(The troops of General Bredov entering Kiev at Sophia Square, 31 August 1919)
In the first volume of his Samson Kolechko series entitled THE SILVER BONE, award winning historical novelist Andrey Kurkov begins his story with a horrifying scene where Kolechko’s father is murdered, and Kolechko himself has his ear sliced off with a saber by marauding Cossacks. Kurkov’s novel is set in post-World War I Ukraine in the city of Kyiv as the fighting for control of Russia after the “revolution” continues into 1919. The death of Kolechko’s father follows the deaths of his mother and sister leaving him an orphan.
The novel accurately portrays a city of 500,000 who live in fear and poverty and are afraid to walk the streets. Remnants of the White Army and other factions opposed to the Bolsheviks threaten the city as the Red Army tries to gain control of the streets. The Red Army is requisitioning any private property they feel will enhance the revolution and people have nowhere to turn. Peasants are forced to enlist in the Red Army, and it is difficult to understand how certain characters believe in the tenants of the revolution. Enters the hero of the novel, Samson Kolechko, grieving because of the loss of his father he wanders the city and ensconces himself in his flat grieving the loss of his family. Samson is an electrical engineering student in need of a job and stumbles into a police station after soldiers requisition his father’s sacred desk. In an absurd scene he is recruited as a detective by Comrade Nayden, a sleep deprived Commissar because of his writing talent, but again very little makes sense in1919 Kyiv as Kurkov’s Vonnegut Esque approach to storytelling is wonderful enhanced by his by the author’s knowledge of Ukrainian history and detailed knowledge of the city’s streets. Nayden hires Samson because he believes he supports the Socialist cause – the new worker’s state and he seems committed to outlawing disorder.
Samson is upset as two Red Army soldiers have absconded with his flat and he is forced to live with them. He has placed his severed ear in a metal box which continues to hear and is located in the room where Anton and Fydor, the soldiers are sleeping. The ear plays a major role in the story as it is used as a superb intelligence device! Samson learns that the two soldiers are preparing to desert and informs Comrade Nayden about enhancing his reputation. Samson will stumble into a world of murder and intrigue as he discovers a wider conspiracy involving a mysterious foreigner and a silver bone.
(Author, Andrey Kurkov)
The elements of an authoritarian regime are on full display as individuals must produce identification documents at will and one could not question the state. In this tense atmosphere Samson investigates a theft that evolves into the pursuit of a murderer who kills a police colleague named Semyon Glukhov, and Friedrich Balzer, a tailor, who also almost kills him. He is aided in solving this crime by Nadezhda Trofimovna, who works in the census office providing a glimpse into the Bolshevik bureaucracy. Soon Nadezhda moves into Samson’s flat, though at first their relationship is quite platonic.
Samson and other characters live in a barter economy that involves frequent blackouts caused by the theft of firewood that fuels Kyiv’s power plant. The city also suffers from food and water shortages leading to a great deal of crime.
Kurkov has authored an atmospheric novel in a droll style which exhibits a great deal of dark humor at the same time Samson battles personal tragedy and a corrupt system as he navigates being an inexperienced detective. At the same time Samson must deal with two important cases. First, arresting Anton and Fydor, the Red Army soldiers and trying to ascertain their link to his second and more important case of locating the killer of Balzer, the tailor, and Semyon, his colleague.
The author is a wonderful storyteller who based his novel on Bolshevik secret archives. These traits are expressed through a series of playful, and at times serious scenes. One of my favorites is at the dinner table in Samson’s flat as Nadezhda has moved in and her parents led by her irrepressible father, Trofim Sigismundovich questions Samson’s intentions. Kurkov employs extreme sarcasm as the conversation shifts to the techniques involved in gathering census material-who knew census taking could be so funny!
There are a number of important characters on display in the novel and each impacts the eventual conclusion. Comrade Nayden provides insight into the bureaucratic nature of Soviet police work. Sergius Kholodny, a priest turned policeman offers commentary about the existence of god. Nestor Ivanovich, a retired police fingerprinting expert. Luc Jeanovich Jacobsen, Balzer’s roommate, is in search of a doctor to transform his ruined leg. Vera Ignatyevna Gedroits, a doctor in the male dominated Soviet medical system. Dr. Nikolay Nikolaevich Vatrokhin who treated Samson’s loss of an ear and provides a great deal of advice throughout.
The novel is expertly translated by Boris Dralyuk, a fellow Ukrainian like the author who returned to Ukraine having escaped Putin’s invasion to fight the authoritarian Russian autocrat. As one reads the novel you should keep in mind that the story takes place in a country which has amazing similarities and relevance to our contemporary world. The Ukraine of 1919 was fighting off the yoke of the Red Army, and though the country achieved its independence in 1991, today it is confronted by the Russian Army as Putin tries to recreate the boundaries of the former Soviet Union. In both cases people clamor for a normal existence, but war and a tyrant’s ego must be overcome first.
(Leon Trotsky inspects units of the Red Army in Kyiv, which was occupied by the Russian Bolsheviks, June 1919.)
(Turkish-backed Syrian rebels stand on the back of a truck at Manbij countryside, December 29, 2018. Turkey-backed rebels have been mobilizing for an attack on Manbij in nearby areas that have been under Turkey’s control since it swept into northern Syria in 2016, part of its effort to roll back the YPG).
Syria is a country that has been at war with itself for almost fifteen years. It survived the Assad family which ruled Syria for more than five decades. Hafez al-Assad seized power in a 1970 military coup, creating a brutal, authoritarian regime. Following his death in 2000, his son Bashar al-Assad assumed the presidency. Bashar, who was educated in England raised hopes that his reign would be more liberal than his father. But that was not to be. He callous rule would foster the brutal suppression of the 2011 protests which triggered a civil war. This resulted in a government that sought to retain power at any cost and committing incalculable atrocities against its own people including the use of chemical weapons. There were a number of rebel groups that sought to overthrow Assad, including extremist factions and the rise of ISIS. In his new book, journalist Anand Gopal creates a far reaching, disturbing, and novelistic account of the Syrian Civil War entitled; DAYS OF LOVE AND RAGE: A STORY OF ORDINARY PEOPLE FORGING A REVOLUTION.
