the year before dies in Vietnam. From the universal frustrations of high school (the drudgery of studying subjects you know you'll never use, to sex - and the lack thereof) to the middle-class values still prevalent but losing ground in the 1960's, author Standiford's life and choices mirror the particulars of millions of men caught on one side or another of the Vietnam war dilemma.

   Beset by the normal doubts and aspirations of any American teenager, he stands at his personal crossroads and wonders aloud what to do. The sixties were, as has been described by an endless array of social scientists, a disaffecting time for those of us then reaching adulthood. The old parameters of "America, Mom, and Apple Pie" were no longer enough. Not merely not enough - they were openly ridiculed. Jingoism was often the appellation applied. Bedrock beliefs were overturned with nothing to replace them. As someone else wrote about that period, America was ripe for a dictator. Free love played into the hands of every teenage boy who wanted to get laid more than anything else on earth. The beckoning hedonism was hard to resist.

   But some did. In a seamless progression Standiford shows us that some took seriously the idea that America was worth fighting for - even if the reasoning behind the fight might be flawed. The author was such a man. Standiford joined the Marines, went through Recon training and scuba diving school, and set off to destroy the enemy to the best of his ability. He did so without reservation. Then.

   In a recent email from Mr. Standiford, he told me the following: "I wouldn't take a million dollars for the experience - and I wouldn't do it over again for two million." Besides dating him (when a million dollars was big money), the statement describes my own attitude and that of most of the vets I know.

   The story he tells called up memories without being predictable. Several times the unexpected sentence made me laugh out loud - a tough row to hoe when discussing mortar round-amputated limbs and burned bodies. And the honesty of this work is mesmerizing. Standiford's early loss of heart and how he dealt with it tells us what we need most desperately to know about any author: Can I trust his word? We find that, indeed, we must. No one would admit to the things he does and lie about lesser things.

   His description of real people, men whose names should be engraved on our hearts, is riveting. The men with whom he served, Meatball, Tut, Ernie, Mac, and Doc, will always be a part of Wayne Standiford. The pain of seeing a friend lose an arm, a leg, life; the exhilaration of returning from the bush as a whole person one more time; the devastation experienced when the fickle love back home sends a Dear John letter; the unreasoning fear that becomes commonplace while sitting in a hole in the ground half-filled with water as mortar rounds creep ever closer; these too will always be a part of him. They become a part of us when we read his story.

   The acceptance of the simple but horrific fact that man-hunting is suddenly legal can be discouraging (which means, literally, to lose one's courage). That so many American boys became men while undergoing this terrifying experience says much for this country and the values we continue to hold dear. That they did it despite attempts, by those Americans who hate America, to convince them they were all criminals for being there says much for the integrity and courage of the individual men. To this day the prevalent notion (and an awful lie) that all our military men came back junkies and killers continues to blacken the sacrifice they made.

   So to all those men and women who survived and those who died trying to save a tiny country from the communist dictatorship that eventually did engulf and murder those with the temerity to stand against the Stalinist horde - I've never had the opportunity to say this before: Thank you.

   That our faint-hearted politicians wasted your efforts, and many of your lives, does not reflect badly upon you - only on them. You stood up when your country asked you to. And I appreciate it, even if I prove to be the only one. You hear the complaint repeated endlessly nowadays: Where are our heroes? The answer is that they are all around us - many of us just don't want to admit it.

   And my most profound thanks to Wayne Standiford for sharing his story with me and all who care to know what really happened there. If I can't occupy the plot next to yours, then I ask the same thing you do: please, Bury Me with Soldiers.




