5 comments about A Secret Life: The Polish Officer, His Covert Mission, and the Price He Paid to Save His Country.

1. Move over, James Bond! Instead of repeating other reviewers, let's focus mostly on the intelligence-gathering aspects of this thriller.
   
   Imagine that you're Ryszard Kuklinski. The best way to avoid excessive surveillance by Communist counterintelligence is to make your daily routine as predictable as possible. You get a dog so that you can stroll around the neighborhood naturally. You give and receive signals to and from your contacts with chalk marks on the pavement. (These sometimes get washed away). You use your wife's iron to reveal messages in invisible ink, and take up hobby photography as a cover for photography of another kind.
   
   You dislike dead-drops because, for one thing, someone else might stumble upon them. You use the brush pass. As you walk per your usual routines, you turn into one of those impossible-to-predict labyrinthic streets so that you are out of prying eyes for a few precious seconds. During this time, you exchange packages with another agent.
   
   The brush passes go uneventfully--until one night. No sooner is it completed than you are hit by the headlights of a car. You try to duck into a side street but your move is anticipated. Finally, you shake off the pursuer. Were you seen well enough by the driver to be positively identified? You think/hope not. But just in case, you get a haircut. Luckily this time, you are safe.
   
   Even little slip-ups can be killers. At one point, your son finds a secret note that you had carelessly taped too lightly on the underside of a piece of furniture. You cannot account for a roll of film, and your colleagues speak of the discovery of a "spy film". (It later turns up in the pocket of your seldom-used shirt). At another time, you are in another world, and you crash face-first into a pillar while carrying sensitive information. Nice way to be unobtrusive!
   
   Picture yourself (pardon the pun) getting caught red-handed, by an officer entering the room, taking surreptitious photos of classified documents. You act normal, but cannot get over the fear that the officer has seen exactly what you were doing and will report you. Then, when nothing seems to happen, you still fear that you are being carefully monitored so that the Communist counterintelligence can trace your contacts and then trap everyone.
   
   You had better not carry a gun because, if you use it and then seek refuge in the US Embassy, the Communist authorities may have legal grounds to have you turned over to them. You fully realize that, if caught, you will be tortured into divulging information, and then be executed. Besides, the Communists will make a spectacle of you for propaganda purposes. For this reason, you request a suicide pill from the CIA. They at first refuse, fearing that an agent may take it in a moment of panic, or that the discovery of the poison could itself be used for propaganda purposes. But in the end the CIA provides the pill--inside a pen.
   
   In any Soviet-NATO war, Poland would be the route for 95% of the Soviet military advance. Poland would then get hit with 400-600 nuclear bombs in an attempt to stop the Soviet advance without escalating the conflict into a full-blown Soviet-US nuclear holocaust (p. 16). No wonder Kuklinski realized that Poland was doomed! (Some conspiracy-minded Poles suggested that the Polack joke syndrome had been a concerted effort to demean Poland so that the American public wouldn't protest too much the future destruction of Poland).
   
   Kuklinski's achievements were staggering: Tens of thousands of highly-classified Soviet documents passed on to the US (p. 300). And that was just the beginning. After his flight to the US, Kuklinski provided much information during his debriefing. May he be forever honored, and rest in peace!



2. "A Secret Life" is a gripping read for two key reasons. First and foremost, it is a suspenseful espionage tale with unpredictable twists and turns. To me, it even stands among the best fictional works of that genre by Le Carre and Ludlum.
   
   The second reason is more holistic. The author, New York Times journalist Benjamin Weiser, has gotten at Kuklinski's heart and managed to successfully explore his motives and ethical dilemma for providing intelligence to the CIA. Kuklinski did not make this decision lightly. He felt morally obligated to do so, and his reasons for doing so are clearly spelled out in the book. When you read about these reasons, it's very difficult to disagree with him. (I do not understand the reviewers who call him a traitor.)
   
   I would recommend this book regardless of whether you are pro- or anti-CIA. Some reviewers here claim that Weiser's purpose was to naively lavish the agency with biased praise. In his introduction, however, Weiser references the "justified criticism" that the organization has endured due to its activities over the years, and goes on to say that Kuklinski's story demonstrates that human intelligence operations can succeed brilliantly, and should serve as an example for such future operations.



3. Gen. Kuklinski's efforts against a communist system controlled by an outside power seems commendable on the outside, but what everyone here seems to forget is that the same CIA that worked with Kuklinski, supposedly to 'fight communist tyrrany' was the same one involved in overthrowing legitimate governments, repressing independence movements, funding terrorism, assasinating foreign leaders who did not see eye to eye with US government policies and interests as well as many other unpleasant acts that sadly too many people either do not know about or do not care to remember.
   
   What Gen. Kuklinski did or did not do is known only to him and his CIA handlers. But things in this book must be taken with a grain of salt. In the cold war, the CIA was notorious for anti-Soviet false flag operations and disinformation propaganda. I only read half of the book and did not bother finishing it. Some of the events might have been outright fabrications.
   As far as whether Gen. Kuklinski was a traitor or patriot in the end really depends on which side one is on. To Gen. Jaruzelski, Kuklinski is a traitor while to some CIA official Kuklinski is a hero. But let's take it from another angle: Suppose Gen. Kuklinski's espionage efforts resulted in a covert CIA Op which ended up killing a bunch of Polish civilians? How would that be seen?
   What is Gen. Kuklinski's legacy? It is one of selling out one miserable SOB to another miserable SOB, for a price.



