Book Description
White's TERRORISM: AN INTRODUCTION, a perennial best-seller, is recognized as the most objective terrorism book in the market. In the latest edition, White has rewritten and incorporated parts of his two books DEFENDING THE HOMELAND and TERRORISM to create one new comprehensive text. To reflect this change, the title has been updated to TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY: AN INTRODUCTION, Fifth Edition. TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY: AN INTRODUCTION, Fifth Edition strives to discuss the most sophisticated theories by the best terrorist analysts in the world, while still focusing on the domestic and international threats of terrorism and the basic security issues that surround terrorism today. The student-oriented writing style is complemented by rich pedagogy, and there is an adequate amount of research and theoretical discussion to make this the ideal text for both the undergraduate- and graduate-level courses.
Customer Reviews:
Good Book.......2007-09-13
Excellent book to use as a resource. Good quality and very fast to ship.
Great reading.......2007-09-03
To understand what terrorism is, you have to know how it has evolved. This book shows you! Interesting reading!
A great read.......2007-08-13
Dr. White, an international expert in the field of international terrorism has put together a great book to help the average reader who may be inundated with the "war on terrorism" put the problem in perspective. The book is presented in terms comprehensible to the average reader and is not a doomsday approach that many terrorism authors have today. This is a great read and allows a reader to fully comprehend the global problem we face without the rhetoric. Thanks Dr. White.
Terrorism.......2007-01-22
This book is presently being used in my college course on Terrorism. The author presents the information in a precise and readable way. The book was nothing of what I thought it would be. It presents a unbiased history of terrorism . . .from beginning to the present...with explanations about how terrorism works.
Only problem I have with the book, is the author keeps referring to other Chapters when explaining some of the points. I would have preferred to have everything together.
Definitely a book that will help you understand what is going on in the world today.
What a dilemma......!.......2006-10-18
When local governments prove lack of temerity and live in chattering fear from terrorists in their midst, there will be no measure for panic, and experience indicate that fear breeds atrocities.
Experience also indicate that terrorists atrocities do not remain localized, they tend to spread outside the borders.
The UN should leave no stone unturned until terrorism is defined.
If the UN took, in unison, immediate actions in the past century to quash the plots for terrorist's acts, many sad events on the turn of this century would have not been speeded up so sudden and hysterical.
But the UN remained weak by the `Veto' power.
It is amazing how the `super powers' sat on heaps of weapons delicately stored in their arsenals to be on the look out against each others, tiger vis-à-vis tiger, while the bugs were brewing to bug.
Certainly the chain of events leading to 9/11 was so odd they would have been more fitting the famous James Bond - Agent 007 movies.
But the unfortunate fact is that what happened was gravely true.
The USA is to blame because by remaining so passive in the past and by sitting put and lethargic when bloody acts looked them in the eye, America delivered the `wrong' message.
It is incredible how the American public was left aloof to know if the successive Administrations had been seriously handling, or gathering intelligence, about bloody acts around the world.
It is also incredible how the USA abdicated its responsibilities to the UN waiting in profound ignorance to see how the disasters from `petty' and `localized' wars in small countries will unfold.
We can all recall Jimmy Carter's famous smile (a precursor of inaction) and his inclination towards pacifism. (Rescue attempt of American Hostages in Iran that failed).
Despite Ronald Reagan's gifted articulation, his soft actions were no match to his hard words and the same pacifist messages were again delivered.
The USA must have taken better heed of what went `wrong' in small countries on this planet (Lebanon for example), not to stoop from the slightest incident (the attack, that killed 241 marines, on their compound located at Beirut Airport on October 23, 1983, for example). Immediately after this sad event, the USA pulled their forces out of Lebanon - scuttling away from important pressing responsibilities.
As World Power, the USA should not have been deceived!!!
Georges Bush senior daring reprisals looked pale, later on, when Bill Clinton weakened them by his impulse to deal with internal matters at home mixed what they feared to believe with what they dared not to believe. Despite short periods of `hopes' during his first term, Bill Clinton occupied the media for quite sometime bringing up the image that USA house is crumbling, at its weakest point, leaving a lot to be desired.
Mr White sees the definition of terrorism very difficult to formulate, and it gets more confusing within 'Homeland Security.'
Who should decide what is a terrorist act or otherwise a resistance struggle?
Are the Palestinians terrorists? Were Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin terrorists or resistance?
Are Hizbullah terrorists and who should decide so? Were members of the French resistance terrorists?
Which signposts should support `a definition' to be recognized by all nations? Should references to certain groups in history be taken as signposts, and equated with current ones? And how soon will it be settled?
As long as there are inequities in the pending issues facing the UN there shall never be a universal definition.
Who should take the lead to define the legend `Terrorism' , the UN or the USA. This time, the UN seems to abdicate this responsibility to the USA. Our impression is one that the UN is playing the role of the Carrot and the Stick is relegated to the USA.
Perhaps this very dilemma that has been challenging the USA presidents in the last twenty years of the twentieth century until the beginning of this one, will also determine the shape of nations in our times.
Book Description
This is the first full-length account of the CIA's coup d'etat in Iran in 1953âa covert operation whose consequences are still with us today. Written by a noted New York Times journalist, this book is based on documents about the coup (including some lengthy internal CIA reports) that have now been declassified. Stephen Kinzer's compelling narrative is at once a vital piece of history, a cautionary tale, and a real-life espionage thriller.
Customer Reviews:
Consequences of One Week ,Fifty Years Ago.......2007-10-04
In 1953 the United States made a momentous decision. Partially out of legitimate fear of a possible Russian takeover of the valuable Iranian Oil field, and partly as a result of incitement by British interests who sought to stubbornly maintain their imperialistic power structure, the CIA led a sinister and clandestine coup that removed the most beloved and democratic leader Iran has had in a century; Mohammend Mossadegh.
Mossadegh was replaced by the Shah Pahlavi who became so hated that a Muslim fanatical mob overthrew him in 1979. The new theocracy, well remembering the American led coup, feared that the CIA would attempt it again. As insurance they attacked the US embassy and took 52 American hostages.
This act so infuriated the Americans that they supported Saddam Hussein's horrific war against Iran. This led to Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, the rise of the Muslim fanatics who created the Hezbollah and Taliban, the empowerment of Saddam, the invasion of Kuwait, the attacks on the US in Beruit, Somalia, 911, and of course our current clumsy missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
While America's awkward foreign policy proved disastrous in hindsight, the fear of communist control of Middle Eastern oil was a driving force in the 1950's. Blame must be shared with the British Anglo-Iranian Oil Company for their greed, the British for treating the Iranians so poorly, for the Iranian Shahs who sold Iran's concessions to fund their lavish life, and for even Mossadegh himself for becoming so blind in his justified hatred for the British that he refused any compromise offered.
Yet while the Iranians despise the US for our intrusions into their affairs and the suffering it has caused, they still honor the American institutions of freedom and democracy. These values are currently suppressed by the current theocracy.
Kinzer's well researched story reads like a first class spy novel. He avoids cynicism and anti American tirades and presents the story in a balanced light. While he does not avoid detailing the disaster we unleashed he also did not avoid the context of the anti Communist fears shared by many Americans in the 1950s.
He will make you think different about the current events in the Middle East.
All the Shah's Men.......2007-08-08
I think this is a book that every American should read because it explains so clearly the little known facts about the overthrow of the very first democratically elected prime minister in Iran. The seeds of democracy were there - just waiting for a little water but because Mossadegh was a nationalist and didn't want to be indebted to any foreign power including the U.S., we initiated this clandestine covert operation which brought the Shah back to power. At the time of the hostage crisis, I couldn't understand why the Iranian's hated us so much. Now I see that scenario with complete clarity. Regime change by any other name is still meddling in the affairs of foreign countries. Even if we don't care about what happens to that country, it always comes back to haunt us because it's bad foreign policy - bad for the U.S. in the worst possible ways.
Excellent crash course in the root of US/Iranian problems.......2007-07-17
I was recommended this book by a friend who is Persian. He considers himself Persian because he does not want to be identified as an Iranian due to misperceptions of the people in the United States. He also does not want to be lumped in with being the government that currently exists in Iran.
