No comments about Sarah Childress Polk: A Biography of the Remarkable First Lady.

5 comments about Jefferson's Vendetta: The Pursuit of Aaron Burr and the Judiciary.

1. This is a part of history I had not studied before, and the same story is told in the earlier "The Jefferson Conspiracies" which continues on with the death of Meriwether Lewis and the rest of the career of General Wilkinson the really corrupt and treasonous person in both books. Both books are very readable, I found some of the points more clear in the other book. Both books feel Wilkinson betrayed Burr to hide his own involvement and would have killed him rather than see him go to trial. The second book speculates the same may have happened to Lewis as he was traveling East because he felt he was being framed in the same manner as Burr (thou in this case apparently competely innocent), and Wilkinson may have thought he was also going to provide evidence of his corrupt land deals.
   
   This book tries to portray Burr as an innocent, which is hard to believe. While it is clear with just 50 men on there way to live on land owned by Burr , no treasous armed uprising against the US or Spain had yet occurred, (rather than the thousands of armed men approaching New Orleans that Wilkinson claimed). But it seemed that both Wilkinson and Burr solicited British and others for help with attacking Spain with Burr to be King (not President) and perhaps to divide the western territory from the US so at least in todays standards treason had occurred. Back then the Federalist were considering withdrawing New England from the union as well and before it was made illegal (but only a high misdameanor) there were US forays into Spainish terrority Jefferson at least wanted Spain to worry about a rogue attack from the US,such thoughts were not unusual in those days.
   
   It is clear that Wilkinson was in Spain's payroll, and was traitous. Both books argue Jefferson shielded him by letting him have a phoney Court Marshall rather than an investigation by Congress. The one book claims it is to protect himself and his support of his star witness against Burr. The other for the national interest, from New England threatening to leave the Union and Britain invasion from Canada , the country could not stand for the distraction, plus Wilkinson's contacts with Spain made him useful with negotian about Florida and Mexico. He escaped conviction again in 1815, which even President Madison found troubling.



2. Every society has a moment in time where a decision affecting civil liberties has enormous repercussions. For example, laws giving the government power to curtail political assassinations were abused by Stalin and Hitler to consolidate their dictatorships. This book covers the issues and personalities involved in the courtroom battle over whether the United States would adopt the British doctrine of constructive treason in which merely thinking that it would be desirable to have the King killed would be sufficient grounds for capital punishment. Jefferson, who intensely disliked his former vice-president Burr, sought to press treason charges for an alleged plan to cause the western regions to sucede from the United States. Faced with shaky evidence, the prosecutors urged that the Constitution be interpreted to enable them to convict Burr on the basis of constructive treason. The book cogently describes the societal and personal issues at stake, and how Chief Justice Marshall navigated the intense political and judicial issues involved in the grand jury proceeding and trial. The author does an excellent job of setting the matter in its historical context and does so in a very readable style.



3. I don't know why Mr. Wheelan has such a sore spot about Jefferson. I would just warn readers that if you read this book, make sure you read many other historical books about these same characters. If you happen to read this book, and have not read other material about these characters, you will come away with a slanted view about Thomas Jefferson, and the other historical characters in this book. There are so many writers who, for reasons of profit or ideology, have taken upon themselves the job of rewriting history to their own liking, or that of their publisher. This book has several historical mistakes, but the overall tone reminds me of some of our current extremists who take a one sided view about many issues. Jefferson was a flawed human being, that is clear to anyone who reads history. But to paint him in this light is unfair. Burr, on the other hand, was not a nice guy. He was the kind of man Bush would have been if he had lived during that time. Power hungry, instigating failed military missions, and willing to kill to get his way. Yes, that is harsh, but painfully true. Be wary of revisionist history. I give this book four stars for its inventiveness; it does have some entertainment value. Wheelan writes well, but perhaps he should switch to fiction and stop trying to turn Jefferson into someone he was not. Thomas Jefferson was a man who would not tolerate tyrants and insisted on civil liberty. Not perfect, but not the character created in Mr. Wheelan's book.