4. Weiser's detailed and measured tale of Kuklinski's historical contribution to Cold War espionage is to be read and enjoyed. His story is taut and thrilling and reminds one of a good John Le Carre novel. Beyond the issue of whether Kuklinski is a hero or traitor to the Polish nation [which is fairly raised and detailed by the author], Weiser never loses control of the subject matter, and, of the abundant documentation he uncovered in his unique access to CIA records. He instills Kuklinski with humanity and sense of Polish nationalism. A fine work to be read and enjoyed.



5. "Sometimes it's not enough to do what is right, sometimes one must do what is necessary." Ryszard Kuklinski knew what was right, did what was necessary...and paid a terrible price.
   
   Benjamin Weiser's riveting work A SECRET LIFE, on Polish hero Ryszard Kuklinski, is an enlightening look back into the dark intrigue, personal danger, and moral dilemmas surrounding one military officer's private battles to liberate his country from totalitarianism. Most importantly, this work shatters the left-wing's liberal illusion of "peaceful coexistence" with a communist system whose very raison d' etre is the destruction of freedom, democracy and enslavement of the West.
   
   Kuklinski saw internal conflict to evict the alien system imposed upon his country by the USSR--as opposed to connivance or the wishful thinking of ideological transformation through "gradualism," favored by some of his Polish General Staff contemporaries, who, for lack of courage or personal gain, fully cooperated with their harsh Soviet task masters--as the only realistic option for peace in the face of Poland's likely nuclear annihilation, had war ensued with the United States. He dared to act accordingly, becoming an agent of change feeding top-secret Warsaw Pact military information to the CIA; thereby, tipping the balance of power in favor of liberty, while loosening the demoralizing death-grip of communist rule over Eastern Europe, as a de facto one-man Polish Underground.
   
   When considering the totality of personal sacrifice and enormity of danger faced by Kuklinski, in his nearly solitary and single-handed struggle against radical, state-sponsored evil--who carried a suicide pill to end his life if caught and was sentenced to death, in absentia, by the Polish Military Court--moral giants like Kurt Gerstein and Aleksander Solzhenitsyn come to mind. It saddens me that former communist collaborators or sympathizers, like Aleksander Kwasniewski, were celebrated or elevated to significant post-Soviet leadership positions and societal prominence, while the country remains bitterly divided over Kuklinski, who has yet to be nationally vindicated, though history has already done so.
   
   Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzesinski said it best when he honored him with the words traditionally reserved for decorating Polish soldiers: "Pan sie dobrze Polsce zasluzyl: You have served Poland well." Rest in peace Colonel Kuklinski.

5 comments about Senator Mansfield: The Extraordinary Life of a Great American Statesman and Diplomat.

1. Michael Joseph (Mike) Mansfield's approach to Congress could instruct many of the politicians in power today. Unlike his bombastic, controlling predecessor, Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson, Mansfield, as Senate Majority Leader, retreated from the glare of publicity so that his fellow senators, from both parties, could take pride in successful legislation that they initiated, all the while guiding that body with a steady hand.
   
   Because of the statesman's honesty, his intellectual capacity, his ability to connect immediately with people, no matter their views, and his brilliance as a public servant, his home state Montana kept him in Congress from the year they first elected him in 1942 to 1977, when he retired from the Senate. They loved him because he put their interests first, regardless of what was occurring on the world's stage.
   
   When Mansfield retired from the Senate, he expected to "loaf, read, and think," but the government couldn't let go and sent him to Japan where he served as Ambassador, a position from which he retired in his mid-eighties. After that, Goldman Sachs hired him to be its East Asian Advisor.
   
   Above all else, human relationships ranked highest in importance for Mansfield. When his wife died, he said during her eulogy that without her he would have been nothing. Early in their marriage she urged him to leave his work as miner and mining engineer to pursue and complete his education.
   
   I recommend Don Oberdorfer's "Senator Mansfield" to readers interested in a look into the bowels of politics, particularly during the Vietnam War era and its aftermath. I felt as if I were hiding under a desk eavesdropping. Reading parts of the tapes that Nixon made of himself, I couldn't decide whether to laugh or weep.



2. I had known of Senator Mansfield, but this biography was essentially my first real glimpse of the man. It was a genuine treat to come to know him, even in this limited way, and the author has given us one of the best biographies in many years. Yes, this is a tribute and it is clear that the author has great respect for his subject (as he should), but he does not ignore the complexities of Mansfield's career in the public arena. Admittedly there is little about Mansfield's private life (outside of the early, pre-government years), but I found that refreshing as what we need to know about Mansfield is what he contributed to the country and what we can learn from his long career. Nevertheless, we do get a sense of Mansfield's intellect, his charm, and his appeal across ideological divides. His greatness is never exaggerated and after finishing the book, one gets a sense of sadness as we consider what could have been if only he had been listened to regarding Vietnam.



3. Don Oberdorfer's biography of Mike Mansfield brings an extraordinary American to life. Not only does the reader gain deep insights into Congressman then, Senator and, later, Ambassador Mansfield; but also Private Mansfield of the U.S. Marine Corps; and copper miner Mansfield of Butte, Montana; high school and college student Mansfield which he completed simultaneously, and professor Mansfield of the University of Montana in the 1930s and 40s.