The book itself is a relatively quick read that can be done in a day or two. But the wealth of information that Kinzer has packed into what I would consider a short book is astounding. He chronicles the history of Iran dating back to the days of Darius and Cyrus albeit briefly. Then eventually focuses on several key events of the late 19th century and moves into the 20th century. The main focus of the book is the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and their nationalization by Mohammed Mossadegh in the mid-part of the 20th century. This eventually paved the way for the British to coerce the United States Government under Dwight Eisenhower to green light covert ops against Mossaedegh to remove him from his position of Prime Minister of Iran. This led the way for the Shah to assume authoritarian control over the country, which eventually culminated in the 1979 Revolution.
It is an incredibly fascinating story and goes to show how the United States in a sense created their own problem with Iran due to the desire to have oil flowing from the country. They got 26 years worth of it only to create a bigger problem by leading the way inadvertently for the fundamentalist government that is there now. It becomes clear why Harry S. Truman is so greatly appreciated these days due to his ability to make decisions that were and would have been better for the long term. He opposed any US action against Iran. If only that advice had been followed, who knows what might have been in the Middle East.
For those wanting to know why the current regime in Iran supports terrorist groups and is so vehemently anti-Western? This is the book to read. It does an excellent job of explaining why and how we got to the this point we are at currently.
Imagine that Iran would try to dictate the US at which prices and to whom they can only sell their products and own resources..........2007-07-14
This book shows the kind of info that is not found, as usual, in the mainstream media. It shows you how the US along with other countries like the UK have tried to control the oil resources of a sovereign third country like Iran. They have used any tool for achieving their goals, even the coup de etat. At the beggining of the history, through the middle ages and until the discovery of America the main excuse for conquering and destroying countries and for genocide was the religion, like happended with the religion wars in Central Europe, in America with the Spanish Catholic Kings and with the English purintans, in France with the hugonots... Then it was the liberty, equality, etc, like with the wars of Napoleon or with Russia and the poor republics that suffered its influece after the war of the October's Revolution. Then it came the race with Hitler. And nowadays the excuse is the democracy. But, always, it is just an excuse that hides the real motivation: economic interest. Nowadays the Western countries while keeping their own population uninformed and sort of drugged with the everyday work and consumption needs, try to convince them to go to war with the excuse that the objective is to spread liberty and democracy. They do this at the same time that they incentivate and protect dictatorships and antidemocratic regimens like they do in most of the Arab countries (there is/were such regimens not only in Iraq or Iran, by the way, just look at the bunch of allies of the US and the UK in the Persian Gulf like Oman, Dubai, Soudern Arabia, Kuwait, Katar, etc.. where the lack of freedom of speach or of democracy does not take the American politicians to go these countries to give them the present of democracy by the force of war). This book is an example of the whole lie, cinism and hypocrisy that the international foreign Wester policies are about. Like alwasy, it is not about virtues but only about money and geostrategical control. For this according the report of the worldwide reputed medicine magazine The Lancet, and published by the American University of John Hopkins, about 660.000 Iraqi people have been killed in Iraq by the middle of the last year, most of them by artillery and air strikes by false called "coalition" forces. For this reason the puppet government of Iraq has announce at the beginning of this year that they will not disclosure more figures of deaths caused by the war. Obviusly the occupants are frighteened by the fact that today, one year after that report, we may have reached already one million deaths, something that if the people of the US and of the UK would be well informed and aware of it they would jump to the streets to stop their goverments spreading the democracy in Iraq. A democratic country of dead people with the second largest oil reserves of the world, a very easy country to control. Whoever that can not understand that it is not democracy or liberty should find the information that is there and that is not provided normaly by the mainstream media. I recommend everybody to read the book of John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hitmank, to understand what it is going on behind the nice words of our politicians.
seeConfessions of an Economic Hit Man
This is a deep book which is very well written and organized.......2007-06-26
The history of Iran has never been documented this well. Kinzer is an excellent author and he has gained himself a loyal new fan in me. This is a most impressive book which I will read again and again and share with all my friends. The key to understanding the past and the roots of terrorism against the USA is this book. Every word in this book has been so superbly edited to convey Kinzer's specific points that every sentence or paragraph can be quite profound and meaningful. An excellent gift to anyone who has ever asked "why do they hate us so much?" - The detailed truth shall set you free.
Average customer rating:
- If you love Shakespeare....
- Carelessness
- "The shock of pleasure"
- Fascinating, inspiring... but oh, SO irritating
- Get Excited about Shakespeare...that's the Message.
|
The Shakespeare Wars: Clashing Scholars, Public Fiascoes, Palace Coups
Ron Rosenbaum
Manufacturer: Random House
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Authors
| Arts & Literature
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Criticism & Theory
| History & Criticism
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Shakespeare
| British
| World Literature
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Shakespeare, William
| ( S )
| Authors, A-Z
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Shakespeare the Thinker
-
Shakespeare and Co.: Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Dekker, Ben Jonson, Thomas Middleton, John Fletcher and the Other Players in His Story
-
A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare: 1599
-
Shakespeare's Philosophy: Discovering the Meaning Behind the Plays
-
Explaining Hitler: The Search for the Origins of His Evil
ASIN: 0375503390
Release Date: 2006-09-19 |
Book Description
“[Ron Rosenbaum] is one of the most original journalists and writers of our time.”
–David Remnick
In The Shakespeare Wars, Ron Rosenbaum gives readers an unforgettable way of rethinking the greatest works of the human imagination. As he did in his groundbreaking Explaining Hitler, he shakes up much that we thought we understood about a vital subject and renews our sense of excitement and urgency. He gives us a Shakespeare book like no other. Rather than raking over worn-out fragments of biography, Rosenbaum focuses on cutting-edge controversies about the true source of Shakespeare’s enchantment and illumination–the astonishing language itself. How best to unlock the secrets of its spell?
With quicksilver wit and provocative insight, Rosenbaum takes readers into the midst of fierce battles among the most brilliant Shakespearean scholars and directors over just how to delve deeper into the Shakespearean experience–deeper into the mind of Shakespeare.
Was Shakespeare the one-draft wonder of Shakespeare in Love? Or was he rather–as an embattled faction of textual scholars now argues–a different kind of writer entirely: a conscientious reviser of his greatest plays? Must we then revise our way of reading, staging, and interpreting such works as Hamlet and King Lear?
Rosenbaum pursues key partisans in these debates from the high tables of Oxford to a Krispy Kreme doughnut shop in a strip mall in the Deep South. He makes ostensibly arcane textual scholarship intensely seductive–and sometimes even explicitly sexual. At an academic “Pleasure Seminar” in Bermuda, for instance, he examines one scholar’s quest to find an orgasm in Romeo and Juliet. Rosenbaum shows us great directors as Shakespearean scholars in their own right: We hear Peter Brook–perhaps the most influential Shakespearean director of the past century–disclose his quest for a “secret play” hidden within the Bard’s comedies and dramas. We listen to Sir Peter Hall, founder of the Royal Shakespeare Company, as he launches into an impassioned, table-pounding fury while discussing how the means of unleashing the full intensity of Shakespeare’s language has been lost–and how to restore it. Rosenbaum’s hilarious inside account of “the Great Shakespeare ‘Funeral Elegy’ Fiasco,” a man-versus-computer clash, illustrates the iconic struggle to define what is and isn’t “Shakespearean.” And he demonstrates the way Shakespearean scholars such as Harold Bloom can become great Shakespearean characters in their own right.
The Shakespeare Wars offers a thrilling opportunity to engage with Shakespeare’s work at its deepest levels. Like Explaining Hitler, this book is destined to revolutionize the way we think about one of the overwhelming obsessions of our time.
Customer Reviews:
If you love Shakespeare...........2007-07-17
... then buy this book.
That's all I can really say.
Carelessness.......2007-06-17
At first, I was annoyed by the lack of citations Rosenbaum gives to Shakespeare's text but now my annoyance goes beyond that. For an example of the kind of carelessness that put me off the book turn to page 269. Here, Rosenbaum, in a discussion of lineation, quotes lines from Richard II, and states that they are from "the unmodernized FOLIO version" of the play but does not say which act and scene they are from. One has to hunt around for them. When I found them on page 353 of Hinman's Facsimile, (Page 31, second column, of the Histories), I saw that Rosenbaum does not quote the text of the Folio accurately. Rosenbaum has a comma after "too" but the 1623 Folio has a colon. He should have:
I should to Plashy too: but time will not permit,
All is uneven, and everything is left at six and seven.