4. I read an awful lot of books about the Vietnam war and those who survived it- I have my own little library in fact. Some books are good, some are not so good. Some are filled with so much tactical jargon or language that an average person cannot even get through to decide if they like the book!Some just sounds like one person pounding their chest real hard!
   This is not one of those books. It is hands down one of the best books I have ever read on any subject. I am not sure I can explain why his words touched me so. But I think it is because he wrote not from a researcher's point of view, but a survivors point of view. Not from second hand- but from his own memories, his own heart, sadness, joys, anger, hate and sometimes humor. You can't make that up. No matter your talent, you were either there, or you were not and people know the difference. He is the real McCoy.
   When I read his book it felt like he was sitting right there in my living room- as if he was my old friend come back from a long stay away from my home. And he sat there in my oldest most comfortable chair, kicked off his shoes and told me about everything that had happened since last we met. Some of his story made me laugh so hard I couldn't not stop- like when he got to boot camp. There were times when I thought my heart would break, and there were times, like when I closed that book, that I wondered how in the world did any man or woman ever survive that war, not just physically, but mentally, spiritually- for that, he is my hero. Yes he did some powerful things as a soldier no question, he was decorated for that more than once. But more than that, he is my hero because he wrote personally about things that we all need to read if we will ever, ever begin to understand how Vietnam was different for our soldiers. It is not easy to put everything you own personally in your heart on paper for other people to dissect. He is brave and I think this book should be read by every American.



5. As the editor and publisher of our county newspaper, I must read a great deal, and have gotten very particular about what I really enjoy reading- and I LOVED this book.
   With a son in the military, three brothers who served in the military in the Vietnam era, and with a Dad who served in WWII, I have never really known what they faced, what they struggled with, and what a shock it must have been to be taken from "Hometown" to defending our country halfway around the world. The author skillfully walks us through his time in 'Nam, and I feel I've gotten a glimpse of thoughts and feelings, fears and emotions, that I could never have gotten otherwise.
   I sent the book to my son and his wife, and they both love it also- (and my daughter-in-law finished it before my son!) We have compared notes, and decided we truly LOVE the way this author writes. I intend to check and see if Mr. Standiford has written other books, because if he has, I'm sold.
   I've purchased books before, dug into them, and then struggled to even WANT to finish them because I was disappointed in the quality, and didn't feel the author delivered what he promised. Standiford delivers MORE than he promises- I was never disappointed and I found myself arranging my schedule so I could hurry up and get back to the book!
   In short- this is a great book.

3 comments about Forty Years a Gambler on the Mississippi.

1. I'll keep it short.
   
   Buy this book and read it, starting at the Preface and continuing, therefrom, to the end; it's a page turner.
   
   Great stories based on the life of George Devol, written by Devol, a Mississippi riverboat gambler. If you are a poker player, you'll like this book. This book is not about how to play poker; it's about an even more interesting subject: the exploits of Grorge Devol (1829-1903).



2. Loved the book, understand why the author has such a big ego- He lived in an awsome time and was at the top. Historic details filled in alot of gaps to my understanding of the mid 1800's. learned many things about the lives of people living in the Steamboat Era and was grandly entertained. laughed outloud.



3. Highly entertaining stories about gambling
   in the mid 1800's on the Mississippi River.
   The life of George Devol as gambler,fighter
   & con artist & his insights into the men &
   their character is also an insight into the
   man himself. He was a master at
   manipulating mens greed & vanity.The
   accounts of his bare knuckle fights were
   truly amazing

5 comments about A Diary From Dixie.

1. Mary Chestnut's diary received great exposure as a result of Ken Burns' documentary on PBS. It is well worth reading because 90% of the history we read of the American Civil War focuses on the military campaigns and the politics. Ms. Chestnut tells us more about the social impact of the war than we get from most authors. On top of that, she was a highly intelligent woman who was writing things in confidence that she would be unlikely to say outloud. She had a unique window into the workings of southern society and Confederate politics and she was completely honest in her evaluations. What we get here are very carefully worded opinions that no self-respecting southerner would have dared to admit in 1863. On the topic of slavery, Ms. Chestnut declares, "Ours is a monstrous system." Amid newspaper reports blasting Union General Grant for his brutal tactics and lack of finesse, Ms. Chestnut observes, "He has the disagreeable habit of not retreating before our irresistable veterans." All in all, hers is one of the most honest and well-written accounts of civilian life in the south during the Civil War.



2. C-Span did a series called "American Writers" in 2001 and although I consider myself well read it was the first time I had ever heard of Mary Chesnut.
   