   Besides a wonderful and inspiring portrait of a truly unique American, the book portrays the relationships Mansfield developed with American Presidents beginning with FDR through Ronald Reagan. The entire middle third of the book focuses on the Vietnam era and Mansfield's heroic, behind the scene, effort as the Senate's Asia expert and Majority Leader to persuade Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Ford to, first, avoid committing American troops to a mainland war in Asia and, second, to withdraw troops once they were tragically in place in Vietnam.

   Mansfield's analysis showed the Vietnam problem to be 9 parts diplomatic/political and one part military. Therefore, he argued American policy in Vietnam could not be resolved using a 9 part military solution to only 1 part diplomatic/political. Essentially, Mansfield believed a military response is rarely indicated and far too often, riding coattails of false intelligence and phony patriotism, militarism acquires a fatal and unstoppable momentum of its own. In retrospect it turns out that the "attacks" by North Vietnamese torpedo boats against the U.S. Navy in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1965 that were used by President Johnson as a pretext to go to war were a monumental and, likely, willful intelligence failure. Almost 40 years later, on a much larger scale, American intelligence now seems to have failed to provide an accurate analysis of Iraq's WMD. It is clear American Presidents still base their decision to take the country to war on often misleading or patently false information.

   This book provides an apt but sober warning for policy makers working on contemporary Middle East who are designing President George Bush's war on terrorism. This is a great read about a unique American who lived through a compelling time in American history and whose values in public life are sorely missed in today's divisive and disfunctional political climate.




4. For young soldiers returning from the war in Vietnam, Senator Mike Mansfield was a literal legend in his own time, the consistent voice for greater moderation, caution, and reason during the escalation of the war in Vietnam. As chronicled so marvelously in this new biography by noted historian Don Oberdorfer, from the very beginning of the sordid Vietnam affair Mansfield had cautioned long-time colleagues as friends John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson as to the absolute futility and danger associated with pursuing a military victory in Southeast Asia. A long-time member of the Foreign Relations committee in the Senate, he was well aware of the complexities and national aspirations simmering under the surface of the region, and recognized the morass we might soon find ourselves in if we succumbed to the siren song of the so-called `domino' theorists, who posited the loss of South Vietnam would lead inextricably to the loss of Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand. Mansfield maintained the domino we needed to worry about was Vietnam itself, which might well topple our whole far-eastern strategy if we allowed ourselves to become entwined in its silken grips.

   Alas, no one among the `best and the brightest' of either the Kennedy or Johnson administration listened, and instead dragged us into more than a decade of death, destruction, and depravity. Yet in this fascinating biography, we learn that Mike Mansfield had many more facets to his marvelous personality and many more intellectual insights to offer the American people during his long and illustrious career as a public servant. He presided over the U.S. Senate during the difficult and angst-filled deliberations over the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, its companion bill for Voter Rights Act passed the following year, and the donnybrook that ensured over the initial passing of Medicare legislation. A man of almost encyclopedic knowledge, he spoke carefully and constructively, and listened as intently as he had spoken. Like his predecessor as Senate majority leader, LBJ, he was a master of personal one-on- one persuasion, and his soaring intellect and engaging personality made him scores of friends and precious few enemies in his many travels and engagements. He was, however, much like Harry Truman in terms of being both a straight-talker and a straight shooter, and he was known to be a man of incredible principle and integrity.

   His only regret in later serving as Ambassador to Japan was that it took him so far a field from his beloved Montana, a place he could sometimes become almost doggedly appreciative of. He was a hunter, an outdoorsman, and an early champion of what was then called conservation and is now better understood as environmentalism. His was a life that spanned a myriad of different concerns, causes, and conflicts, and although we will always remember him best for his earnest, informed, and heartfelt opposition to the war in Vietnam, Mike Mansfield was certainly a public man for all seasons. This is a wonderful book about a noteworthy American who until now has been seriously under-appreciated. Enjoy!