(Bashar al-Assad in 2018)
Gopal focuses the northern Syrian city of Manbij and a small group of people who developed a movement to try and overthrow the Bashir al-Assad dictatorship. The author collected over 2000 interviews, viewed hundreds of war-time videos and read a myriad of books to tell the story of six ambitious people from a remote provincial town that many Syrians have never heard of until these rebels helped unleash a war and the revolution that encompassed it. Among the rebels are a pair of best friends torn apart by political polarization, a mother who stands up to a misogynistic culture, and a worker who risks everything in the hope of establishing a democracy.
Gopal’s work provides the reader an insightful approach to the horror that was Syria as people tried to overthrow the Assad regime, the ensuing civil war that created many factions, many of which turned against each other, and produced another brutal dictatorship in the form of the Islamic State of Syria. Gopal focuses on a group of individuals who lived in Manbij, a strategic city in the northeast Aleppo Governorate of northern Syria, located roughly 30 kilometers west of the Euphrates River and 12 kilometers from the Turkish border. Historically an ancient and diverse hub, the city became part of the battleground that was Syria during this period. The fighting produced a Revolutionary Council to govern the city made up of elites which led to an opposition under the heading of the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) which believed that the needs of the masses were not being addressed. The factionalism that eventually evolved pitted friends and relatives against each other as the fabric of the city fell to extreme poverty and violence.
The key characters include Ibrahim Kasem, who originated from the village of Little Hyena where his family worked on the land until they learned of the construction of a dam that would submerge his farm and fostered a rage within. Kasem and his family would move to Manbij as a laborer where his anger increased against far away forces he did not understand. Nasan Fefi, lived in Manbij and loved to read and write poetry. He would be arrested and tortured by the Assad regime and was sent to the notorious Palmyra Prison where he was offered his freedom in return for spying for the regime. Abdul Qader Oseb, a Kurd who lived in a hamlet near Manbij was known as Abel O. A laborer and karate expert he left home very young and returned when his father died taking over his business. He would be sucked into dealing with loan sharks who got the regime police to pressure him. Mina Saba , a teacher would try and improve the condition for women within an Islamist society and will eventually create a women’s freedom movement. Gopal offers wonderful chapters describing these characters and how their experiences eventually brought them together to overthrow the regime in Manbij. Gopal explains the dual nature of Syrian society where a small rich class centered in Damascus supported Assad and the smaller cities and villages throughout the country that resented the regime. Over the years poverty and drought were not dealt with by the regime resulting in a lack of bread and other necessities. By 2008 and the world economic crisis would devastate the Syrian economy.
(Anand Gopal)
In February 2011, the Arab Spring had broken out in Tunisia and would spread to Egypt giving people in Syria false hope for a better life. Men like Oday al-Hema had always supported Assad because of the government’s modernization program and services it offered. However, when the masses in the south did not experience any benefits torture, beatings, and murder on the part of the regime turned Oday against the government. Soon demonstrations against the Baath Party headquarters in Damascus broke out.
Gopal does an effective job weaving aspects of Syrian history into his narrative to highlight contemporary events. For example, the massacre of demonstrators at Daraa is juxtaposed against Hafez el-Assad’s destruction of Hama were 50-60,000 people were killed. By 2012 a massacre in Homs and reports of other massacres and shootings by regime soldiers helped radicalize many who had been supporters of Asad. Among those are Oday and Abel O. These men would ally with others to create “flash demonstrations” against the government resulting in their arrest. Gopal goes on to describe in detail the horrors faced by these men in Assad’s Gulag and how prisoners were forced to depend on each other for survival.
As the narrative continues Gopal introduces more characters who greatly impacted the overthrow of the regime in Manbij. Abdul Hadi Bisher, a former promising soccer player was convinced by Abel O. and Oday to join a protest movement against the government. Another ally of this developing group was Abdul Hadi would be arrested by security forces as was Oday and others were they would be tortured and forced to admit they were terrorists to gain their release. Increasingly, more protests developed and a burgeoning military component against the regime was formed. The end result is the regime is over in Manbij is overthrown leading to the 2011 Syrian uprising in the city. Gopal will chronicle a remarkable 18-month democratic experiment before being torn apart by political polarization and economic inequality.
When the citizens of Manbij overthrew the regime, they created their own grassroots system from the ground up. For a brief window, this included citizen assemblies, free civic organizations, and local newspapers to replace forty years of authoritarian silence. The problem that developed was that people grew tired of waiting for things to improve as bread prices skyrocketed and the masses blamed the new Revolutionary Council as being elitist and not addressing the economic needs of people and focusing too much on creating overly democratic institutions. This will spark an opposition which will split Manbij and create an opening for the arrival of ISIS by 2013.
Gopal will trace the fighting against the Assad regime and the horrors it perpetrated against the Syrian people. The situation was exacerbated by the defacto embargo on weapons by the Western powers who feared radical Islamists and terrorist groups benefiting from their aid as opposed to damaging Assad. With the Arab Spring, the Gulf states feared for their own regimes. As Iran sent Hezbollah to fight to save the Assad government the situation in the small cities and villages deteriorated further. Finally, Jordan and Turkey would begin to arm the rebels. The Obama administration did little and even after he announced a “Red Line” if Assad resorted to chemical weapons – once sarin gas was used Obama did nothing. This was after a period when the CIA worked to make sure rebel groups did not acquire lethal weapons.