He then gives the same lines as given in the Riverside edition.
I should to Plashy too,
But time will not permit. All is uneven,
And everything is left at six and seven.
He seems to have given these accurately, but again there was no citation of the act and scene where the lines come from.
On the next page, Rosenbaum writes "Not only is it an instance of the jeweled clockwork of Shakespearean verse, not only is it another instance, he [John Andrews] suggests, in which one imagines that Shakespeare may have overseen the printing in order to ensure that the expressive irregularity of the meter was persevered in the lineation...." Since Shakespeare was buried in April 1616 and the Folio was not published until 1623, the Bard must have overseen the printing in Jaggard's printing house from beyond the grave.
Perhaps Rosenbaum meant to write "Quarto" where he wrote "Folio." But even if he meant "Quarto" he still does not quote the First Quarto of Richard II (published in 1597) correctly.
"The shock of pleasure".......2007-04-24
In studying and teaching the Bard, I always wonder if I am over-praising or under-estimating Shakespeare's achievement. "Is it him or is it we who are not making sense?" (524) Rosenbaum replies we are at fault. But this is a "felix culpa," a happy fault. He energetically plows through dozens of topics revolving around reactions of critics and directors of Shakespeare. This is not a biography; Rosenbaum has choice words for Stephen Greenblatt's recent "Will in the World." Rosenbaum's dogged pace shows his journalistic knack for standing outside the "public fiascos, palace coups" of his book's subtitle, the better to examine "clashing scholars." Digging in, he holds his ground against formidable experts.
He's able to summarize Stephen Bloom's rhetorical application of antanaclasis in Sonnet 40: "like pulsating alliteration, evokes a sense of insecurity, of flux, of motion..." (471) This whole book, in fact, is Rosenbaum's effort to come to grips with a day as a grad student at Yale when he first realized this disassociation, this suspension between meanings, this either-and-or-plus-more capability that he argues Shakespeare, more than any other writer ever, at his best conveys to us. Still, this "exegetical despair" at never having enough time to get to the bottom of Shakespeare's "floating signifiers" persists.
In fact, Rosenbaum's status as a drop-out from an Ivy League doctoral program in English enables him to return to textual studies, critical debates, academic cogitation, and performance anxieties with aplomb-- and perhaps a wish to settle scores with fusty scholars and fussy thespians.
I found myself certainly eager to return to my student seminar on Lear, to pick up for the first time since college Antony & Cleopatra, or to re-discover the overlooked Troilus & Cressida. But, admittedly, the amount of detail, the intricacy of the arguments, and the rapidity with which parts of this study move too quickly all present any prospective reader of "The Shakespeare Wars" (not the best title, either) with reason to reflect. This book took me over two weeks on and off, and it demands-- as is only fair given its subject-- close attention and unwavering recall.
Often Rosenbaum sets up a point that he may not return to for hundreds of pages; he takes up as an aside concerns that far ago at a later stage in his quest to uncover Shakespeare's spell. He expects more than that elusive "generally educated reader" for you need to have read the plays he talks about. No plot summaries here; he takes what is odd for a mass-market account of the drama in that he writes at a level thankfully more accessible than the usual critic (which isn't hard these days, admittedly) but nonetheless a tone that implies on every page you need to have done as nearly an intensive scrutiny of the plays as he has had the stamina, the intellect, and the passion to pursue over thirty-five years.
The high points for me were his treatment of Shylock as performed too genteely by actors today afraid to admit that Shakespeare may have been one of his time and not above it in some universalist humanism in presenting a Jewish villain. Rosenbaum confronts Steven Berkoff and Henry Goodman, both British Jewish actors who in Rosenbaum's estimation have with varying degrees of success tried to make this play and its main character still worthy of a post-1945 performance of a drama more controversial now perhaps than it presumably in Shakespeare's London. Rosenbaum's own determination to argue for the play's antisemitism as its central and essential core despite "universalist" efforts to soften its edge make for stimulating reading.
He follows with a suitable interlude showing that Shakespeare on film for us can outshine its theatrical productions today-- by virtue of close-ups, subtle vocal expression, voiceover of soliloquys, and crafting of scenes without the stage's necessity to thunder out and soldier on for hours more. He recommends Welles' Falstaff, Burton's Hamlet, Olivier's Richard III, and Brook's Lear above all else. To his credit, he gives fair space to Harold Perrineau's stunning Mercutio in Luhrmann's Romeo; on the other hand he barely mentions Taymor's Titus, Parker's Othello, Branagh's Hamlet & Henry or Almeyredra's Hamlet although he seems to like much in them at their best. Not to mention his lack of explanation of what's good and bad in the 1980s BBC TV series that filmed for the first time the entire set of plays. Much more is needed than what his film chapter gives.
Too often, Rosenbaum mentions asides that to me proved more appealing than his main examples. I never figured out what adds up from Brook's "Secret Play" concept or the cumulative effect on stage of Cic Berry's vocal experiments in rehearsals. The Socinian heresy may have much to suggest about Merchant and Empson in "Milton's God" had much to provide about the Doctrine of Christian Satisfaction, but Rosenbaum raises such points only to then rush past them in his determination to transcribe yet another interview with an actor or director. These conversations are often enlightening, but there lurks an understandable if still awkward tendency of the journalist to put himself too forward as the antagonist, the devil's advocate, the naysayer.
There are places, as with his demolishment of Harold Bloom's ridiculous claims for Falstaff as the epitome of Shakespeare's "invention of the human" as we have inherited his conceptual paradigm, where he seems to have that personal agenda come out too much. Revenge for those Yale sherry parties when he witnessed his classmates fawning over Bloom is understandable. But it does undermine the intellectual rigor of his critique of that orotund mandarin.
Unfortunately, this hefty and handsomely designed book lacks any way to track down quotations from his sources. Bibliographic endnotes are engrossing, but the lack of specific citations for hundreds of quotes is disappointing in a book that tries to connect a wider audience to insider debates. Despite an imperfect result, this is one of the rare books that bridges the gap between the ranks of (in the phrase of one of them, Linda Charnes) "yuppie guerrilla academics" and the rest of us. Rosenbaum, for all this book's unevenness and exhausting mass of half-digested material, cares about getting us to share his enthusiasm. Pleasure-- how rarely do we find this concept at the heart of a critic's search for aesthetic wonder? Grace, infinitude, love, sea change, the abyss, forgiveness, transport outside of ourselves: Rosenbaum seeks the source of his "reader reception" by hunting down everyone he can who may guide him to the elusive source of Shakespeare's power and control over him-- and, he urges, if we wish to follow him, Shakespeare's trail blazed for us.
I don't understand, apropos, why Rosenbaum agrees with an assertion that we are the last generation who will be able to comprehend Shakespeare's language before it becomes as antiquated and inaccessible as is Chaucer's Middle English to non-specialists. He raises this point, typically, but never elaborates on it. He raves about Kevin Kline's Falstaff but skims over how Kline's acting in part 2 of Henry IV alters from part 1: a topic that previously Rosenbaum insists upon for many detailed pages. Too often, Rosenbaum seems so excited about his adventure that he forgets we have a hard time keeping up with his dash.
He's no Bardolator. Rather, he wishes us to uncover the intensity of what we read and witness as "the language of thought" as it emerges onto paper or into the spotlights. He argues for what matters in Shakespeare as an aesthetic achievement-- in fact one more apparent to those of us outside today's academy. We may be mocked by those claiming "the institutionalist debunking of the bourgeois subject" from ivory towers to speak rather for the oppressed. I teach some of these less- privileged, literarily-challenged students every day, far from the Ivy League. I'd ask Charnes: how should I teach them Shakespeare? How explain his appeal to the person next to me on the bus? Getting "ordinary folks" to understand a bit of Shakespeare's art brings the original aim of the playwright home. As one critic mentions, anyone can experience the complex reactions Rosenbaum or critics or directors know. The only difference is that the professionals know how to articulate it, and can re-experience it with increasingly adept awareness. What Wordsworth labelled as simultaneous dissassociation and association: this quality marks Shakespeare's inexhaustible, endlessly renewable "moral complexity" as well as artistic achievement.