5. This book is mandatory reading for anyone seeking, or currently in, public office. Oberdorfer's analysis of Mansfield's writing, thinking, and speaking style is first rate. For serious students of American politics, Oberdorfer has given them a look at the making of one of the most important men of the century. I know it must have been difficult because Mansfield steadfastly refused to allow anyone to be his biographer. Mansfield believed that biographies should be written only after a person had been dead for 75 to 100 years. Therefore I was extremely happy to see that Don Oberdorfer had accomplished what many Mansfield devotees couldn't...capture the essence of one of the most important men (and his absolutely incredible wife Maureen) of the 20th Century. The 510 pages devoted to Mansfield are only the tip of the proverbial iceberg. His influence on members of the Senate, his understanding of world affairs, his unshakable and sometimes frustratingly rigid belief in Montana, and his ability to say so much in as few words as possible, could fill a dozen more volumes.
   I wanted to be Mansfield's biographer. I was his foil regarding the complex and vexing problems surrounding US-Japanese defense policy from 1985-1988. During his trips into the Pacific Command, we had long conversations about Asia, American politics (especially LBJ and the course of the Vietnam war), the teaching of history, and getting inside the mind of the Japanese. Ambassador Mansfield, who rarely carried on long conversations, spoke in 50-minute segments and one only got three minutes to answer the questions he would pose afterwards. To engage in a conversation with Mansfield was a dangerous thing if one was un- or ill-prepared. Those segments, which came from his encyclopedic and near perfect recall memory, would tie everything in his life starting as a 14 year old seaman to an up-to-the-minute analysis of the world in general and Asia in the specific. Two days with Mansfield could qualify anyone to CLEP an examination in world history! I would rate him as the finest professors of history in the United States.
   Mansfield once told me that the preparation time to smoke a pipe was the equivalent of preparing for a conversation. Slowly and deliberately, he would think about what he wanted to say, say it, then command from the listener that three minute reply. I never heard him ever raise his voice. I never saw him ever become rude or angry. When he felt it was time to leave a dinner or conference, he left, regardless of who was in the room. His coffee making always put people off guard, immediately humbling them and defusing their anger.
   Whenever he came to Hawaii for medical checkups, or conferences, he had a shopping list to buy small yet significant things for the lowest ranking members of his embassy staff. For the secretary pool, See's chocolate candy...for his US Marine Embassy guards, the newest rank insignia for their next promotion...for his Japanese staff members, Hawaiian macadamia nuts. For himself, he always bought Prince Albert pipe tobacco; two large cans worth so he could "mediate and reflect" on what was best for the United States of America.
   Read this book, for it is the true and good and troubled history of the 20th century of the United States. Mike Mansfield personified all that is good and decent about politics. Mike Mansfield knew how and when to act when troubles arose. Mike Mansfield knew how to love his nation. Fortunately Oberdorfer was in the right place, as the right time, posing as the right agent, to capture Senator Mansfield as no one else ever will.

5 comments about Fugitive Days.

1. Bill Ayers is frustratingly vague on the specifics, hazy on the details of his life, his motives, and what compelled him to transform himself from an ordinary college student into a radical activist and leader of the Weather Underground, a group that took their protests to violent extremes.
   
   Ayers expresses little regret for his actions, including his part in the bombing of the Pentagon. What few Americans may realize is that the early 1970's, the country was terrorized from within, by daily bomb threats and actual devices that were planted in public places. Ayers dismisses these fears, explaining that the bombs hidden by his group were always revealed in advance by telephone calls placed to the media and also to local police. This doesn't make his crimes any less violent, dangerous and disturbing.
   
   Don't waste a dime buying this book. Check it out from the library or steal it, to paraphrase both Abbie Hoffman and an earlier reviewer of this book.



2. In writing about his life, Ayers attempts to make a "silk purse out of a sow's ear"! He wants his audience to "see" his self-centered, pathetic, useless, violent, criminal life as some sort of heroic journey. Ayers fails.
   
   However, Ayers may succeed in convincing many people that they should NOT vote for Obama to be president. After Ayers got almost $50 million in funds from the Annenberg foundation for a project to try and improve the schools in Chicago, Obama was chosen around 1995 to head the committee that administered the use of the Annenberg funds. Five years later the funds were almost gone and the schools that got the Annenberg funds weren't doing any better than the schools that didn't get the funds. Note: (1) Obama clearly knew and worked with Ayers for several years, even though Obama claims Ayers is just a guy in the neighborhood. (2)As chairman of the committee spending the $50 million, Obama demonstrated that he was incompetent as an agent of successful positive change. The more people learn about Ayers and his relationship with Obama, the less they will consider voting for Obama.
   
   While reading his book, I kept trying to understand why Ayers became a domestic terrorist. I suspect being a middle child of five children he needed to find some way to be noticed, so he became a rebel and did poorly in school while his two older siblings were scholastic stars. His parents finally sent him to a private school, but he continued his "rebel" role. The anti-war movement was a perfect group for Ayers to find drugs, free sex, feelings of power, and a cause to rebel against. Ayers never mentioned considering any non-violent means of protesting, he went straight to using bombs. He also never mentioned considering protesting against any of the most evil and destructive governments in the world, such as Communist China and Communist Russia.
   
   Ayers wrote that the Weatherman always phoned and warned people before they set off bombs. Ayers neglected to mention that his girlfriend's Weathermen cell was responsible for at least two incidents where they INTENDED to harm people with their bombs and did NOT give any phone warning. For example:
   
   His girlfriend's Weathermen group accidentally blew themselves up while making a bomb filled with nails, a bomb that they intended to set off at a non-commissioned officer dance for about 240. Since they added nails to the bomb, it is clear they intended to do as much harm as possible. If they had been successful, they would have killed and wounded many officers and their wives. Luckily they only killed themselves.
   
   The book begins when Ayers starts his fugitive life after he learns that his girlfriend has been blown up. However the book has very little information about Ayer's "fugitive days". Because his focus is not of his "fugitive days", I suspect that Ayer's fugitive days were really easy years of living under his parent's financial support until his father's money paid for lawyers who figured out how to keep Ayers from ever paying for the deaths and destruction for which he, as a leader of the Weathermen, should be held accountable. Then once Ayers didn't have to worry about getting arrested, his father probably paid for him to get a college degree and then used his influence to get Ayers a job.
   
   Only in the America can an unrepentant domestic terrorist like Ayers become a professor and probably try to produce more domestic terrorists. Only in America! I hope Ayers understands just how lucky he is to live in the USA, but I'm afraid he is either too dumb or too brain washed to understand that regardless of the mistakes the USA may have made, the USA is still better than most of the rest of the world. Ayers should check out the book, "Death by Government" to learn about the real evil and cost of communism. Communists were responsible for about 62 millions deaths in Communist China and 35 million deaths in Communist Russia. Yes, it is really too bad Ayers didn't live in either Communist China or Communist Russia when he acting like a terrorist. Either Russia or China would have gotten rid of him quickly.