   This story of the Civil War, told from the perspective of the civilians at home, was a real eye opener. Mary Chesnut, the wife of a Confederate general, was well off, but even Mary and the ladies in her circle couldn't get shoes to replace their worn ones and could only afford the outrageous prices for food because they had money. One can only imagine the suffering of those less fortunate. Life for civilians was severe and the news from the front, often heartbreaking, added to their woes. This is a unique first person account of the Civil War.
   
   I remember reading that the author of "Gone With the Wind", Margaret Mitchell, did about five years of research before she actually started writing her book. I feel it is highly likely that she read Mary Chesnut's book as part of that research.



3. Mary Chesnut's diary of life in the South during the American Civil War is possibly the best of all American diaries. You could spend weeks making your way through the labyrinth of events -- trivial and important -- and personalities found in the diary.
   
   This edition of the diary is superseded by a better one: "Mary Chesnut's Civil War" edited by C. Vann Woodward which won a Pulitzer Prize for History in 1982. Woodward's edition offers a more complete text and is heavily footnoted with explanatory material. The text in Woodward includes many interesting passages excluded from "A Diary from Dixie" because of limitations of space and because some of them reflected unfavorably on the South and Southerners.
   
   One virtue of this edition is a fine foreword about the diary by literary critic Edmund Wilson, but Wilson's foreword can also be read in his book "Patriotic Gore." I recommend you read Woodward's "Mary Chesnut's Civil War" instead of this book.
   
   Smallchief



4. This book deserves 5 stars for educational value alone. While it does have its slow points, I can say that I have learned more about antebellum culture and Southern war perspective from this book than any other I have read up to this point. The book gives us a glimpse into the mindsets of a demographic of the Southern population we can rarely find anywhere else, and it's incredible to believe that this work was almost thrown into the fire for fear of capture when McClellan's forces dwelt a mere six miles from Richmond's door in early 1862.



5. This primary source document is one of the best windows we have into southern society during the American Civil War. Mary Chestnut was a southern aristocrat, married to the man who was the first to resign his seat in the US Senate before the war. She knew many prominent Confederate leaders well--Jefferson Davis, John Bell Hood, and Wade Hampton among them--and was acquainted with nearly all of the major players in the war (she even spent several occasions in the company of Robert E. Lee and Joseph Johnston). Because she knew so many people, she was in a position to cast a very revealing light on the war from the southern point of view.
   
   Besides knowing so many influential leaders, Mary Chestnut also lived in both Confederate capitals--Montgomery, Alabama and Richmond, Virginia--while they were the government seats. Her husband's plantation was in South Carolina, and in fact her home in Columbia, South Carolina lay right in the path of Sherman's destructive march through the South. As such, Chestnut is poised to offer very interesting commentary on the fire that burned much of that city. Mary and her husband gave their all to the Confederacy, and lost much of what they had because of the Civil War.
   
   Several things in this journal are unique and worthy of mention. First, Chestnut and her friends are living the high life for much of the war, having parties, dinners, and luncheons and more-or-less living it up, even when the Yankees are approaching Richmond. They live comfortable lives, and, though Mary has a very insightful perspective into the suffering of her soldiers, she often spends as much time complaining about some minor inconvenience (such as being without her maid for a week) as she does deploring the sorry state of the starved and ill-clothed soldiers. Mary does what she can, and helps in many ways, but she is not willing to give up her parties, even when her husband repeatedly begs her too.
   
   This diary also provides a unique view of slavery. A staunch abolitionist, Chestnut hated slavery less for the cruel treatment of the slaves than for the insolent behavior of many of them. Her husband's slaves were well taken care of, and did less work than they consumed in goods. Mary recounts many horrific tales of what happened when the slaves were set free--a story of a white family going along a road and picking up a wagonload of Negro infants which had been abandoned by parents enjoying their freedom, for example. She never questions that slavery is wrong, but she does argue that Harriet Beecher Stowe's account of slavery was the exception, not the rule. This is an interesting perspective, whatever the truth of it.
   
   All in all, this is a great diary, and a splendid resource. Thank goodness this book has been reissued. The edition edited by Ben Ames Williams contained unsatisfactory notes, including some in which Williams shamelessly engaged in self-promotion of his novel. This book is indispensable for anyone looking for primary accounts of the human aspect of the war between the states.