(The ISIS-controlled area of Deir-ez Zor appears to be greatly damaged by artillery and aerial bombing, while the government section of the city has suffered relatively minor damage. An explosion was possibly caused by a rocket-propelled grenade fired from a government position, May 24, 2015)
Within Manbij a civil war of its own broke out between elements of the Revolutionary Council and the RYM over who was in charge of the city. Both sides were guilty for intransigence in trying to reach a settlement in what can be seen as a class war as Abel O upon reflecting on events compared life in prison to life dealing with the split between the Revolutionary Council and the RYM. The debate according to Gopal centered on what type of government Manbij should have. The author develops the arguments over democracy, freedom, and a more authoritarian rule. The issues of secularism on Islamism come center stage as Islamists argue that secularism is what led to the brutal Assad regime and an inability of the Revolutionary Council to meet the needs of the people.
As these debates and conflict proliferate Gopal does an exceptional job discussing how ISIS was able to ingratiate itself into the Manbij community. However, once some of their efforts emerged the people of Manbij threw them out only having them return a month later taking over the city as the price of bread skyrocketed. ISIS would take over the RYM and the result was a split between Abdul Hadi and Oday and their followers highlighting the convoluted political situation in Manbij that was in the background throughout 2012 and 2014. The factionalism that was on display is a major theme of the book and a reason for the devastation caused by the Assad regime and the arrival of ISIS.
(A young woman crosses a street in Ghazi Ayaash, a residential neighborhood of Deir-ez Zor a few hundred feet from the frontline, after a mortar attack from an ISIS position. The city is an outpost of modernity surrounded by ISIS-controlled areas where strict Islamic law is enforced, May 20, 2015.)
One of the many strengths of Gopal’s work is his description of what it was like to live under ISIS rule. He is particularly effective employing Mina’s experiences in dealing with day to day life under extreme Islamist rule i.e., the almost hourly arrival of trucks with loudspeakers blaring the rules that one must live by under the new ISIS regime. Gopal explained that people came to follow ISIS because they needed security and were willing to trade for freedom. The Islamic State achieved what the Revolutionary Council could not. For Oday, people succumbed to a collective delusion.
As Gopal describes the fighting for Manbij in 2014 as American backed Kurdish forces and other rebel groups fought ISIS he delves into Oday’s seizure. Once he is taken he is tortured by ISIS which is emblematic of the split between the old revolutionary embodied in Oday and his former compatriot, Abdul Hadi. The author describes Oday’s courage and unshakeable commitment to freedom which eventually results in ISIS’ defeat which at the same time chronicle’s Abel O’s fight for survival under a reign of bombs. The most interesting character at this point is Abdul Hadi who founded the RYM and morphed into an ISIS leader. As the slaughter and bombs he experiences extreme guilt for his life’s path because of his belief in the Caliphate. Gopal portrays these friends on different sides of the revolution who have come full circle. It is a morose description of what war can do to friendship and commitment to the same cause.
Charles Glass’ review in the March 5, 2026, entitled, “This Story of Ordinary Syrians Who Fought Tyranny is a Masterpiece” in the New York Times captures the essence of what Gopal achieved in his excellent monograph that at times reads like a novel. As Glass writes he captures the dichotomy the people of Manbij faced; “As Gopal follows his characters around the city streets, he interlaces personal dramas with political conflicts, hopeful gatherings of aspiring democrats with the torture of young idealists, citizens uniting for liberty with families torn apart, the poor fighting for a share of resources against extortionate merchants, of government apparatchiks switching allegiances to join the revolution, of local soccer and karate heroes finding themselves on opposite sides of the barricades, of hope as much as despair. Many of the young people who emerged as revolutionary leaders were at first loyal followers of Assad, of whom they said, “Our president is a good man.” Government attacks on peaceful protesters requesting simple reforms turned them into rebels determined to rid the country of a leader and a system they blamed for the wretchedness of their lives. Gopal plays fair, pointing out that Baathist rule provided the peasants of Manbij with electricity, education, roads, health care and land reform that took them out of feudal bondage. In exchange for security, all they sacrificed was freedom.”
(Demonstrators in Daraa rally in celebration after Bashar al-Assad’s collapse in December 2024)
Glass accurately evaluates Gopal’s monograph as he brings Manbij to its present situation; “As they had fought Assad, the people of Manbij turned against ISIS and, with the assistance of the Free Syrian Army and the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (S.D.F.), expelled it in 2016. The largely Kurdish S.D.F. proved as repressive in Manbij as Assad had been. “The Syrian Democratic Forces were democratic in name only,” Gopal writes. “There was no freedom of speech or assembly, no free and fair elections. The government in Manbij was a dictatorship.”
Politics can be a dirty business, but in Days of Love and Rage, Gopal makes the enduring optimism of his subjects movingly clear. For 40 years, everything from labor unions to chess clubs had been subject to the dictatorship. “Yet when the people of Manbij overthrew the government, independent councils and assemblies and newspapers and charities and unions appeared overnight,” Gopal writes. “In other words, the people of Manbij started doing politics.”
Despite falling under tyranny again, the city’s inhabitants learned from their mistakes and banished the subservience to power inherited over four centuries of Ottoman rule, 26 years of French occupation and, since 1949, local dictatorship.
When Assad fled to Moscow in December 2024, ending the civil war, Gopal and many of the town’s exiles returned to Manbij. A new council, Gopal writes, “appointed officials who had been tainted by corruption allegations during the revolution.” The people protested, marching and chanting in the streets and squares. “They came out simply because it is who they are,” Gopal concludes, “because of what has been awakened, because of the fire that cannot be put out.”