3. Recently in this space I reviewed the documentary Weather Underground so that it also makes sense to review the present book by Bill Ayers, one of the `talking heads' in that film and a central leader of both the old Students for a Democratic Society and the Weather Underground that split off from that movement in 1969 to go its own way. Readers should see the documentary as it gives a fairly good presentation of the events around the formation of the Underground, what they tried to accomplish and what happened to them after the demise of the anti-war movement in the early 1970's.
   
   To get a better understanding of what drove thousands of young American students into opposition to the American government at that time the documentary Rebels With A Cause (also reviewed in this space) is worth looking at as well. Between those two sources you will get a better understanding of what drove Professor Ayers and many others, including myself, over the edge. Professor Ayers makes many of those same points in the book. Thus, I only want to make a couple of political comments about the question of the underground here. They were also used in my review of the Weather Underground documentary and apply to Professor Ayers thoughts as well. I would also make it very clear here that unlike many other leftists, who ran for cover, in the 1970's I called for the political defense of the Weather Underground despite my political differences under the old leftist principle that an injury to one is an injury to all. Moreover, and be shocked if you will, the courageous, if misguided, actions of the Weather Underground require no apology today. I stand with the Professor on that count. Here are the comments.
   
   "In a time when I, among others, are questioning where the extra-parliamentary opposition to the Iraq War is going and why it has not made more of an impact on American society it was rather refreshing to view this documentary about the seemingly forgotten Weather Underground that as things got grimmer dramatically epitomized one aspect of opposition to the Vietnam War. If opposition to the Iraq war is the political fight of my old age Vietnam was the fight of my youth and in this film brought back very strong memories of why I fought tooth and nail against it. And the people portrayed in this film, the core of the Weather Underground, while not politically kindred spirits then or now, were certainly on the same page as I was- a no holds- barred fight against the American Empire. We lost that round, and there were reasons for that, but that kind of attitude is what it takes to bring down the monster. But a revolutionary strategy is needed. That is where we parted company.
   
   
   One of the paradoxical things about the documentary is that the Weather Underground survivors interviewed had only a vague notion about what went wrong. This was clearly detailed in the remarks of Mark Rudd, a central leader, when he stated that the Weathermen were trying to create a communist cadre. He also stated, however, that after going underground he realized that he was out of the loop as far as being politically effective. And that is the point. There is no virtue in underground activity if it is not necessary, romantic as that may be. To the extent that any of us read history in those days it was certainly not about the origins of the Russian revolutionary movement in the 19th century. If we had we would have found that the above-mentioned fight in 1969 (the SDS splits) was also fought out by that movement. Mass action vs. individual acts, heroic or otherwise, of terror. The Weather strategy of acting as the American component of the world-wide revolutionary movement to bring the Empire to its knees certainly had (and still does) have a very appealing quality. However, a moral gesture did not (and will not) bring this beast down. While the Weather Underground was made up a small group of very appealing subjective revolutionaries its political/moral strategy led to a dead end. The lesson to be learned; you most definitely do need weather people to know which way the winds blow. Start with Karl Marx."



4. TO THINK THAT THESE PEOPLE WILL MAKE MONEY OFF THIS HOGWASH IS VERY DISTURBING. THE AUTHOR GOES ON AND ON ABOUT HOW "RIGHT" HE WAS TO ENGAGE IN ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES - WITHOUT MENTIONING THE PEOPLE HE HURT BY HIS ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. BUT WHAT REALLY BOTHERS ME, IS HIS MEMORY OF A 1981 ROBBERY WHERE 3 INNOCENT MEN WERE KILLED IN COLD BLOOD - THE AUTHOR DOESN'T EVEN CALL IT A ROBBERY - BUT A WAY TO GET MONEY FOR THE CAUSE. FURTHERMORE, HE GOES ON AND ON ABOUT THE HORROR OF SPECIAL RIGHTS OF WHITES OVER BLACKS, BUT FAILS TO MENTION THAT IN THE TRIAL OF THE 1981 ROBBERY KILLERS, THE BLACK ACTIVISTS GOT 75 YEARS TO LIFE, BUT KATHY BOUDIN - A WHITE FRIEND OF THE AUTHOR - PLEA BARGAINED WITH THE HELP OF HER WHITE DADDY LAWYER AND ONLY GOT 20 YEARS AND IS NOW OUT ON PAROLE. DID SHE HELP HER BLACK FELLOW ACTIVISTS? HELL, NO. WHAT HYPRICATES!!!



5. Contrary to what others may think/say about this book, the Weathermen was a group who wanted to promote peace. They wanted to create a revolution for a better world. It is a misconception that they were "cop killers" or were "terrorists." They simply wanted people to wake up to the atrocities of the Vietnam War and rampant racism in America.
   
   I had the pleasure of meeting Ms. Dorhn and Mr. Ayers and they are two of the nicest people I know. They both are firm believers in peaceful resolution to problems of social injustice and are inspirational at panel discussions.

No comments about Running Alone: Presidential Leadership from JFK to Bush II.