5 comments about The Fool Lieutenant; a Personal Account of D-Day and WWII.

1. Outstanding first-person account of experiences in World War II. Amazing, hard to believe its true. Reads quickly and easily. I give it two thumbs up, plus the big toes, too.



2. Personal narratives of World War 2 are pretty common, but this one was more personal to me since I knew the guy. Bob Edlin ran Edlin's Auction House here in Corpus Christi. A small kindly old man who probably didn't weigh 120 pounds soaking wet, you would never dream he captured 800 Germans single handedly. I never knew anything about him until I looked at the certificates on one wall of the auction house. A purple heart on June 6 1944! He was at D-day? I always wanted to ask him his story, but didn't want to pry. He didn't brag about his exploits, didn't even mention them. I wish I would've talked to him some more, he passed away a few years ago. But at any rate he, with the help of Marcia Moen and Margo Heinen, put his story down in paper, and it makes for fine reading. There were millions of Bob Edlins in the war, and we can never thank them enough. Pass the history on to the future generations, we owe it to them.



3. The Fool Lieutenant is one of several WWII 1st person accounts of veteran's memories of combat in Europe and the Italian campaigns. These stories need to be told and read to let younger generations know what their fathers did to make the world safer for them today. My father never talked about the war to me except in generalities I know most were the same way around their children.



4. I happened on to this book by chance and am glad I did. I served with the 2nd Ranger Bn in the 80's and consider myself pretty good on Ranger History but, I had never heard of "The Fool Lieutenant". Bob Edlin is truely an American hero and anyone who is interested in WWII or the Rangers should definitely read this story. Mr. Edlin captures the essence of the dedication, the selflessness and the comaraderie that is embodied in the American Ranger both past and present.



5. Excellent personal account of an elite Ranger. Edlin has been credited for almost single-handedly capturing 800 german soldiers and is a decorated soldier. This book shows the heart in soul of the volunteer Rangers. A real page turner.

2 comments about BattleFire!: Combat Stories from World War II.

1. "Battlefire! Combat Stories From World War II" by Col. Arthur L. Kelly
   The University of Kentucky Press, 1997.
   
   This book is written by a veteran of three wars: World War II, Korea and Vietnam. Colonel Kelly has collected in one place eleven (11) different stories of World War II, ranging, chronologically, from the Japanese sneak attack on the Navy at Pearl Harbor to the Marines' attack on Iwo Jima. The author recounts experiences of individuals in the U.S. Navy, U.S. Army, U.S. Army Air Corps and the Marine Corps. Interestingly, all of the eleven individuals were from Kentucky. This is understandable for a book from "The University Press of Kentucky".
   
   I found it difficult to read the story of Corporal Field Reed Jr. who was on the Bataan Death March and was a POW at Camp Cabanatuan, where he was rescued by U. S. Army Rangers.
   
   Of personal interest to me was the story of Signalman First Class Lee Ebner, U. S. Navy. He was on the USS West Virginia, BB48, which was sunk at Pearl Harbor. Ebner recounts how he joined thousands of sailors who had lost their home due to the attack. There were seven (7) active battleships at Pearl Harbor on that December day. If each ship had a crew of 1500 men, then there were some 10,500 sailors who lost their belongings, their uniforms, and their place to sleep at night. On the USS Arizona, BB39, more than a thousand sailors also lost their lives. Signalman Ebner relates that he was assigned to a destroyer, the USS Mahan, DDG37, the day after the raid on Pearl Harbor. What a let down! From a big battleship to a tin can! Ebner's story goes all the way to the end of the war, where he was under attack by Kamikazes.
   
   Here is a story yet to be fully told. How did the Navy deal with thousands of displaced sailors on the days and weeks after the sneak attack? Where did they go to eat? To sleep? Where did they obtain new uniforms, and how did they get paid? The old Navy always wanted full and complete pay records before they would give you a dime.
   
   This slim volume covers the full gamut of World War II experiences, from the raid on Pearl Harbor, to POW stories, to B17 raids and depth charge attacks on American submarines. Nicely done!