[4/20]
(A woman holds a bag on her head at a souk in Manbij city, December 29, 2018. Manbij has changed hands three times since the Syrian conflict began in 2011. Free Syrian Army rebels seized it from President Bashar al-Assad’s government early in the conflict. Then it fell to Islamic State which declared it part of its ‘caliphate’)
(The construction for the ballroom on the White House’s East Wing as seen from the top of the Washington Monument, Nov. 17, 2025).
When Donald Trump announced his goals to justify his war on Iran he described it as an “excursion” and regime change was on the top of his list. Fast forward three months and it appears the United States defeated Iran militarily but lost the geo-strategic battle as Tehran has emerged victorious as it now controls the Gulf of Hormuz and can negatively impact the world economy at will, something that did not exist before Trump’s “excursion.” Further, Iran’s theocratic regime remains intact, the government maintains its missile capabilities and retains thousands of drones. It is clear from the recently signed Memorandum of Understanding that the United States has lost the peace. It appears Trump has grown tired of the war and needs to put it behind him because of the upcoming mid-term elections. As a result, he has agreed to lift oil sanctions on Iran, allow Iran to control the Strait of Hormuz, promised billions of dollars in rebuilding funds a.k.a. reparations, and the release frozen Iranian assets. In addition, nothing has been agreed to pertaining to Iran’s nuclear assets. One must ask, how did this situation come to fruition so quickly? Many of the answers to these questions and other aspects of the Trump administration’s policies can be found in New York Times’ journalists, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan’s new book, REGIME CHANGE: INSIDE THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY OF DONALD TRUMP.
From the book’s title one would gather the narrative focuses on Iran, but that is just one component as the authors focus on the Epstein Files, Trump’s revenge tour against perceived enemies, immigration policy and the actions of ICE, foreign influence, the enriching of the Trump family, corruption, and the overriding concept of loyalty which dominates any relationship with Trump and his administration. The authors also engage in analyzing why Trump behaves as he does. From the outset they argue that Trump has always created his own reality and then proceeds to force others to submit to his version of events. Trump lies constantly and absurdly; but what began as fantasies often blurred and morphed into a reality of his own making. With increasing frequency, and the help of sycophants, Trump spoken word is truth. Trumps adamant refusal to accept reality laid the foundation for his comeback in 2024. His obsession over the election of 2020, his ability to draw many into his mindset that the election was stolen, and that January 6th rioters were patriots out for a “Sunday stroll” dominate his world view and if you do not succumb to the gestalt you are not allowed into his world and administration.
(President Donald Trump (L), Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (C), and Secretary of State Marco Rubio monitor the U.S. strikes on three Iranian nuclear enrichment sites from the White House Situation Room on June 21, 2025)
Regime change is normally associated with foreign countries. However, based on the use of executive power what we are now experiencing in our country is regime change when one examines administration policies and actions, and Trump’s rule by his “gut.” The monograph is very concerning in that it is well researched and sourced. One could not imagine the types of events, personalities, and actions that are described, but they are part of our political fabric and policies that makes one wonder what the future holds.
In reading REGIME CHANGE it is difficult to discern which event or policies are the most disconcerting. But what is most important is the issue of accuracy. To this point there has been little push back from Trump administration supporters concerning the narrative. There are the usual criticisms focusing on personal attacks against the authors but little if any questioning of the substance of what the authors present. The most important criticism voiced by Tunku Varadarajan in his June 26, 2026, review of the book in the Wall Street Journal states that “the book relies largely on sources who spoke exclusively on ‘deep background,’ journalism jargon for the pinky-swear promise of eternal anonymity. We’re asked to trust the writers but have no means to verify their disclosures, some of these purportedly from the very heart of the presidency.” If this criticism is accurate why has no one questioned the core of what has been uncovered? Further, based on the record of honesty associated with the Trump administration who should we believe?
(Senior White House policy adviser Stephen Miller watches President Donald Trump speak in the Oval Office. Emails leaked to the Southern Poverty Law Center appear to reveal Miller’s familiarity with white nationalist texts and thinkers).
The book itself is a cornucopia of the last 365 days. If you are a news junky like I am I was pretty aware of most of what the book discusses. What I wasn’t cognizant of were the deep sourcing taking the reader inside meetings, arguments, and written components of the topics at hand. This is where the Trump administrations actions become unsettling which is due in large part by Trump himself but also the characters around him who have been given power. Chief among them is Stephen Miller who has risen to be Deputy Chief of Staff for policy and the keeper of all executive orders, placing him in charge of domestic policy. He has become the most powerful White House staffer in modern history. He is laser focused on cutting through the traditional bureaucratic obstacles in the federal government to push through Trump’s agenda. He has recruited lawyers who stretch the law to illegalities to implement Trump’s wishes – clean out the federal work force from “Trump haters.” Miller was in charge of the flurry of executive orders at the outset of the administration by overwhelming the opposition as to their number be it ending birthright citizenship or pausing funding of federal agencies. In the realm of immigration, Miller has set daily quotas to round up and deport people to the tune of 3000 per day. The promise was that only criminals would be seized and deported, but to reach the one million per year that Miller sought regular people, some of whom are citizens and others who are here legally have been rounded up by ICE. It was clear racial profiling was used which went along with Miller’s view of race and wanting to facilitate the creation of a white republic. The authors delve into Greg Bovino, Dan Bongino, Tom Homan, Kristi Noem, Pam Bondi and others who have facilitated this process.
Another character portrait which is beyond the pale centers on Elon Musk who spent $300 million to get Trump elected in 2024. He created DOGE, the Department of Governmental Efficiency and began to gut the federal work force and certain programs. With little knowledge of the labyrinthine federal system, nor how the budget functioned, with even less interest in the Constitution, he sought to reengineer the government as he imagined. He usurped the powers of Congress; impounded billions already appropriated and overrode cabinet members. A case in point was getting rid of USAID, the heart of American soft power overseas which probably caused the death of thousands by slashing funding for medicines and other aspects of disease control. Further he even blocked funding for an ISIS prison that held over 300 terrorists.
(ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – MARCH 02: U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth speaks during a news conference at the Pentagon on March 2, 2026 in Arlington, Virginia. Secretary Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)
The list of characters associated with the implementation of Trump’s agenda is long and disheartening especially on the domestic front with the use of ICE, and the deployment of the military to try and occupy certain cities – all of which are heavily minority and democratic. The first test case was Los Angeles, then Chicago, Washington, DC, and of course the fiasco that resulted in the death of two American citizens in Minneapolis.
The authors present the rationale for other programs including the unleashing of tariff wars as Trump maintains the 1950s belief that doing so would bring back manufacturing to the United States. Trump’s tariff policy rekindled the horrors of the Hawley-Smoot tariffs of 1930 which greatly contributed to the Great Depression but free trade once the hallmark of the Republicans just melted away. It began a trade war with our allies, a process that would also include Trump’s agenda to rely less on traditional allies, break up NATO, and force them to recalibrate any reliance on Washington. This also had a negative effect on the economy as by increasing tariffs the result is an increase in the cost of consumer goods resulting in higher inflation. Trump blames inflation on the Biden administration, or he rationalizes that it would only be a short time problem as tariffs would produce great revenues to offset the pain for the consumer.
Haberman and Swan’s discussion of Trump’s domestic agenda are disturbing enough but his foreign policy has been a disaster. According to Trump he would end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. His kowtowing to Vladimir Putin is part of the historical record. His treatment of Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been abhorrent particularly the scene in the Oval office in February 2025 as Trump tried to force the Uranian president to give into all of Putin’s demands. The treatment of NATO allies is well known as is Trump’s obsession with obtaining Greenland and the obnoxious tactics pursued. But it is the current situation in Iran and how we went to war which is most disturbing.
It is clear that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Neteyahu was able to convince Trump to go along with the plan to attack Iran. The June 2025 Israel attacks in Lebanon and Iran showed Trump what success could look like and since he always wants to be associated with a winner, so he joined Israel in going after Iran’s hidden nuclear capabilities. After the success against Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro Trump thought he could decapitate Iran’s leadership, and a new regime would give into his whims. We all know how that turned out with Iran controlling the Gulf of Hormuz and Trump succumbing with his Memorandum of Understanding, a strategic victory for Iran, though a military victory for the United States.
(General Dan Caine, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff)
Apart from domestic and foreign policies Haberman and Swan’s research into the accumulation of Trump family wealth and those of the presidents friends are unprecedented. Deals for Jared Kushner, Steve Wycoff and his son, Erick and Donald Jr. have brought in billions from drone contracts, crypto deals, and other projects. Donations based on coercion of Corporate CEOs have brought in billions to Trump’s political actions committees to fund some of his outlandish desires reflecting the fear Trump has instilled. Yesterday, in fact it was announced that Trump had earned over $2 billion of personal wealth during his first term. The media has been no exception as Trump wants to remake how news is reported. If that is not enough Trump wants to change how we view our history – the author’s discussion of the Smithsonian is a case in point.
The scariest section of the book is entitled “Retribution” in which the authors recount how Trump has gone after anyone he feels criticized him in the past. If you did not agree with the 2020 election conspiracy or the categorization of the January 6th participant there was a target on your back. Law firms, former Homeland Security or FBI officials, universities, newscasters, nighttime comedians, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, John Bolton, John Brennan, James Comey and his daughter, and Federal reserve Chair, Jerome Powell all fit this criteria as do a host of others.
One would think that the MAGA world would never oppose any action or inaction taken by Trump, but the Epstein Files finally created an opposition which to this day has not gone away. The work of Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche to block the release of the files is well known and the authors sprinkle in greater detail. Especially intriguing is the chronicling of the Situation Room meetings to develop a strategy to deal with the Epstein files that included Vice President Vance, Susie Wiles, and many other important figures.
(Donald J. Trump with Todd Blanche outside Manhattan Criminal Court, where Mr. Blanche was the president-elect’s defense lawyer in the hush money case. The two bonded over the several weeks of the trial)
The depth of detail in Haberman and Swan’s narrative amazes. From their description of Trump as an interior decorator with his gold touches, to Trump’s annoyance at Vice President Vance’s position on Iran (maybe that is why he was put in charge of negotiations to end the war!) to reactions to the killing of Charlie Kirk, to how Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos and others ingratiated themselves with Trump, to a myriad of other examples the authors take the reader inside an unimaginable world. Significantly, Vance and Miller wanted to use the murder of Charlie Kirk as an excuse to go after anyone they perceived to be enemies of the administration. Thery issued a National Security Presidential Memo/NSPM-7 which was designed to label all leftist elements in American politics as a terrorist threat arguing that most violent acts were committed by leftists while the facts reflect it was the American right which was most responsible.
The authors provide many keen observations in the run up to the attack on Iran. They focus on the debates within the administration as to what action should be taken. The focus on CIA Head John Ratcliffe and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine are most disconcerting. Ratcliffe warned Trump that Netanyahu’s presentation to justify war and his objectives did not pass the smell test, and others described them as “bullshit.” The Israeli Prime Minister had his own agenda separate from the United States and was able to convince Trump of a quick and relatively easy victory. Cain warned Trump that war would heavily deplete America’s weapons and munitions stockpiles presenting the cost of an Iranian drone v. US missiles as a case in point. This would lead to Defense Secretary Pete Hesgeth’s repeated lies about America’s inventory once a ceasefire was agreed to. The authors unequivocably state that at no point during the deliberations that resulted in war did Caine tell Trump that war with Iran was a terrible idea, “though some of Caine’s colleagues believed that was exactly what he thought.” In the end, as per usual, Trump went with his “gut” and did what he wanted expecting a second Venezuela result.