5 comments about The Prince of Providence: The Rise and Fall of Buddy Cianci, America's Most Notorious Mayor.

1. RI is such a secular little world where everyone DOES know everyone else. Buddy played those connections to the hilt, rebuilding a city and lining his own pockets at the same time. This is a great study of a guy who, had he not been so affable, would have been regarded as the nastiest of crooks. But instead while he wallows in the Federal Pen, his legions of fans and supporters remain steadfast. Stanton does a superb job of capturing the uniqueness of Rhode Island; the Italianness, the corruption, the general air of "fuhgheddaboudit, they're all crooks". Don't rule out Buddy Part III, this is but the first installment of a very interesting man.



2. I know very little about New England or Rhode Island. I'm not terribly interested in politics. I came to this book in a roundabout way. I had never been aware of Buddy Cianci until I happened to see a musical at the New York International Fringe Theatre Festival in 2003 titled BUDDY CIANCI. While the musical wasn't very good, I thought the story was fascinating and that in Buddy Cianci the authors certainly had a character who was big enough to sing. Here was a guy who was a scary crook that everyone loved. Here was a mayor whose popularity was never higher than just after he was indicted a second time. He had been indicted previously, pleaded guilty to assault (he bound and tortured a man he claimed was his ex-wife's lover) and had to step down as mayor, only to run again and be re-elected! So of course I pounced when I saw this book in the bookstore. I was not disappointed. Mike Stanton's THE PRINCE OF PROVIDENCE is jaw-dropping reading as it traces Cianci's rise to power and his outrageous machinations to keep his power. Stanton's book is very detailed and objective. This is not a hatchet job. He gives equal time to all sides. In one chapter I would be rooting for Buddy and in the following chapter rooting for his enemies. This is that kind of book. Buddy Cianci is that kind of guy. The book has been sold to the movies and should make a terrific film. (But what actor could possibly do justice to the title character?) There are times when the book seems on the verge of becoming a Yankee MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND EVIL (which I consider a compliment). THE PRINCE OF PROVIDENCE is consistently entertaining and has a lot to say about America and the times we live in. Four stars.



3. A fascinating view of a Mayor who engaged in boosterism to sell his city, and himself. Very helpful to those interested in studying styles of government and a great read.
   
   Jim Fiorentini Mayor, Haverhill, MA



4. 
   This book is a fascinating look at politics, corruption and the enigma of Buddy Cianci. Thoughtful and balanced, it shows both sides of a bright, funny, and charismatic mayor whose impact reaches beyond his city. It's all about good and evil in the same person. Charm, power, and political realities. A great read.



5. Well, perhaps not everyone does. But as this book outlines in great detail, Buddy was quite a character. He was the huge push (or battering ram?) behind the proverbial renaissance of Providence. PVD has a long way to go, but some would argue that it is definitely better off after Buddy's term in office. Besides, how many cities have had a convicted felon with his own marinara sauce in City Hall? Stanton has written a meticulously researched and engaging book about one of the most interesting mayors to come along in quite a while. Whether you're from Providence or just passing through (ahem college kids), pick this one up and learn about the man behind the myth.

1 comments about The Lenin Anthology.

1. Tucker's edited volume, "The Lenin Anthology," is a good compilation of Lenin's body of work. If one wishes a quick introduction to Lenin in one volume, this is a good work to look at.
   
   First, Lenin's real name was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov. The death of his older brother at the hands of the government was a key point in his life (note the brief chronology on pages xv-xxiii, from his birth in 1870 to his death in 1924). Tucker's introductory essay is useful for placing Lenin's work in context. He observes that (page xxvi): "Lenin must be understood both as a creator of a distinctive version of Marxism as a revolutionary theory and also as a person steeped in the native Russian, non-Marxist revolutionary tradition."
   
   The volume's Part I focuses on "The Revolutionary Party and Its Tactics." The single most important contribution is probably "What Is to Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement." This work outlines his view of the tactics of revolution under the banner of the party. Other selections are also useful to understand his tactical perspective (e.g., "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back").
   
   Part II examines "Revolutionary Politics in a World at War." One of the best known of his works in this section is "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism," in which work he equated capitalist countries with carrying out imperialist policies. Part II considers "The Revolutionary Taking of Power." In my view, doubtless the single most important work appearing in this section is Lenin's "The State and Revolution." This work focuses more on revolution, how to achieve it, what it means, and what of the aftermath than almost any substantial work that he wrote. This is far more a kind of philosophical work than his more tactical pieces from Part I. And so on.
   
   Other key works appearing in whole or in part: "The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky," "'Left-Wing' Communism--An Infantile Disorder," etc. At the end, there are some poignant letters and brief essays. Poignant among some of these: His frustration with bureaucracy holding back what he saw as the goals of revolution after the Bolsheviks had seized power; his fears regarding succession, as he lugubriously diagnosed that Stalin was not the person to succeed him (e.g., see page 728)--and his powerlessness to prevent what he feared; his essay "Better Fewer, But Better," in which he excoriated Stalin indirectly and argued for less obtrusive government and moving ahead more slowly and carefully. In the last named essay, he defined the title as (page 736): "We must follow the rule: Better fewer, but better. We must follow the rule: Better get good human material in two or even three years rather than work in haste without hope of getting any at all."
   