2. The reader will hardly believe the danger, deprivation and hardships endured by by these ordinary Kentucky boys plucked from their farms and schooling and thrust into the most extaordinary circumstances. Kelly is a great story teller, and these stories of bravery and heroism in the face of the terrors of war are powerfully moving. These are stories that capture the experience of war from all the services and all the major campaigns of WWII while focusing on the very human side of those who were caught up in it. After you read this book you will want to give it to your children and grandchildren so future generations will never forget the sacrafices of those who went before.

4 comments about Gatekeeper: Memoirs of a CIA Polygraph Examiner.

1. The book is well written and well describes the chaos in the US intelligence community. The hilarity of the CIA's affirmative action/diversity is worth the price of the book.
   
   
   (of course anyone who volunteers
   to take a poly test should first consult a lawyer----or a neurologist.)



2. To say that I'm a skeptic of the accuracy of polygraph would be a gross understatement. I've read the research on polygraph or "lie detector" accuracy for about 30 years. My conclusion is in agreement with David Lykken's (1998) outstanding critical review of this literature in, "A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and abuses of the lie detector," as well as the conclusion of a thorough investigation by the National Academy of Sciences. Lykken, the Academy, and I agree that there is no credibile evidence for polygraph accuracy that stands up to scientific scutiny .
   
   There is, of course, substantional anecedotal evidence, supplied by those who make their living administering the exam, and which these folks almost univerally claim counts as evidence for polygraph accuracy. It is evidence, of a sort, but very weak, in fact, essentially worthless evidence. It simply ain't science.
   
   What a skilled polygrapher can sometimes do is use the machine as a prop, an aid to help elicit a confession. Mr. Sullivan's is the first book I've read by a polygrapher that acknowledges this latter point, at least implicitly. He also directly confronts some of the enormous damage that reliance on polygraph has caused - e.g., the Alrich Ames debacle. Ames was the CIA agent who sold millions of dollars of information to the Sovets, causing many moles (Soviet agents who were working for us) to lose their lives. Ames was ignored as a source of the leaks for about six years because he passed a series of polygraph exams.
   
   Sullivan also provides fascinating insights into the CIA and FBA cultures vis a vis the polygraph, including the impact of the Ames case.
   
   Although clearly pro-polygraph, Mr. Sullivan is not blindly so. His candor is often impressive. Unlike other books written by polygraphers, he appears to be less concerned with preaching pro-polygraph propaganda and more concerned with presenting a professional and balanced treatment. For me, his approach adds much to his credibility. The book is well written and I have no hesitation recommending it - although I recommend reading Lykken's brilliant book first.



3. Author John Sullivan was a polygraph examiner for over thirty years, conducting more such tests than anyone in the history of the CIA's program. What makes his story exceptional is his explanations of how lie detectors are used to identify unsuitable applicants, possible foreign agents, and others guilty of misconduct from harming the Agency. His methods, the psychology behind polygraph testing and results, and the tests which enabled Sullivan to uncover double agents, applicants with criminal backgrounds, and more makes for exciting case histories and also offers military libraries insights into the CIA's internal workings and quality control measures. An intriguing, unusual survey which moves beyond 'memoir' status to examine the foundations of CIA quality and strengths.



4. John Sullivan presents an insider's view of the utility of the polygraph and the applications where it is valid and where it is not. This is an art and not a science and false positives are common in the hands of intimidating operators. The writing style is a bit stiff and too detailed about CIA polygraphers and security officials but the overall work is a contribution to the literature of a topic that is often misunderstood.
   This is good background for people seeking employment where a full polygraph is required.

1 comments about Narrative of the War Between the States (Da Capo Paperback).

1. This book was written shortly after the war long before Early became the primary leader of the Lost Cause, a major player in the post death celebration of Lee, and the chief architect of who to blame for Confederate defeat. The book is worthwhile since Early has no negative contrived remarks for Longstreet in this 1866 era autobiography at Gettysburg. In the early 1870s, after Lee's death, he ridiculously subscribes to Pendleton's made up version of Lee's "sunrise attack order" to Longstreet that Pendleton alleged occurred on the second day. Early's book lacks any criticism of Longstreet since it is written before acrimony that started after Lee's passing. There is notable commentary on his valley campaign that is particular of interest as "Old Jube" was pretty critical of his boys at Cedar Creek where, with half the manpower of Sheridan's forces, his army virtually routed the Union Army for the first half of the day then losing steam as a huge counterattack reversed the day. His role in Chancellorsville is interesting as well as he was left with 9,000 men to create a hoax of strength before Sedgwicks 50,000, that was eventually short lived. Not an exciting read but a notable perspective of Early, contrasting his early penmenship and position before he used his pen as a spear later in life, putting his stamp on his version of history and a severe critic of all that disagreed with him.