The inexhaustability of good art may sound old-fashioned, but Rosenbaum near the opening of his book shows how Shakespeare rewards our investment-- with compound interest. For many people today, accustomed to obvious presentation of vapid messages, Shakespeare may nudge them out of their shell. They are often scared of him. Rosenbaum likewise demystifies Shakespeare for a wider audience. He understands the academic arguments and translates their findings to those of us whom scholarly articles and learned books may rarely reach: the common reader.
Fascinating, inspiring... but oh, SO irritating.......2007-03-25
Absolutely great, stimulating material. Rosenbaum has both thought deeply about Shakespeare and had the contact with leading critics and directors to make this a compelling intellectual journey that anyone with a deep interest in Shakespeare should read. In fact, I know of no similar book, one that so carefully and successfully treads the narrow line between scholarship and journalism.
All that said, the incomplete sentences irritated me increasingly as I got deeper into the book. They make the reader stumble, and they're unnecessary. Interestingly, they don't seem to be a hallmark of this writer's other work, at least judging from his compendium of essays published as The Secret Parts of Fortune. Why here, then? I have no idea, but they detracted seriously from what would otherwise be one of the best books I've read in quite a while.
Get Excited about Shakespeare...that's the Message........2007-03-23
With so many excellent books about Shakespeare, where do you start...with Harold Bloom or Ron Rosenbaum? What book would you give to the teenager who is afraid of the Bard. I would select this book, not because it contains the best analysis of the plays, but because it imparts an infectious enthusiasm that is irrepressible. Over and over again, the author talks about how HE reacts to a performance or a line or a film of the Bard...and that is good. He starts with his overwhelming experience of seeing (Peter Brook's) Midsummer Night's Dream in Britain, an experience perhaps similar to the ecstasy of St. Theresa in brushing close to God. (I never saw that performance but I was impressed with Max Reinhardt's black and white film of the DREAM produced in 1935)
Let's take an example of how he approaches Shakespeare. He rails against the recent attempts to soften Shylock and the anti-semitism of the Merchant of Venice. In response, I believe that Shylock is a deeply complex character and that the recent attempts such as Al Pacino's film performance are valid. The point is not the argument but that the author forces us to think about the issue. Again, that is good. Thus, I wholeheartedly recommend the volume to get excited about the meanings of the plays.
Ron Rosenbaum deliberately avoids discussing the biography of Shakespeare and indeed argues that much of the biographical work is counterproductive. To him what matters are Shakespeare's words, not Shakespeare's bed partners. The argument against the biographies is a point well taken. To quote the author, we don't know much about Homer yet we can still read and appreciate his Illiad and Odyssey just the same. Indeed.
Amazon.com
The leaders of the American Revolution, writes the distinguished historian Bernard Bailyn, were radicals. But their concern was not to correct inequalities of class or income, not to remake the social order, but to "purify a corrupt constitution and fight off the apparent growth of prerogative power." They wished, in other words, to mend a broken system and improve upon it. In doing so they drew on many traditions of political and social thought, ranging from English conservative philosophers to exponents of the continental Enlightenment, from backward-looking interpretations of ancient Roman civilization to forward-looking views of a new American people. Bailyn carefully examines these sources of sometimes conflicting ideas and considers how the framers of the Constitution resolved them in their inventive doctrine of federalism.
Customer Reviews:
Brilliant - for its time.......2007-09-22
Bernard Bailyn's Ideological Origins of the American Revolution is a centerpiece in much, if not all, of contemporary historians' viewpoints and methodologies for understanding the philosophical constructs and ideological underpinnings of the American Revolution. It was, according to Bailyn and many learned historians, after this writing first appeared in 1967, a revolution of ideas. What Bailyn did was to read prodigious amounts of writings of the time, mostly in the form of pamphlets and synthesize the thoughts that were being discussed and written about at the time. Essentially, he put the revolution of ideas into the context of the time. That was, some forty years ago, revolutionary within of itself.
Many of today's more serious readers of the period have read much of Bailyn and Gordon Wood indirectly, if not directly reading their own work. Both have been that influential in the field. The "disappointment" in this book is caused by Bailyn's own success, ironically enough. It was his work, along with select others, who began to pay attention to history within its own context - that is what was occurring in life and politics at the time rather than a chronological and linear view of the time. More of an interdisciplinary viewpoint and, as such, more accessible to the reader. Since the time of its first publication, many others have emulated its style (a good idea) but made its rather seismic effects at the time, feel much less so today. Effectively so much hype over the years (deserved then and de rigor today) makes for more than a bit of a letdown for today's readers. That said, those truly interested in the ideas, the philosophies, and their interpretations and misinterpretations of the day are well served reading Bailyn. Others should approach the read with caution as it is fairly dense but filled with moments of sheer academic brilliance.
Still a standard!.......2007-05-30
Research on a previous project provided Bernard Bailyn an intellectual treasure trove of over 400 pamphlets, written between 1763 and 1776, from which he crafted his Bancroft and Pulitzer Prize-winning The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1992). This work, first published in 1967, remains a standard volume for students of early American studies at all university levels. Bailyn crafted a pointed examination of thoughts of American colonial leaders that culminated into the Revolution. Not only is his analysis wide-ranging, but it explores the depth and fallaciousness of eighteenth-century American revolutionary rationale with force and clarity.
Bailyn lays out the basic argument in the book's sixth sentence: "The ideology of the Revolution, derived from many sources, was dominated by a peculiar strand of British political thought" (v). Around this central thought, Bailyn details the convergence of thought that formed the colonists' case for a break from the British empire; he explains the change over time in American thinking on long-held political views; he highlights contemporary issues, i.e. chattel slavery and established religion, that gained argumentative force from the colonials' complaints against the British Parliament; and he illustrates the difficulties that Revolutionary thinking posed for participants of the Constitutional Convention who sought to replace British authority with a central American government.
The first part of the book describes the vehicle, voice, and ideological basis of the Revolution. The leaders of the Revolution propagated their thoughts through newspapers, broadsides, and almanacs. The primary writing form of the Revolution, however, was the pamphlet, which allowed polemicists of all different vocations to broaden the political debate. The American revolutionary pamphlets, though a "distinctive literature of the Revolution," had roots in seventeenth-century American sermon publishing and early eighteenth-century English polemical pamphleteering techniques.
The Revolutionary crisis did not originate during the crisis period from 1763 to 1776. Elements of the discourse had been long present in the colonies, but the post-1763 turmoil fused the ideas into "a comprehensive view, unique in its moral and intellectual appeal" (22). Bailyn nods to the intellectual influences on colonial leaders from quotations of classical writers, a rather superficial knowledge of the Enlightenment, citations of English common law, and the covenant theology of New England Puritanism. One of Bailyn's significant contributions to the present thinking on eighteenth-century American revolutionary thought is his understanding that "the ultimate origins of the this distinctive ideological strain lay in the radical social and political thought of the English Civil War and of the Commonwealth period" (34). He identifies early eighteenth-century English radical writers, such as John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, as shaping the mind of the American Revolutionary generation more than any other single group.
Change in America did not begin to happen only with the Revolution; it began a century before and progressed slowly. Bailyn constructs an intellectual chronology of Revolutionary thought that consists of three phases, beginning with the years of Anglo-American struggle before 1776, the execution of state constitutions from 1776 through the 1780s, and the crafting and ratifying of a national constitution. The final section of the book exquisitely displays the difficulties encountered by participants at the Constitution Convention to form a federal system of government in the wake of the force of argument put forth at the Continental Congress against the encroaching powers of a central government. Bailyn's discussions of imperium in imperio bookend with sheer mastery his understanding of the entangling intellectual obstacles which American colonists laboriously yet successfully maneuvered to produce the Revolution and the Constitution.
Throughout the Revolutionary period corruption served as the greatest threat to liberty, and, according the federalist view, a constitution establishing a government endowed with the separation of powers would ensure the existence of virtue, the necessary attribute for the sustenance of liberty within a republic. One area of frustration throughout the book is the use of terms like "corruption" and "virtue" that portrays an almost given denotation of such enigmatic expressions.