   Lenin was a master of political invective, attacked his enemies mercilessly (even if just in his writing). He was a professional revolutionary who also was, on occasion, capable of interesting political reflections. If one wishes to know more about the works of and ideas of V. I. Lenin, this is one of the very best starting points.

5 comments about Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi's Life, Times, and Rise to Power.

1. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and Sandalow's insight gathered over years of observing Pelosi in action. While Pelosi may not be the most fascinating politician, she is clearly devoted to public service and a role model for other women interested in entering politics.



2. I normally have no interest in politics, and only happened upon this book because my husband was reading it. At first, I was only flipping through it to make another point to my husband about how different our literary tastes are (I'm a literature fan...he's a political junkie). Before long, I was actually reading the damn thing! The author has clearly been a close observer of both Pelosi and California politics for some time, and does a fine job mixing the personal with the nitty gritty details of a life in politics. This book has heightened my understanding of politics in general, and deepened my appreciation of the achievements of a woman serving as speaker of the house, something we are starting, for better or worse, to take for granted.



3. This is a terrific book that fans of politics, history and popular culture will enjoy tremendously. Marc Sandalow has written a compelling tale of Nancy Pelosi's background and historic rise to power. I was especially taken by Sandalow's vivid description of Pelosi's Baltimore childhood in a highly political family and how she later applied those early lessons with such skill. A great read, full of insight, passion and wit.



4. Amusing to read all the reviews obsessed with how boring Pelosi is--obviously not the author's intention to make her a movie star, so these comments really miss the point. Clearly this is a book that will find more traction in the classroom than in the living rooms of Oprah's Book Club members--thank god. Sandalow has produced a thoughtful and very well written history of someone whose political power (dull as it may be!), and representation of a certain kind of liberal ideology on Capitol Hill (ditto?) demand our attention--for those precious few who still have serious attention spans....



5. This is a very well-written and well-researched book on a woman who seems to have done it all -- managing both a successful career and family. The book is notable in describing the many barriers she (and other women faced) in her climb to the top -- and the skill and perseverence required.

5 comments about John F. Kennedy: A Biography.

1. My fascination with John F Kennedy comes from when I first saw him riding down Lehigh Avenue in Philadelphia in 1959 when I was 9 years old. He was running for president back then. After he became president I used to like watching him on TV verbally sparring with news reporters. What a difference in how the "powder-puffs" we have today on TV avoid, hide and pretend we have no problems. I'm definitely no Democrat but JFK had a lot more courage, intellegence and insight than most of who you see on the scene today in political arenas. He had a specail way of moving people to action that just doesn't seem to exist anymore. Hopefully someone else will eventually come along again like him who actually becomes an excellent president. Maybe someone like Sarah Polin?
   
   I'm also a big fan of well-written biographies and found this book to be amazing. What I liked about this book is how different aspects of JFK's life were catagorized and separated so that you could gain a real insite to how John Kennedy must have looked at the world. I liked that the author did not spend very much time on his assassination since there are already too many theories, stories and legends about that unfortunate incident.
   
   JFK appears to have been the consumate listener which to me is probably why he was so smart about common sense aspects. He listened and did not want to block that part of life out since it does make a positive difference. And yes he liked the ladies (he was so charasmatically attractive does that surprise anyone?) and he seems to have taken his job as president seriously. He often went to the people whenever he needed to really get an important point across. Had he remained president that wind-bag who took over, president Johnson, would have went back to his ranch in Texas instead of helping to kill so many young people during Viet Nam.
   
   I recommend this book to anyone who wants to get a more realistic idea of who JFK was, what he was really about and what his principles really were.



2. The 1960 election was one of the closest. John Kennedy was Catholic, and many voters were against him for that reason. Kennedy's critics still question whether the Vietnam War would have been fought had Nixon won. It may not have been. On the other hand, there may have been a nuclear war. We will never know. It is part of the controversy of those years. Kennedy is remembered for his moon speech to Congress in 1961: "I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the Earth." In 1962, Kennedy confronted Khrushchev over Cuba. The U.S. could not allow Soviet missiles 100 miles off the Florida coast. John Kennedy and First Lady Jackie brought an elegance to the White House emulated by successors Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Kennedy's assassination in Dallas in 1963 is something America is still dealing with, like Pearl Harbor before it and 9/11 after it. Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone when he assassinated Kennedy. Conspiracy theories are false. The grassy knoll is a figment of the imagination. Oswald was a loner and a misfit. He was a marksman. He shot Kennedy from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository as his motorcade passed below. He fled and hid in a theater but was quickly apprehended. Jack Ruby shot and killed Oswald. He said he did it out of sympathy for Jackie. There was no reason not to believe him.



3. This great biography was written by an academic historian who gathers and compares several sources, yet the publisher to cut costs cuts the footnotes, which are of essential and greatest interest. In our era of intellectual property and knowledge as commodity, the publisher did not wish to provide the reader with specific indications for further study through the footnotes. With the collapse of the Internet we may never know what amplifications and insights the author may have included in these footnotes, which were no doubt as exhaustive as the work itself. How could the once great St. Martin's have been so academically irresponsible for commercial purposes? It is as inexplicable as our once great nation's journey from the intelligent JFK to the solipsistic W.



4. I read this book after reading the Caro series on Lyndon Johnson and this book fell short of my expectations. I felt that too many facts and stories where thrown together without a supporting theme or purpose. Also, I thought a disproportionate amount of time was spent on Kennedy's private life.