4. In the early nineteenth century, former Vice-President Aaron Burr -- the recent killer of Alexander Hamilton in a duel -- was up to something. Maybe it was an attempt to conquer Spanish Mexico and set up an American empire. Perhaps it was a plot to separate the western territories (and Kentucky) from the rest of the Union. Maybe it was both. Maybe it was neither, Historians still debate the matter. But whatever it was, it ended up with Burr on trial for treason, with Chief Justice John Marshall presiding over the trial (and President Thomas Jefferson a behind-the-scenes prosecutor). Burr was eventually acqutted (probably more for lack of specific evidence and creditable witnesses -- Burr's co-conspirators did not inspire confidence in their own integrity) but it was an extraordinarily dramatic event in the early American Republic. Wheelan tells it story well, although he is clearly not sympathetic to Jefferson. I regret to say that Wheelan's accuracy is made suspect by errors he makes: in the space of four pages Wheelan writes that James Wilkinson (the comanding general of the US Army and secretly a paid Spanish agent and the chief Government witness against Aaron Burr) had in 1775 accompanied Benedict Arnold in his famous march across the Maine wilderness to attack Canada (Wilkinson had actually been among the reinforcements reaching Arnold the next year) and also that Westchester County is in Connecticut (a statement that would amaze thousands of New York State taxpayers). But, overall I found Wheelan's account to be a gripping narrative about both conspiracy and trial.



5. A lively account of a notable trial in U.S. history. Mr. Wheelan writes like a reporter (which he has been) more than a more measured historian. Here President Jefferson is the bad guy with Chief Justice Marshall saving the day. Burr is presented as a mis-understood rogue with political enemies in high places. I do not accept the author's version of the first presidential election of Jefferson, which gives an exceedingly favorable bent to Burr's actions. Burr also killed Hamilton, which does not cause the author much pause.
   
   In my mind, John Marshall is our country's greatest jurist. This book does help in showing an important example of his fine work.
   
   
   

1 comments about TO LIVE FREE - WILLIAM WILBERFORCE (Barbour Value Tradepaper).

1. Reviewed by Lori Plach for Reader Views (7/07)
   
   Martin Luther King was very instrumental in freeing slaves, right? Or was it Abraham Lincoln who is credited with abolishing slavery? Have you ever heard of the man who did all he could to abolish slavery in England? His name is William Wilberforce.
   
   Surely slavery has played in the increasing wealth and ease in the day-to-day lives of the wealthy of the 18th and 19th centuries. We don't participate in slavery and oppression today, or, do we? Two-hundred years ago, William Wilberforce becomes a member of the English parliament. He uses his political influence and position to achieve his goal of setting people free -- freedom for the slaves from being sold and being held as property. Slaves made English life possible in that time period. Were you aware that even the Church of England owned slaves and had the word "Society" burned onto the slaves' chests? This book brings this and much more to light of what had really happened at this time.
   
   "To Live Free" provides an easy-to-read analogy of some of the key events of his involvement in the abolition of English slavery. His work, with his main objective of setting free, is truly an inspiration. There are many sections in this book which tell of Wilberforce's thoughts on pride, pleasing God, patriotism and sympathy. There are charts of world events in the 1780's included in this book.
   
   It is definitely one thing to say you have faith and another to put your faith into action. This is what Wilberforce does throughout his time as a prominent Member of Parliament. Despite his being ridiculed for his position against slavery, he continues on. Shouldn't we all continue on to our goal rather than, at the first sign of a problem, abandon what we truly believe in.
   
   Lon Fendall has written a biography on this hero for the slaves. William Wilberforce is a little-known man, but he was a man with a definite mission. "To Live Free" is sure to inspire readers to see an opportunity to make other people's lives better and to seek to achieve your goals. Just as the slaves of long ago are now living free so are we through Christ we are not slaves to our sin. The price of slavery has not come cheaply and our debt is truly been paid in full.

3 comments about Amritsar: Mrs. Gandhi's Last Battle.

1. It is really well written, it is my third book on the events that lead to the operation blue star. This book amazes with the details of history genesis of the issues and events in fairly objective manner. It is truely a must read...



2. A religious fundamentalist seizes control of a major holy place and unleashes terror onto others for their beliefs. It sounds like 2001, but in fact it was Amritsar, India 1984 and the religious fundamentalist was a person of the Sikh faith called Bhindranwale. Bhindranwale was a Sikh fundamentalist who believed in establishing the Punjab as a Sikh state. Hindus, and other Sikhs who didn't believe as he did were murdered and assassinated. This was all in the name of religion. Mrs. Gandhi at first didn't tackle this problem and let Bhindranwale seize control of the Sikh holy place called the Golden Temple.
   When terror continued to be directed from the Golden Temple, Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to seize this place. Hundreds of Sikhs were killed because of the Sant getting out of control. Gandhi was later assassinated by a Sikh as a result of her ordering the Golden Temple raid. This book is the story of this conflict.
   This is an average read on a very interesting event. Few books have been written about this conflict. I think the authors treated all parties from a equal perspective, so this story is not slanted.