A true gem within the book is Bailyn's demonstration that the colonial leaders could not contain revolutionary fervor. Opponents of chattel slavery in America and proponents of religious disestablishment used the American leaders' own arguments for freedom from the British Parliament and taxation without representation to assail the continuation of the slave trade and ecclesiastical taxation against religious dissenters.
Bailyn's The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution is nothing less than a most persuasive, brilliantly crafted work that will influence the way Americans think about the Revolution for years to come.
A spark in the study of the Revolution.......2006-03-22
This is a book that all students of the American Revolution should be forced to read. Without understanding Bailyn's argument, that the "conspiracy against liberty" was the main reason why America decided to break away from the British Empire, a student will be forever lost in trying to understand the roots of the American Revolution. Almost all of the books on the outbreak of the American Revolution have had to take Bailyn's argument into consideration; so, if you're interested in the study of the American Revolution, then this book is an imperative read. Read T.H. Breen's "The Marketplace of Revolution" after this book, and you'll have a decent grasp of the roots of the American Revolution.
The Radical Whig Fountain of Libertarian Rhetoric.......2006-01-02
While the 17th century witnessed the failure of the libertarian Levellor revolution, the 18th century can be said to embody its partial victory in the form of the American Revolution. The radical libertarian nature of the Yankee revolutionaires has only recently been acknowledged by historians. Bailyn's volume broke new ground when it was published in 1967 by showing the Radical Whig foundations of the American Revolution. He says "attitudes and ideas that would constitute the Revolutionary ideology was present a half-century before there was an actual Revolution".
The two most widely read polemical Radical Whig authors were Thomas Gordon and John Trenchard. By means of their anti-clerical and anti-military essays, known collectively as "The Indpendent Whig" and "Cato's Letters", they kept alive the Radical Whig traditions of natural rights, suspicion of the ever-encroaching nature of state power, and justified rebellion. Gordon and Trenchard were able to transmit these revolutionary ideas in popular form to the American colonies.
Bailyn says "Everywhere groups seeking justification for concerted opposition to constituted governments turned to these writers [Trenchard and Gordon]". He adds "By 1728, in fact, 'Cato's Letters' had already been fused with Locke, Coke, Pufendorf, and Grotius".
Another important connecting link was Thomas Hollis. Bailyn says "that extraordinary one-man propaganda machine in the cause of liberty, the indefatigable Thomas Hollis" distributed libertarian tracts in England and British America, and subsidized the publication of American revolutionary pamphlets, as well as reprinting the classics of the 17th century Whig tradition such as Sidney and Locke. He was instrumental in supplying radical libertarian literature to libraries in France, Switzerland, Italy, and to Harvard University.
Radical Whig libertarianism comprises a coherent body of principles that are held together and given meaning by two fundamental moral principles. The first being the right of the individual to own justly acquired property; the second being the right of the individual not to be aggressed against.
The individual is defined by his physical uniqueness and so has the potential to develop into a mature and responsible acting individual. The individual's uniqueness forms the basic element of all social interaction and is the source of the division of labor and the exchange process. Similarly, privacy is the result of recognizing the dignity, worth, and sanctity of every individual. Only by permitting the individual to enjoy his or her property unmolested, within the protected sphere defined by the self-ownership principle and the derivative right to own property in other physical objects, can there be true privacy and protection of the private side of human life.
Tolerance results from the recognition that all individuals are potentially morally perfectable. As long as no property rights are violated, then all consenting, peaceful activity must be legally protected. Tolerance is vital because it allows each and every individual to exercise moral autonomy. Only by being free to choose between different courses of action can the individual learn from past mistakes and so strive for moral perfection and self-fulfillment.
It is a consequence of the ownership of one's body and the moral autonomy that springs from this ownership that no one can act on any individual's behalf unless expressly and formally delegated to do so. This means that individuals have to begin claiming their rights of self-determination, the right to withdraw or secede from any political organization that is not to their liking, and the right to resist political intervention in their social and economic activities. Bailyn says "Such ideas, based on extreme solicitude for the individual and an equal hostility to government, were expressed in a spirit of foreboding and fear for the future".
In 1765, Charles Carroll of Carrollton said, "corruption . . . will produce the same effects . . but that fatal time seems to be at a great distance. The present generation at least, . . . will enjoy the blessings and the sweets of liberty". Bailyn says "Suspicion . . . of an active conspiracy of power against liberty . . . rose in the consciousness of a large segment of the American population before any of the famous political events of the struggle with England took place".
Bailyn cites the Report of Speech in the House of Lords, 1770: "Lord Chancellor Camden . . . accused the ministry . . . of having formed a conspiracy against the liberties of their country". Bailyn also cites the Boston Town Meeting to its Assembly Representatives, 1770: "A series of occurrences, many recent events, . . . afford great reason to believe that a deep-laid and desparate plan of imperial despotism has been laid, and partly executed, for the extinction of all civil liberty . . . The august and once revered fortress of English freedom - the admirable work of ages - the British Constitution seems fast tottering into fatal and inevitable ruin. The dreadful catastrophe threatens universal havoc, and presents an awful warning to hazard all if, peradventure, we in these distant confines of the earth may prevent".
Colonists such as radicals Thomas Paine and Richard Price added to these fears. Paine is best noted for his popular tract, "Common Sense"(1776), which attacked monarchical government and urged immediate declaration of independence from the Crown and the formation of a Republic, as well as for his passionate defense of the French Revolution in his "Rights of Man"(1792). Richard Price, a Dissenter and self-styled "Honest Whig", defended natural rights, justice, and the right of a people to rebel against oppression in his "Observations on the Nature of Civil Liberty . . . and the Justice of War in America", also publishe in 1776.
Bailyn says "the colonists' ideas and words counted too, and not merely because they repeated as ideology the familiar utopian phrases of the Enlightment and of English libertarianism. What they were saying by 1776 was familiar . . . ; yet it was different." He says "The radicalism the Americans conveyed to the world in 1776 was a transformed as well as a transforming force", namely "to make federalism a logical as well as a practical system of government".
Proponents of liberty were mistrusted as well. Bailyn says "denunciations of the work of seditious factions seeking private aims masked by professions of loyalty, which abound in the writings of officials and of die-hard Tories".
It is significant that Bailyn seems only to touch lightly upon the views of the Tories - predecessors of today's neocons. He draws heavily from the radicals. This cozy accomodation and convenient oversightedness is also suspicious. It is an approach that is commonplace concerning the American Revolution. State public schools do not teach the Tories' views, rather their aim is to justify the present organization of American society.
More questions arise from reading Bailyn's work. Why did the Radical Whig revolution in England fail to attract the ruling elite and beneficiaries of monopoly profits resulting from the political system? And why did their counterparts in the American colonies embrace Radical Whig ideology?
My guess is that, when examined closely, the American Revolution fails to live up to its libertarian origins. My particular concern is with the Declaration of Independence - the supposed listing of reasons for the revolt. The facts indicate that the goals of most of the signers of the Declaration were quite different from their rhetoric. They sought freedom from Britain, it is true - the freedom to govern the lives of Americans THEMSELVES. This is obvious, not only from the words of the Founding Fathers, but from their actions as well.
In short, a valuable collection of primary sources. It should be read alongside Raoul Berger's "The Founders' Design" and Cecelia Kenyon's "Men of Little Faith".
Groundbreaking Book.......2005-09-24
As of today, the work Bailyn did in this book is not new. But if considered in the context of the time period when he wrote it and what it did for the study of the American Revolution, this book was the beginning of the current dominate thought on the Revolution. Bailyn changed the way historians and Americans look at the Revolution by challenging the work of several scholars. Written extremely well, this book deserves every award it revceiced and is still entitled to be a mainstay in history departments around the country.
Book Description
No Other Way Out provides a powerful explanation for the emergence of popular revolutionary movements, and the occurrence of actual revolutions, during the Cold War era. This sweeping study ranges from Southeast Asia in the 1940s and 1950s to Central America in the 1970s and 1980s and Eastern Europe in 1989. Goodwin demonstrates how the actions of specific types of authoritarian regimes unwittingly channeled popular resistance into radical and often violent directions. By comparing the historical trajectories of more than a dozen countries, Goodwin also shows how revolutionaries were able to create opportunities for seizing state power.