One could never write a Hollywood script to describe a presidency that people would believe if it were based on this book. However, until someone proves that what these authors have written is false we as a nation have a president who puts himself, his legacy, his wealth, and his “gut” feelings ahead of the needs of the American people.
(A general view of the White House East Wing entrance in Washington in 1906).
Jonathan W. Jordan has written a superbly blended dual biography of Dwight D. Eisenhower and Winston S. Churchill entitled IKE AND WINSTON:WORLD WAR, COLD WAR, AN EXTRAORDINARY FRIENDSHIP. He focuses on their relationship from the time they met in 1941 carrying through World War II and the Cold War. It is carefully researched and written for the general reader rather than the professional historian as there is little that is new, though to the author’s credit he highlights the most important components of their relationship. The monograph explores their enduring and complex relationship as disagreements abounded, but they always seemed to come together exhibiting a genuine respect for each other. The differences center on their backgrounds as Eisenhower was an amiable man from the Midwest, Abilene, Kansas who could also exhibit a cold and ruthless drive to achieve his goals which could be hidden by genial facial expressions. Churchill, on the other hand, was a charismatic aristocrat who often came across as a 19th century figure as he did his best to preserve the British Empire. Despite differences in approach to war and diplomacy they worked closely together to defeat Nazism and deal with the crisis that emanated from the Cold War, but in all cases they seem to have their own agendas.
At the outset Churchill held the upper hand as Prime Minister of England as a wartime leader who held his country together in its darkest moments fighting Nazi Germany. Eisenhower was a career military officer who worked his way up the bureaucratic chain of command behind a desk and never held a military command. As World War II evolved their positions in the hierarchy of power and influence shifted dramatically as Churchill became more dependent on the United States to defeat Nazism, and Eisenhower with the support of General George C. Marshall became the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe who developed the ability to say no to Churchill’s whims and desires. At times there was great tension between the two particularly over Eisenhower’s refusal to kowtow to Churchill’s wishes in Greece as the Prime Minister believed Eisenhower owed him deference because of his previous support for the general. They would also come to larger heads over planning for an invasion of France to create a two front war and how to approach Russia as it conquered Eastern Europe as its army moved west.
Jordan delves into the bureaucratic machinations associated with Operation Overlord, the Normandy invasion deftly as Eisenhower wanted to use a bombing campaign near the beaches to block any German reinforcements in the area. Eisenhower wanted to make the landings as safe as possible by preventing the Nazis from strengthening their positions in the area. The problem was the thousands of French citizens who would be collateral damage which Churchill refused to agree to fearing for the postwar hatred of the French toward England. Jordan presents the different personalities and arguments accurately as Churchill unhappily gave in to Eisenhower who was willing to sacrifice French lives to save the lives of American soldiers to win the war. His view was clear – if the bombing did not take place even more French citizens would be killed by the Germans. As the debate unfolded Eisenhower was dumbfounded by Churchill’s opposition.
(George C.Marshall, Field Marshal Sir John Dill, Churchill, and Secretary of War Henry Stimson viewing airborne training at Fort Bragg, NC).
Throughout IKE AND WINSTON Jordan pits “Winston the romantic against Ike the realist.” Eventually Churchill would admit a grudging respect for Eisenhower, recognizing he possessed “a great creative, constructive and combining genius.” However, Churchill was often angered and puzzled over Eisenhower’s analytical coldness in his decision making. Eisenhower’s refusal to take the Greek Island of Rhodes in 1943 facilitating Churchill’s overall view of the Balkans was a case in point as Eisenhower viewed it as a distraction and unnecessarily as it withdrew troop strength from Italy.
Jordan should be commended for his ability to describe the private lives of his two main characters, their numerous meetings and conversations, and their overall opinions of each other. He takes the reader inside their relationship providing a greater understanding as to how they interacted and reached the decisions they did. Many insights are offered as at first Eisenhower would develop exceptional physical and intellectual stamina to keep up with Churchill whose daily schedule was the opposite of most people. As the war progressed and Churchill began to realize that the United States might take over Britain’s preeminent position in the world he needed a voice to influence Roosevelt and Marshall, and that would be Eisenhower. An interesting insight is offered as Churchill believed Eisenhower was out of his depth in dealing with the French be its Generals Henri Giroud, Francois Darlan, and Charles De Gaulle in 1942, so he sent Harold MacMillan to advise Eisenhower and steer him the right way. If we fast forward to the Suez Crisis of 1956 it would be Eisenhower who would help install MacMillan as English Prime Minister after the failures of Anthony Eden. From the time Churchill sent MacMillan to be at Eisenhower’s side in 1942, the two men would develop a strong friendship.
World War II produced a number of outsized personalities Eisenhower had to deal with aside from Churchill. Chief among them was Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery whose ego knew no bounds. Montgomery believed that he should be in charge of all land forces in Europe and was not shy about complaining to Churchill and others that he was not. Once the Ardennes Forest (Battle of the Bulge) fiasco took place in December 1944 it provided Montgomery with the fuel to go after Eisenhower’s command once again. His letters and other correspondence with Eisenhower were demeaning and insulting constantly, accusing Eisenhower of “failure.” Eisenhower resented Montgomery’s ill treatment of General Omar T. Bradley and finally read the British general the riot act. Eventually a contrite Montgomery would back off, but he never would change his opinion of the Allied Supreme Commander.