3. The book is nicely written and is informative. It starts with a brief history of Sikhs, the long drawn roots of the movement, how it turned into terrorism, to the army operation and its aftermath. As pointed out in the book political leadership of the time was more to blame - Government did "too much too late". Too much because they acted too late which closed all the moderate options. Too late because a movement of small issues was allowed to grow into terrorism. The struggle for power and its wrath, once again, is well established. The dastardly act of few in power after the assassination of Mrs. Gandhi is brought out without wavering. And how the government machinery stood observer to inhuman killing of innocent people. The book carefully brings out controversial accounts, but not consistently. The book fails to paint the right picture of extent of terrorism - loots, killing of individuals, sects and groups, and attacks on government machinery with bombs and arms supplied from outside the country. Things can be argued one way or the other about the army operation. Everything is fair in love and war! The fact remains that army operation was inevitable and the Congress party, SGPC and Akali Dal were all equally responsible. While the first one created the problem, the other two supported and all the three used the propagators apart from the outside worlds, which helped in kind and cash both.

   I will have to say that it is not a complete account of the movement. It fails to account for all the forces that supported the movement, financial, political and moral. Origin of Sikhs is not mentioned at all.

No comments about The Papers of Woodrow Wilson, Vol. 63.

No comments about The Life of Henry the Fourth, King of France and Navarre: Volume 3.

No comments about The Life of Henry the Fourth, King of France and Navarre: Volume 1.

No comments about The Papers of Woodrow Wilson, Vol. 39.

No comments about ''TAL COMO FUE''.

5 comments about The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan (Cambridge South Asian Studies).

1. This is a excellent book on the history of Pakistan. Ayesha Jalal has done her home work and has presented the facts in a very logical fashion. I find this book among the few honest assesment on India and Pakistan division.



2. You say Moderate and secular Congress :

   I say : "Mahatma" Gandhi and "Pandit" Nehru? Is this secularism?

   You say Poisonous fruit of their efforts "A Nuclear Rogue pakistan"

   I ask you which country detonated the nuclear device first? Gandhi's so called secular India or the Nuclear Rogue Pakistan?

   Kindly tell me where you acquires such biases... have you even tried to read the book? Have you read about Mr Jinnah? Why is it that people like yourself wish to propagate the same false myths again and again, and not salute people like Ayesha Jalaal who have done an extremely good job in bringing out the facts..

   Ayesha Jalaal mentions a very important fact... the Muslim Extremists and fanatics like the Ahrar were actually in alliance with your Mr Gandhi and the "secular Moderate Congress Party". Indeed Gandhi brought all fundamentalists and religious fanatics together regardless of religion caste or creed. Truly secular!




3. Indeed, the premise of the book is correct, Mr Jinnah was a SECULARIST! However, by 1946, did he still want a unified India? I dont think so.

   By the way, the guy who wrote the first review.. I am afraid, Bias aint gonna get you anywhere.




4. In her masterly work of deceit, Ayesha Jalal would have a century of research hung by the way side.

   A generally well-accepted principle called Occam's Razor says that a problem should be stated in its basic and simplest terms. The simplest theory that fits the facts of a problem is the one that should be selected. When applied to the events in the Indian subcontinent, the picture appears like a moderate and secular congress fighting to keep India united; pitted against a brilliant political-Muslim Jinnah hell bent on breaking it. A chronic problem of Muslims with peaceful co-habitation manifesting itself into Pakistan.

   But Ayesha would have us believe otherwise..... Congress a Hindu party. Jinnah and his cronies paramount examples of "secular ideals" (look at the poisonous fruit of their efforts .... The nuclear rogue Pakistan...) Gandhi .. the father of Indian partition. Even Bart Simpson won't say "I didn't do it" this innocently.........




5. Ayesha Jalal has delivered a highly impressive piece of work. The research is impeccable and the analysis rigorous. Contrary to most historical accounts of the creation of Pakistan, Ayesha does not engage in rhetoric or political slogans. Instead, her efforts to remain unbiased clearly come across and are admirable. She is a historian par excellence and her talent for writing clearly and lucidly about complex subjects is clearly revealed in this book. A provocative piece of work which might actually get students of India/ Pakistan interested in a subject which they have always found dull.