Book Description
Kurt Muse handed over his passport at Torrijos International Airport, just as he'd done countless times. Instantly, he sensed that something was wrong. Rather than the cursory glance followed by the whack of the entry stamp, the bureaucrat held the little book in both hands. He seemed to be studying it. And then he smiled. Kurt followed the clerk's gaze to a piece of paper taped to his partition. The sign was handwritten in Spanish:
Kurt Muse American Citizen Arrest Him
His life was over.
Born in the United States, raised in Panama, Kurt Muse grew up with a deep love for his adopted country. But by the late 1980s, Panama was suffering under the regime of Manuel Noriega. Innocent people disappeared. Beatings and murders became commonplace.
For Kurt Muse, accepting such a dictator was not an option. For two years, Kurt and a few friends operated clandestine radio stations on low-tech equipment smuggled into Panama. At first, they broadcast on a small scale. But in late 1987, the group realized that they could override any transmission from a government-run radio network, and Radio Constitucional was born.
Muse and his compatriots chose Noriega's Loyalty Day address, simulcast on every radio station in the country, for its first transmission. Just as Noriega began his self-serving message, Radio Constitucional seized the airwaves, urging the people to rise up in defense of their freedom. Kurt knew that if his identity was revealed, he and his family would be in grave peril. But he had no idea what kind of terror, confusion, and betrayal lay in store for all of them.
Six Minutes to Freedom spins the remarkable tale of Kurt's arrest by Noriega's henchmen and his months of imprisonment; the squalid conditions he faced in Panama's infamous Modelo Prison; his eyewitness accounts of his fellow inmates' torture; and the plight of Kurt's family as they fled for their lives. And it reveals, for the first time, the astonishing details of the long-awaited day when helicopters arrived in a firestorm of bullets to whisk Kurt Muse from under the noses of thugs who had been ordered to kill him.
This is Kurt's thrilling and highly personal story—the story of an American hero on foreign soil, who risked his life for his beliefs and for freedom…and became the only American civilian ever rescued by the elite Delta Force.
Customer Reviews:
Ron, Redding CA.......2007-08-24
I had seen this book once in a book store and passed it up. From reading the description and review on [...] I decided to buy it. The book was well written and very informative. I knew of the incident, Operation Urgent Fury and the rescue of Muse, but knew very few details. My attention was held until the very end. Although somewhat limited or shrouded I especially enjoyed th details of the rescue and the rescuers. This is one of those books that just make you proud to be an American.
Riviting.......2007-05-25
I rate this book right up there with my favorites "Endurance", "Touching The Void" and "Blackhawlk Down". I had a tough time putting this book down. Kurt Muse is one strong willed indivdual.
Edmund Burke said it best with "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Amazingly true story.......2007-05-13
What an amazing story to be told. I can't believe this really happened - I couldn't put down this book until the very end. A very fast & enjoyable read.
Could not put the book down.......2007-01-16
I am from the Canal Zone but was not there when Noriega was in power. The book is very well written and I am glad I purchased it. I would recommend the book to anyone who wants a book that is exciting and historical. I think Kurt has accurately described this period in the history of Panama and the Canal Zone.
6 Minutes to Freedom.......2007-01-15
Good book. Outlines situation in Panama prior to departure and capture of Manuel Noriega. Author was imprisoned by Noriega's administration and only rescued through the use of US Special Forces.
Book Description
This unique book capitalizes on a successful approach of using definitional formulas to emphasize concepts of statistics, rather than rote memorization. This conceptual approach constantly reminds readers of the logic behind what they are learning. Procedures are taught verbally, numerically, and visually, which appeals to a variety of users with different learning styles.
Focusing on understanding, the book emphasizes the intuitive, de-emphasizes the mathematical, and explains everything in clear, simple language—with a large number of practice problems.
For those trying to master statistics, as well as reading and understanding research articles.
Book Description
Cuba's number 2 official today — Commander Juan Almeida — was secretly working with JFK in November 1963 to overthrow Fidel. The US government recently revealed Almeida's work for JFK, allowing the updated trade paperback of Ultimate Sacrifice to tell the full story for the first time (complete with new photos and documents).
The authors obtained the story from almost two dozen associates of John and Robert Kennedy, starting in 1990 with JFK's Secretary of State Dean Rusk. Their accounts are supported by thousands of newly-released files at the National Archives.
Almeida's "palace coup" set for December 1, 1963, was to be backed up by US forces "invited" in by Commander Almeida, then Chief of the Cuban Army. However, three Mafia bosses being targeted by Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy used several CIA assets to infiltrate the secret plot and murder JFK.
This resulted in cover-ups by officials like RFK and LBJ, to prevent the exposure of Almeida and a possible nuclear confrontation with the Soviets. The new edition explains why Almeida was not a double agent, why Fidel suspected Almeida's ally Che Guevara, and what Fidel did in 1990 when he finally found out about Almeida's work for JFK.
Customer Reviews:
Too Many Unsubstantiated Facts Leading Nowhere.......2007-09-13
As with most books about the JFK Assassination, 'Ultimate Sacrifice' suffers from its own evangelism; having decided on a theory, the authors opt for proselytizing over objectivity. Authors Waldron and Hartmann start by taking themselves and their theory much too seriously, trying to convince the reader of the correctness of their conclusions by presenting a gigantic load of so called facts to overwhelm the reader. Most of these "facts", however, are far from substantiated, coming as they are from the usual secondary sources rather than original research, while ignoring much good evidence that detract from them.
There are way too many assumptions of unproven allegations in this book for me to take the authors' conclusions seriously, despite the new evidence they provide from some admirable original research to try to back them up. To take just a few examples:
1. The authors accept without question that Oswald was an American agent before he went to Russia. They cite the usual suspicious, yet inconclusive evidence about this such as the 'phony' suicide attempt, Oswald seen with unsavory characters while in Japan, an alleged false defector program the US was supposed to have run, and just the general feeling that it seems to make sense. And yet, the authors completely ignore the much greater evidence opposed to this inference found in the well-researched chapters on Oswald's time in Russia in the Mailer biography, much of it coming from KGB sources who had been watching him constantly. Indeed, not one shred of spy-like behavior was made evident too them by their subject during his entire stay.
2. The authors believe Oswald did not take his Marxism seriously, but was only pretending to be a true believer as part of his cover. Were this true, Oswald must have been the best method actor of all time, never getting out of character, even with his wife and close friends. And oh yes, all those commie books in his room were `planted'. Amazing analysis!
3. The authors decide to accept with little question the interpretation of the ambiguous ballistic and medical data of the assassination that best fits their theory, namely that the fatal shot came from the Grassy Knoll, while discounting the Single Bullet theory. Once more they completely neglect the most scientific data available that counters this notion: the Barger Acoustic analysis done during the HSCA hearings. Nor do they cite the excellent analysis of the first shots in the Zapruder film done for the Frontline special on Oswald that clearly shows the flap of Connelly's collar being flipped up as the bullet -- the same bullet that emerged from Kennedy's throat -- passes through into his shoulder.
There is much more of this type of thing, too much so for me to find much value in what evidence the authors do present. I say this believing indeed that JFK was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy involving elements of Cosa Nostra and CIA. But the breadth of scope of their arguments is just too much for the lack of depth of the evidence they provide.
Do not mistake me, there is some value in this book. The research on the Tampa and Chicago threats is intriguing. The details on the CIA-Mafia assassination plots is both informative and believable. And the presentation of Ruby's ties to Organize crime is the most convincing and thorough I have seen. Unfortunately, when the authors try to cover all the mysterious associations of Johnny Roselli, the Mafia point man on the assassination, they mainly rely on a single secondary source, All American Mafioso by Charles Rappleye and Ed Becker while completely neglecting to cite the most curious close friendship he maintained with top CIA officer William K. Harvey, point man for Executive Action assassinations, until his death. The same tactic of using a very small number of JFK assassination books to back up their arguments is used to show the actions and meaningfull associations of the other mobsters involved in the conspiracy as well.
What is needed in the field of JFK assassination research is not more rehash of old and untested data to backup new conspiracy theories, but a well constructed analysis focused on manageable areas of the assassination using original research, including validating rather than blindly accepting evidence cited in previous works. At times Ultimate Sacrifice does attempt this, but far too seldom; and in the end, the books bites off more than it can chew and concludes very little.