(Winston Churchill and Montgomery visiting 79th Armoured Division after the Rhine crossings, 1945)
In terms of ego, it is hard to discern whose was larger Montgomery or the leader of the French Free forces, General Charles De Gaulle. Eisenhower repeatedly had to deal with disagreements with De Gaulle especially over the French city of Strasbourg. When Eisenhower would not cave to De Gaulle’s wishes the French general threatened that he would pull the First French Army out of the allied fold and fight on its own. Eisenhower had vowed never to shortcut military objectives to please political leaders, and when Eisenhower threatened to cut De Gaulle’s supplies, a compromise was reached.
Jordan argues that the most important disagreement between Eisenhower and Churchill emerged at the end of the war over who should seize the city of Berlin. Churchill wanted to beat the Russians to Berlin and seize as much eastern territory as possible. The issue became a bone of contention when Eisenhower decided to halt his army at the Elbe River. Churchill was fresh from the Yalta Conference, and his distrust of Stalin was growing, fearing for the post-war world. Eisenhower’s viewpoint was purely military, arguing that the most efficient way to finish off the Nazis was to drive through Leipzig and Bavaria. Churchill had no choice but to back off and despite his anger he would defend Eisenhower from criticism from the British Joint Chiefs as no matter how many riffs existed Churchill valued Eisenhower’s friendship and usual support. Despite these feelings Churchill never got over Eisenhower’s Berlin decision as he knew it signaled trouble for the future.
Jordan does not deal with the post war era in as much detail apart from Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech on March 5, 1946, in Fulton, Missouri, and a few other events. He picks up their relationship substantively as Churchill returns to 10 Downing Street on October 26, 1951. He had concerns about Eisenhower in that his supporters for the presidency were bankers, lawyers, and corporate types who were more concerned about money and profits as opposed to military matters. Further, he believed he did not trust John Foster Dulles and his moralistic approach to foreign policy. Lastly, he feared he would not be able to maintain the special relationship with his wartime ally.
The main point of contention between Eisenhower and Churchill would center on the Prime Minister’s obsession with having a summit meeting with the Russian leadership, a recreation of the “Big Three” especially after Stalin died in March 1953 and Eisenhower assumed the presidency. Eisenhower would refuse any summit until the Russians took steps to lessen tensions in Austria and Eastern Europe. When Churchill tried to go it alone and meet with the Chairman of the Soviet Council of Ministers, Georgy Malenkov, Eisenhower rejected his plan. Churchill would blame Dulles for manipulating the President and the two held very low opinions of each other. The idea that Dulles was the most prominent architect of US foreign policy is a misnomer. In my own research for my monograph DAWN OVER SUEZ: THE RISE OF AMERICAN POWER IN THE MIDDLE EAST 1953-1957 documents clearly show that Eisenhower was in charge and at times had to rein in his Secretary of State.
(Sir Anthony Eden)
If there was an area that the two agreed it was over events in Iran. When Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossedegh nationalized the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company in 1953 an Anglo-American coup took place as it was feared that Mossadegh was creating inroads for Russia in the region. However, the summit issue with Russia would drive them apart as did Eisenhower’s new approach to defense. “The New Look” would rely less on conventional weapons due to their expense and put the emphasis on covert operations by the CIA and arguing that threats of small nuclear weapons would save money. Churchill was horrified as he believed if it came to a nuclear showdown with Moscow, London would be one of the first Russian targets. The Prime Minister would argue with Eisenhower over the possible use of weapons of mass destruction repeatedly. More and more Eisenhower saw Churchill “as a man past his prime. A cavalier in an atomic age….Winston is a curious mixture of belligerence and caution, sometimes amounting to almost hysterical fear.” Churchill could not accept he had lost his influence over Eisenhower and continued to blame Dulles.
Jordan correctly delves into the ideological split between the two men which rested on the issue of “colonialism.” Eisenhower feared that Moscow was taking advantage by promising to break the chains of old world oppression – chains forged by England and France. To keep Moscow from exploiting populist rage, the United States needed to show support for independence movements and self-determination when speaking in public. England was seen as the epitome of underdeveloped world bullying. The example of Egypt and the Suez Canal reflected this reputation as Egyptian President Gamal Nasser was able to use American pressure on England to agree to the “Heads of Agreement” to gain greater control of the Canal, a topic that Jordan does not discuss in enough detail. As far as French colonialism is concerned, events in Vietnam which produced the disaster at Dienbienphu, and the deterioration of their Algerian colony created hatred for France throughout the underdeveloped world. Eisenhower would have to navigate a public stance of sympathy for colonialist oppression and in private he would engage what Blanche Wessen Cooke argues in her book DECLASSIFIED EISENHOWER being ”the coup president,” as was seen in Iran in 1953 and Guatemala in 1954.
Churchill finally agreed to leave office and turn 10 Downing Street over to his Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden in April 1955. Jordan will recount the Suez Crisis in detail reflecting how Eisenhower refused to go along with the Sevres Agreement whereby England, France, and Israel agreed on a plot to recover the Suez Canal which Nasser had nationalized. Eden believed he would have Eisenhower’s support and twisted their communications to reinforce this pipe dream. Jordan discusses the main aspects of the crisis and the final pressure by Eisenhower that would force the three conspirator countries to withdraw from Egypt by March 1957. What he leaves out is the hypocrisy of the Eisenhower administration which had its own coup planned for Syria at the end of October 1956 the same week the Israeli invasion of Egypt took place. At that point, the coup had to be called off. Further in December 1956 Eisenhower would work behind the scenes for Harold MacMillan to replace Eden as Prime Minister when Eden was visiting Jamaica. Some might call it a coup! It is clear that the US was actively working to replace English domination of the Middle East with American control. With the issuance of the Eisenhower Doctrine in January 1957 which would be first tested in Lebanon the transfer was complete.