5 comments about The Making of Robert E. Lee.

1. I had never paid a great deal of attention to the Civil War outside of history classes many years ago, occasional writing assignments (I covered the raising of the Confederate submarine Hunley), the strange attraction of the Stars and Bars in certain quarters, and a handful of historic novels I have read. But in February, 2002, the local daily paper published a letter to the editor I had penned which contained a digressive slap at the Godfather, Robert E. Lee. Whoo boy, did I step on some sore toes! Both the Asheville Citizen-Times and the local weekly, the Mountain Xpress, were pelted with letters from across the country urging that I be fed to the dogs. One Web site published a thinly veiled threat on my life. It seems that the old General Lee is above reproach, at least among the Stars and Bars crowd. Eager to determine if my passing slam was as well grounded as my previous casual knowledge had suggested, I have commenced to read. It appears I was right. This is the first volume I have read from beginning to end, but I have dipped into others, and the picture that emerges is about what I expected. Fellman presents a fairly non-partisan viewpoint--he is neither an ardent admirer nor a harsh critic--but the facts are pretty plain from the letters and speeches quoted herein. Lee was a self-aggrandizing liar, who wore his Christian piety and humility very proudly, never ceasing to tell others what a pious and humble man he was. He blamed his defeats on others. He rewrote history after the Civil War, going so far as to claim that it was really the Union that had seceded from Constitutional law and that the Confederacy was only trying to enforce the wishes of the Founders. After the fact he flatly denied that the South had seceded over slavery or that he had fought to maintain it. Though he claimed opposition to slavery and insisted that the Lord would end it in His own good time, when forced to liberate his wife's family slaves by provision of his father-in-law's Will, he attempted to hire them out to buy themselves out of bondage. He later testified before Congress that blacks were inferior beings, unable to care for themselves, certainly unable to govern themselves. He indirectly caused the deaths of tens of thousands of white soldiers on both sides, who succumbed to cholera and typhoid in stagnant prisons, because he was unwilling to exchange black prisoners for white. (He held that a Southern soldier was worth more than a black man, and so wouldn't trade black Union soldiers for his own. Grant insisted that all Union soldiers were soldiers, and refused restrictions on the swaps.) Lee also appears to have been a serious lech, soliciting visits from dozens of young women (often cousins, in the best Southern tradition) to his tent and writing passionate love letters to them ... only visiting his frequently bedridden wife to reimpregnate her. Not my kind of hero. The book is well written, interestingly arranged, carefully footnoted, and the author is deft at portraying the important scenes and events of the subject's life. This is not a bad place to start if you share my curiosity about an overrated shibboleth.



2. Hopefully some of those interested in a character study of Robert E. Lee will not be dissuaded by the negative reviews this book seems to have attacted. This is not really a conventional biography, but rather an attempt to unravel something of the man who resided behind a stoic mask. Yes, there are a few instances where the author seems to overreach -- but they do not negate the value of the work as a whole. Overall, the picture of Lee that emerges is thoughtful and balanced.



3. I must confess before proceeding that I am a southerner born and raised and have since my early youth been enamoured with the southern icon Robert E. Lee. It is to this confession that I will futher confess that perhaps this clouded my opinion of this book a bit.
   
   In my opinion Fellman goes too far to try to break the myth that is Robert E. Lee and in this effort he becomes transparent and not objective. In reading this book I found myself scoffing numerous times, raising a perplxed eyebrow and even speaking out loud saying "Oh, come on now". Several of Mr. Fellman's conclusions and speculations simply were not borne out of the text or letter(s) he develops his view from (I actually researched a few of the referenced letters for the full context and still found myself disagreeing strongly with Mr. Fellman's reading of them and wondering how any sensible person could arrive at his conclusions).
   