Worth the time.......2007-08-16
I finished this book. Took awhile, but did it. Close to 900 pages. "We'll explain further in another chapter," or words to that effect were sprinkled throughout and wore thin, but explain they did. I've wondered, over the years, why RFK wasn't more aggressive about pursuing the truth and why he presented obstacles to Garrison's investigation, etc--and this book explains all that and more. The theories make sense, and the documentation is laid out nicely. And next to Bugliosi's bag of hot air and overwrought opinion, Ultimate Sacrifice looks even more important. I see it's now available in paperback, so the investment is halved. I'd say it surely deserves a spot on serious researchers' shelves.
The Mafia Did It: A Script and Play Written By CIA Productions Inc........2007-07-26
This is a difficult book for one to get his head around. Not only because the subject matter unfolds like a reverse Russian Doll - as each new puzzle is opened, a larger more interesting one with an even deeper subtext emerges -- but also because of the artful ambiguity with which the source documents (upon which the story is based) makes themselves an integral part of the plot itself.
This is my fourth attempt at writing a review, the first two having been rejected out of hand; and although the third was accepted; mercifully it too was later withdrawn after I tried to amend it several times. However, if this one is accepted, after my third reading of the book, I will not be amending it.
Prologue
As an integral whole, there is yet another way to view the JFK assassination story told here. Imagine it to be an intramural chess game between competing teams within the U.S. government. On one side are the Kennedy brothers, whose goal is C-Day and presumably a return of Cuba to a free and independent state. On the other side, are the anti-Kennedy forces which includes: the front line of the CIA, the mob, J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, the moneyed anti-Kennedy interests, primarily centered in Texas, and the state of Israel. The goal of side B is to checkmate the Kennedys, using C-Day as the cornerstone of the cover-up.
Each side has an array of forces and assets to deploy during the course of the game. And while the pawns, or minor pieces are interchangeable (and consist of Cuban exiles, low-level FBI and CIA operatives, Mafia, hired foreign assassins and their related patsies) the heavy artillery, or the pieces on the back rows of the respective sides, are not. The Kennedys have as their heavier artillery: the U.S. State Department, key executive advisors, various aspects of DOJ, and disparate elements of the intelligence community, including DIA. Importantly, neither the CIA nor the FBI are reliable major pieces for the Kennedy side, but the Kennedys seem to be unaware of this unreliability. Both sides also have at their discretion use of the press to either signal or conceal their respective side's motives and strategies.
The heavy artillery for the anti-JFK side include the middle echelon of the Mafia, namely, Santos Trafficante, Carlos Marcellos, John Roselli, and Sam Giancana; the upper hierarchy of the CIA itself, namely, Richard Helms, William Harvey, Desmond Fitzgerald, James Jesus Angleton, Colonel Sheffield Edwards, E. Howard Hunt, and David Atlee Phillips. At an even higher echelon of movers and shakers, (above the level of the government) for the anti-JFK side, one must also include the important but invisible hand of the Texas moneyed interest led by H.L. Hunt and Clint Murchison with LBJ as their number one lieutenant. And then there is the Don of dons of the mob, Meyer Lansky. Finally, there is Israeli concern over JFK's attempt to deny that nation nuclear status. Arguably it is these behind-the-scene controllers, from deep within the shadows of the CIA, the FBI, Texas moneyed interests and the Massad, that are the real drivers of the chess game.
The Rules of Engagement
Now, the rules-of-engagement is where this chess game really gets interesting. While for the most part the Kennedy's side remain in the dark about what the other side is up to, their own moves are not only transparent to their opponents, but are also subject to manipulation and secret rearrangement by them. The Kennedys personally, and their plans specifically, are repeatedly tripped-up and penetrated again and again. They are cajoled, blackmailed, and stalked repeatedly until they are both eventually killed. No other strategies or maneuvers are successful or even intended to be successful. Under such asymmetric rules of engagement, is there any wonder that it is not a foregone conclusion that the side with knowledge dominance is the one most likely to win the chess game?
The Script
The story of this book is about how the Kennedy brothers, after no less than some twelve different failures by the CIA/Mafia to depose Castro, beginning in 1959, decided to concoct and enlist its own White House plan. It consisted of using a Black Cuban Major, Jose Almeida, along with no less than the infamous Che Guevara himself as turncoats in an attempt to wrest Cuba away from the revolutionary-recently-turned Communist, Fidel Castro. If the newly released documents can be believed, under severe domestic pressure to do something before the 1964 election cycle, the Kennedys seem to have lost all their sense and their normally balanced decision-making abilities in favor of this cockamamie Hollywood version of returning Cuba to a democracy.
No matter who is credited with checkmating the Kennedys, and the authors of this script say that it was the Mafia "who done it," the script still has all the earmarks of "written by CIA Production Incorporated," stamped all over it. The spots on the CIA Leopard just never seem to change. While the integrity of these authors is not itself being questioned, it does seem that they have made among the most naïve of all possible interpretations of the newly released information. Their incessant - even embarrassingly droning and shrill attempt to "pin the tail of the donkey" onto the Mafia, "just does not wash." From the very beginning, it has a hollow ring to it.
By leaving out even a suggestion that others among the real heavy hitters on the anti-JFK side, may have been involved, may have played even a minor role, this rendition raises more questions than it answers: Suddenly and inextricably the Mafia becomes all-knowing, all-wise, and all-powerful, leading the white House, the FBI, and the CIA and the Kennedys around by their respective tails, while all of the other major players -- the disgruntled cabals within the CIA itself, J. Edgar Hoover and LBJ, the Moneyed Texas interests, Meyer Lansky and the Massad - all make only cameo appearances in this carefully stage-managed production.
While no one doubts the Mafia's ability to kill a President of the U.S., the author's shrill theme that the "Mafia did it," begins to wear thin early on, and is incongruent with what the Mafia could and could not be able to do to facilitate both the murder and the cover-up of the assassination plot. They certainly could not have implement the cover-up without confederates very, very high up in, and well above the government. Thus the big flaw in the book is that all of heavy-handed finger-pointing at the Mafia, including "C-Day itself," is but an elaborate smoke screen to give additional cover to the real architects of the assassination.
This book leaves no clues as to whom, or what group that might be.
Two stars
Very Interesting.......2007-06-27
I have read alot of books regarding JFK, and I have to say that this one was very interesting.
Weighs a Ton -- Doesn't Miss Many Tricks.......2007-06-25
I was a pre-teen in England when JFK was killed, and I've been an agnostic on the topic of conspiracy ever since. On the one hand, the Warren Commission report, for all its length, always seemed superficial and almost certainly undermined by political influence. On the other, the start point for all conspiracy theorists is the notion that one lone crazy couldn't possibly pull off something as audacious as an assassination of a president. Who sez? After all, every other successful and attempted presidential assassination was unquestionably the act of a lone crazy (okay, a crazy PAIR, in the case of Truman), including -- for all the lessons learned by the secret service in 1963 -- three later close calls (Ford x 2, Reagan).
In recent years, all the major forensic myths that CTs have leaned on for decades -- Oswald's poor marksmanship; the impossibility of his rifle firing three shots in the time; the backwards riccochet of JFK's body; the "magic bullet" -- have been conclusively debunked. What are left are some real, circumstantial issues concerning Oswald's movements in the two or three years before 11/22/63, his affiliation with pro-Cuba and anti-Cuba movements, the CIA, big business and organized crime, his multiple passports and corporeal manifestations; plus eyewitness accounts and the highly questionable activities of the FBI, CIA and the mob.
"Ultimate Sacrifice" covers the lot exhaustively, if repetitively and in prose that doesn't set the pulse racing. It doesn't provide too many answers, but it does ask most of the questions that still deserve to be asked (along with many that don't), and is probably the best bet currently available for the general reader who wants to know which one book on the subject she or he should read.
Book Description
There is a newer edition of this book.