5. Michael O'Brien is to be commended for writing a lengthy, well-written tome at this late juncture on the late, great JFK, especially post-Robert Dallek's masterful "An Unfinished Life", a VERY hard act to follow, indeed. O'Brien's book is a worthy companionn to Dallek's and, while it treads a lot of familiar ground, it is worthwhile for all Kennedy fans. Get this!

5 comments about Ike: An American Hero.

1. Easy to read and enlightening about Eisenhower.
   If we hadn't had Eisenhower in WW 2 we would have had to invent him.
   He was so much more than contemporary opinion of him during the 50's.
   A true great American hero.
   More evidence that Truman should have fired MacArthur so much sooner.
   MacArthur- the tin soldier.



2. Michael Korda's beefy biography of Dwight Eisenhower is a must read for anyone who thought of Ike as just the avuncular President of the quiet 1950's. Korda's portrait of Eisenhower paints Ike as an intelligent and thoughtful leader in both World War II as Supreme Allied Commander and in his many Post War roles. When Eisenhower took over the presidency in January 1953 the post war peace had all but unraveled with Korea raging, the French losing their grip in Vietnam, and the Middle East a boiling cauldron of activity. Ike's stalwart character appears to have been a great force in keeping this potential incendiary period in check.
   
   Korda paints Eisenhower as a simple but forthright and principled individual. I was particular impressed with the resolute character of Eisenhower and his strong sense of duty in whatever assignment or job he undertook during his career. As Korda says, "while Eisenhower was the last president born in the 19th century, he was a 20th century thinker." As supreme commander of European theatre during World War II and as President of the United States, Eisenhower never seemed to get raddled no matter how difficult or bleak the situation appeared. It is not hard to see how Eisenhower commanded such world respect during the War and the Post War period. One wonders what the situation would have been in Iraq if Eisenhower had been the chief executive today?



3. The first 1/3 of the book is spent on the first 45 years or so of Ike's life, which is remarkable for its dullness. He really did nothing of note or of interest until WW2. Then, most of the rest of the book is dedicated to war-years (which is already well-trodden ground). Relatively little space is dedicated to his two terms as President, which I find appalling. Four years at war get almost 500 pages but 8 years as leader of the most powerful country in the history of the world get maybe 50? A very imbalanced treatment, IMO, and very disappointing.
   
   On a lesser note: the habit of the author to drop (un-translated) French and German phrases is pretentious and annoying. The author also makes a few attempts to dabble in psycho-history, which I've never been able to take seriously. Aside from these minor points, the writing is o.k.
   
   I'm sure one wouldn't have to work very hard to find a better treatment of Eisenhower and his work.
   
   Not terrible but not recommended.



4. Once Korda reached 1945 in IKE, it feels like he filed all his research away and said, "Let's wrap this up!" Unfortunately, Ike still had 25 years left in him. Consequently, Korda's biography feels incomplete. Furthermore, for all the space Korda accords to Ike's WWII years, he pays scant attention to the Holocaust. What did Ike know about the Holocaust, about the Final Solution? What was his reaction to the liberation of the concentration camps (Korda mentions Ike's presence at just one, a sub-camp). In light of the preeminence of Holocaust studies in the past 15 years, Korda really could have shed new light with a discussion of Ike and the plight of the Jewish people. Similarly, the creation of Israel receives no mention in this book, even though Ike, as Supreme Commander of the AEF and, later, commander of NATO, would have seen, heard, and possibly opined on "The Palestine Question." In short, if well done, a 900-page offering from Korda would have been more edifying than a 700-page tome.



5. Excellent Presidential Biography that was both appropriately critical and complementary. This book is a must for anyone interested in both the military history as well as the Presidential biography.

1 comments about Morning in America: How Ronald Reagan Invented the 1980's (Politics and Society in Twentieth Century America).

1. Ronald Reagan campaigned and then was elected on a promise to restore American virility. In the closing years of the cold war, we wanted to believe that America was a super power and that we ourselves were super.
   
   Who better suited for that type of positioning than a former Hollywood actor? I think the "1950's Doc Brown" from the 1985 blockbuster 'Back to the Future' spoke for many people when he just expressed shock that an actor ended up as President of the United States. Yet, it made perfect sense in the early years of the cable revolution when the 'best' public official was one who did manipulate the media for their message.
   
   The author examines how this manipulation provided a needed boost to America. We were still recovering from Vietnam and had difficulty realizing that we were perhaps not the center of the world. Reagan's campaign was genius because it essentially said 'don't' and encouraged swing voters to believe that everything would be solved if they elected Reagan.
   
   Reagan made critical inroads with 'blue-collar' democrats. These voters had supported the party on economic issues but had been increasingly at odds with the Democrats on social issues. Specifically because of his own Hollywood background, Reagan knew these voters could be won if he stressed 'morals' and 'tradition' regardless of how he (a twice divorced man who had signed off on the liberalization of abortion laws as California Governor) actually felt about those same issues. Appearance IS everything in politics.
   
   The author also makes clear that the Reagan years are not admirable. Troy explains how the feel good images of success and luxury were sharply contrasting with the reality being experienced by many people. The rapidly rising cost of living, spending cuts, and the AIDS epidemic prevented many other people from enjoying the prosperity.