   I was originally sorry that I had purchased the book, but after concluding it and in reflection, am actually glad that I read the book...for at least I see how historical revisionist go about trying to rewrite public opion on favorable historical figures.
   
   As for a much more enjoyable read in which Lee comes alive, you would be better severed with Douglas Southhall Freeman's "Lee"...even if (as Fellman contends) he is biased to paint a positive portrait of Lee.



4. This is a very disappointing biography. I can't tell whether it is disappointing because of the way Fellman wrote or because of who Lee really was, but I suspect that Fellman did a poor job in bringing Lee to life.
   
   His chapters are very prosaic and simple, attempting to boil Lee down into different titles. "Audacity", "Fatherhood", "Patrimony Recaptured" and so on. He spends so much time trying to recapture Lee through his letters that he fails to see that they don't add anything worth noting to Lee. Even when you get to "Gettysburg" Fellman doesn't talk about the battle, doesn't try to recreate a picture and show how Lee fought. Instead he shows Lee talking after the battle and claiming responsibility, then telling Davis what went wrong and so on. We hear nothing of the battle itself!
   
   I must assume, then, that Fellman is an amateur author. But then you read that he has written five previous books before and is a professor of history! Astonishing. I would not recommend this book to anyone, in fact I wouldn't recommend this author at all.



5. In his effort to bring Lee to earth Fellman overreached to the point of intellectual dishonesty--see the previous comment about his anger. Here's my recommendation to anybody who wants to see this in action--read any two good balanced biographies of Lee--Thomas comes to mind, for example. Then read this book and you'll be easily able to see the extent to which evidence can be twisted and distorted to create a fantastic picture.
   
   What's remarkable, though, is Fellman attempts to do this in broad daylight, insulting the intelligence of the reader.
   
   I'll give you some examples so you can see for yourself. On page 61 Fellman states of Lee on Indian duty that "often he welcomed the destruction of the savages." To justify this he uses this extract from a letter to his wife: "I hear that my young Lts have been active in their scouts during my absence. They have each intercepted marauding parties of Indians, chastised them severely. Upwards of a dozen were killed, more wounded, all their horses, animals, camp equipage captured. It is a distressing state of things that requires the the applications of such harsh treatments, but i is the only corrective they understand and the only way they can be kept within their limits."
   
   This, to me, says he 'regrets the necessity,' not welcomes the destruction--but not to Fellman.
   
   Here's another--page 66, Lee is sending female negro servants (Fellman calls them 'house slaves') to a relative but cautions "I can not recommend them for their honesty." Fellman characterizes this with "This sort of snide commentary about inherent slave dishonesty was the language with which Lee expressed his racism." So Lee's comment about three particular people he knew becomes a generic statement about inherent slave dishonesty, and somehow this is an expression of Lee's 'racism' instead of a simple assessment of these individuals. Fellman somehow, through a mechanism he neglects to mention, has been able to discern that Lee's comment was untrue and a product of his racism, not his observation.
   
   Page after page after page with these overwrought generalizations, many of which, like the above, simply slap you in the face with their presumptiousness. Fellman produces a quote, and right before your eyes tells you it means something entirely different from what it obviously says.
   
   Remarkable.
   
   What's more remarkable is he closes the book by telling you why he's doing this. It's not because previous assessments are wrong, he's working at a higher plane than mere fact: "To accept Saint Robert would be to accept the code of the white south at face value, to deny the reality of terrible historical questions by embracing the willful self-blinding of hero worship."
   
   So there it is--to accept Robert E. Lee as a great man--a great southern man--lends credence to 'the code of the white south,' therefore, Robert E. Lee is not a great man. And how an assessment of Lee's character can possibly deny--or affirm--'the reality of terrible historical questions' is beyond me. Besides, he tells us, "This makes him far more interesting than some boring marble representation of the supposedly unitary and perfect man."
   
   Well, he's right there, he's certainly concocted an 'interesting' Robert E. Lee. Maybe in his next book he'll concoct an accurate one.