Bitter Fruit recounts in telling detail the CIA operation to overthrow the democratically elected government of Jacobo Arbenz of Guatemala in 1954. The 1982 book has become a classic, a textbook case study of Cold War meddling that succeeded only to condemn Guatemala to decades of military dictatorship. The authors make extensive use of U.S. government publications and documents, as well as interviews with former CIA and other officials. The Harvard edition includes a powerful new introduction by historian John Coatsworth, Director of the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies; an insightful prologue by Richard Nuccio, former State Department official who revealed recent evidence of CIA misconduct in Guatemala to Congress; and a compelling afterword by coauthor Stephen Kinzer, now Istanbul bureau chief for the New York Times, summarizing developments that led from the 1954 coup to the peace accords that ended Guatemala's civil strife forty years later.
Customer Reviews:
Student - LOVED IT!.......2007-06-10
If you are new to political type books, this is a great read! It reads very much like a novel. I had to read the book for a class and couldn't put it down because I just couldn't wait to see what happened next. It is a disturbing tale of the manipulative power of the U.S. government and press among other things.
It's still happening!.......2006-05-14
After the successful coup by the CIA, general Castillo Armas was "made" president. Just two years later he was murdered, and Gen. Ydigoras Fuentes took power (1958). In response to the increasingly autocratic rule of Gen. Fuentes, a group of junior military officers revolted in 1960. When they failed, several went into hiding and established close ties with Cuba. This group (the guerrillas) became the nucleus of the forces that were in armed insurrection against the government for the next 36 years.
Nearly 300,000 people died.
The civil war ended in 1996. And we are still living with the repercussions of a 36 year war: violence, poverty, industrial underdevelopment, resentment, corruption etc.
So, if you think this book speaks of events long past and forgotten... think again. The same MO was used in Irak. There were no WMDs (Bush lied), there was no reason to start a war! Or was it? Did american big business benefit?
37,000 civilians from Iraq have died.
3,000 american soldiers have died.
And when you see the millions of latin immigrants protesting in all your major cities, don't be so quick to blame our countries. The CIA did similar things in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Chile, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Argentina, Honduras etc.
Do yourself a favor and read this book.
Power and influence.......2005-07-31
BITTER FRUIT is about the means and methods the U.S. government, through the CIA and the American ambassador to Guatemala, used to overthrow the democratically elected government of Guatemala in 1954. The Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz was leading an administration that was working to enact land reform. It was hoped that these efforts, among others, would stem the tide of poverty in a country still bound to a labor system that forced poor people to work a certain number of days on large farms or face prison time. Shaking off the vestiges of a dictatorship that was defeated by popular elections in the 1940s, Guatemala sought such reforms to enfranchise more citizens.
The "fruit" of the title is that of the United Fruit Company, an American concern with large land, labor and capital holdings in Guatemala and the Caribbean. UFC also had a lot of influence in government, particularly with Eisenhower's Republican administration. When Arbenz's government took the rights to Fruit Company land (much of its land was left uncultivated, held as an "in case" the company said) and paid it the value the company had listed on its Guatemalan tax returns, influence was peddled in Washington, the word "communism" was thrown around, and Eisenhower gave the go-ahead to covert operations to overthrow the democratically elected Arbenz and replace him with an American supported military junta. Ironically, the Guatemalan move to democracy in the 1940s was inspired by FDR and the country's belief in rights for all humans, whatever the economic level. (Truman, apparently, would not approve such operations, so the Fruit Company had to wait for Eisenhower to effect the outcome it wanted.)
The book is a model historical work, heavily footnoted, clearly written, factually presented and overwhelmingly upsetting. It has a chapter on Edward Bernays, an early practioner of PR, who was Freud's nephew, and who was hired by the United Fruit Company to advance its goals in the United States. Bernays did powerful work and was probably instrumental in the coup taking place by building public sentiment in the United States against the Arbenz government.
The greatest and most painful irony of all was that not long after the coup, which was instigated, basically on behalf of United Fruit Company, the U.S. government, concerned that it would seem a little "too convenient" to have overthrown a popularly elected president on behalf of a banana company, decided to bring an anti-trust suit against United Fruit, hobbling the company. One has to ask at that point, "What the heck was it all for, then?"
The final chapter answers that: An April 1998 report found that 150,000 people had been killed and 50,000 had disappeared in the time since the coup in 1954, with 80 percent of the casualties caused by government forced.
What this book reports on made me sad and disgusted, but the book is well written and fascinating, a model historical account of a pivotal incident in the history of both Guatemala and the United States.
More accounts of U.S. terrorism in the world.......2004-09-22
I'm glad to see yet one more accurate account of how far an almost imperceptible percentage of this country's population is willing to go in the name of their interests. It's really sad that those who should be most interested in this, namely U.S. citizens, turn a blind eye to it. But as it has been proven throughout centuries of history, silent propaganda, coupled with loud lies told by the rest of the press, works really well at keeping the population in a different galaxy. Otherwise, they would not allow these things to happen.
Poor education must have something to do with this phenomenon, as illustrated by the disastrous spelling and grammar in some of the negative reviews coming from U.S. locations above.
Fast-paced and balanced account of American foreign policy.......2004-05-31
I had wanted to read this book ever since reading Mr. Kinzer's account of the overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran, entitled "All the Shah's Men," which I would also heartily endorse. Like that book, "Bitter Fruit" is an intricately detailed yet fast-paced account of an American-sponsored overthrow of a popularly-elected foreign leader. Perhaps the most unique aspect of the book is the attention that the authors give to providing biographical sketches of all the participants. These portraits serve to contextualize the situation and render the actors' motives more understandable.
As a graduate student in political science, I have been trained to explain political phenomena as functions of identifiable and measurable independent factors. While the parsimony afforded by the academic approach has its advantages, Schlesinger and Kinzer's account reminds us that political reality is shaped by fallibe individuals often guided by imperfect information and their own ideological commitments. Indeed, the most vexing question that came to my mind was how men like the American Ambassador to Guatemaula in '54 and the dogmatic Dulles brothers ever attained positions of such prominence. Their belief that the social reforms being enacted in Guatemala represented the initial stage of a Communist revolution that would spread through all of Latin America seems ludicrous in hindsight, and Schlesinger and Kinzer's account makes clear that the evidence upon which this domino theory rested was shaky to begin with. The role that the "liberal" media played in reproducing the American accusations against Arbenz's government is one of the most interesting aspects of this book.
In conclusion, the authors are clearly antagonistic to the neoconservative ideology that justified American intervention around the world in the name of "anti-communism." Advocates of this view will naturally find weaknesses in their account. That said, Schlesinger and Kinzer are not apologists of the Guatemalan revolution of 1944. They devote ample space to detailing the weaknesses of the economic and social reforms enacted in the name of the revolution. All in all, their tone and their evidence permit the reader to form his or her own conclusions regarding the sagacity of America's interference in Guatemala's political and social evolution.
Average customer rating:
|
Jewish and Russian Revolutionaries Exiled to Siberia, 1901-1917 (Jewish Studies)
Philip Desind
Manufacturer: Edwin Mellen Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Jewish
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Eastern Europe
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Revolutionary
| Historical Study
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Jewish
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Israel
| Middle East
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Russia
| History
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0773497625 |
Books:
- The Blessing of a Skinned Knee: Using Jewish Teachings to Raise Self-Reliant Children
- The Blessing Way (Joe Leaphorn Novels)
- The Canterbury Tales: (original-spelling edition) (Penguin Classics)
- The Complete Stories of Robert Louis Stevenson: Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Nineteen Other Tales (Modern Library Classics)
- The Devil's Arithmetic
- The Door into Summer
- The Easy Way to Stop Smoking: Join the Millions Who Have Become Nonsmokers Using the Easyway Method
- The Eight Essential Steps to Conflict Resolution
- The First Princess of Wales: A Novel
- The Gold Coast
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Design for Six Sigma for Green Belts and Champions: Applications for Service Operations--Foundations
- We Shall Not Sleep: A Novel
- The French Challenge: Adapting to Globalization
- The Big Book of Wordoku Puzzles: Sudoku for Word Lovers
- Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry
- Wireless Imagination: Sound, Radio, and the Avant-Garde
- Utilitarianism and Other Essays
- Accounting Systems of U.S. Government Agencies
- The Economics of the Profit Rate: Competition, Crises and Historical Tendencies in Capitalism
- I Remember Heaven: Beyond the Death Experience
Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues
American National Security
The New Global Terrorism: Characteristics, Causes, Controls
The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Authorized Edition)
Inside Terrorism