In evaluating Jordan’s work, he has produced a wonderful synthesis of the Eisenhower-Churchill relationship, one in which remained a true friendship despite the lack of agreement on a myriad of issues over the years. The book is written in a style that the general reader would enjoy, and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in one of the most important personal relationships of the 20th century.
(Nazi German flag being raised over Acropolis, 1941.)
Most people with a knowledge of history are aware of the Nazis insatiable appetite to steal and destroy the cultural artifacts of others. Whether we are speaking of the art works stolen from the Louvre in Paris, the personal possessions of Jews, archeological treasures from museums, and a host of other sources the Nazis had to be outsmarted by those who sought to save their countries treasures. A special example of how a group of people made up of archeologists, academics, epigraphers, classists, and other vocations did so in World War II Greece which is wonderfully portrayed in Stephan Talty’s latest book, THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF SPIES: THE ARCHEOLOGISTS WHO FOUGHT THE NAZIS AND SAVED THE TREASURES OF ANCIENT GREECE.
Talty’s monograph is broken into a number of subjects. First, the problem of the relics and how to keep them from the Germans. Second, a useful description of how and where the relics would be hidden and preserved. Third, the recruitment of individuals to serve as agents for the Greek Desk created to oppose Nazi actions. Fourth, the conduct of the missions needed to defeat and block Nazi attempts at destroying relics or shipping them back to Berlin. Fifth, the introduction of the most important individuals, their training, and missions to thwart the likes of Adolf Hitler and Herman Goering as they attempted to seize Greece’s cultural heritage. Sixth, a section on the status of relics following the end of the war.
Talty immediately introduces the reader to Rodney Young, the first of many important characters that are developed. Young was an American archeologist, an east coast blue blood and heir to the Ballantine Beer fortune whose mother had a passion for Latin and Greek culture. Young earned a Ph.D from Columbia in the Classics and Archeology. He rejected the life of the “social register” to pursue his chosen field in Athens. He would be based at the American School of Classical Studies in Athens. He would be recruited by OSS head William Donovan to set up a spy ring to thwart the Nazis in Greece. Young would recruit an unusual cadre of people who would be known as “the Greek Desk.”
Once the Germans arrived in Greece many American archeologists returned to the United States as Hitler in particular made plans to seize as many artifacts as possible. The Nazis had taught their followers that Ancient Greece had been built by their own ancestors. The Nazis wanted to curate Athenian ruins and see what they could bring back to Berlin as Hitler and his cohorts were fixated on Ancient Greek artifacts. Hitler believed that the Aryan race had given birth to Ancient Athenian culture. He wrote in MEIN KAMPF that a racial kinship connected Ancient Greeks, Romans, and Nazis in a straight line. Heinrich Himmler, the head of the SS created a German Ancestral Heritage Society and charged scholars to locate the missing links between the “true German culture.” Alfred Rosenberg, Hitler’s racial theorist would order teams of archeologists to central Greece to locate “pre- and post-historic” Germanic and Slavic finds which would prove the connection between Ancient Greece and early Germanic culture. By using what Talty describes as archeological strip mining, the Germans located 10,000 relics which they argued proved the missing links were found.
(This well-known photograph of Rodney Young at Gordion shows him in his excavation “uniform”)
Talty delves into the Greek government’s plan to bury their relics under the National Archeological Museum in Athens. Before he met William Donovan, Rodney Young was one of the volunteers. Fearing a full German invasion the volunteers had to work quickly to bury artifacts in the ground under the museum and throughout the city. In addition, homes, bank vaults ,and air raid shelters were also used. By April 1941, the most important items were taken from the museum which then stood empty which did not make the Nazis happy.
Donovan played a major role in blocking the Germans as he believed that a classic spy network was needed. He was convinced that conventional methods could not alone defeat the Nazis. His plan was to create a series of guerilla units to be drawn from Greek immigrant communities in the United States, train them in sabotage, and have them infiltrate their ancestral homeland. Once Young was chosen he recruited a number of important colleagues. Among the most important were Dorothy Hannah Cox, an excavation architect and numismatist; Jerome Spirling, an archeology professor at Yale with great experience excavating Troy in Turkey; and Jack Caskey, fluent in Greek he spent part of his youth in Athens and was a trained archeologist. Except for Cox, among Young’s two dozen classist recruits, most were overwhelmingly male, Wasp, and from monied families.
Talty does an exceptional job explaining how the Germans went about looting relics and shipping the ones they did not destroy back to Berlin. For example, items that were too large to ship or were attractive enough were ground up and used for military purposes, since marble and stone made for excellent building materials for bunkers and other needs.
Young’s headquarters were in Cairo and Talty goes to great lengths describing how agents were recruited with new identities provided, how information was gathered, and how cable traffic was managed. Young created his own merchant marine using Caiques, traditional Greek fishing vessels to transport agents, information, and the tools that a spy needed to operate. The Greek Desk created German documents employing a separate team of counterfeiters. The OSS bureaucracy was of little help, and neither were the British who saw the Balkans being part of their sphere of influence.
(Nedjmettin Bekhtori, age 12, and Dorothy H. Cox, architect of the expedition, washing an Amphora (vase) just excavated by Miss Cox).
Talty is correct as he explores British distrust of American agents in Greece. Cox reported that Winston Churchill saw Washington as interlopers in the Balkans who supported liberal elements rather than King George II. She believed that the British pressured the Turks not to cooperate with American agents. Once the Germans were defeated and withdrew from Greece Churchill wanted to forbid elections and hold on to power. Churchill and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin met in Moscow from October 9 to October 19, 1944, at a summit codenamed the Tolstoy Conference. Their discussions defined the postwar map of Eastern Europe and produced the “Percentages Agreement,” on October 9, whereby Churchill and Stalin negotiated a secret “spheres of influence” deal for the Balkans. Churchill wrote percentages of dominance on a piece of paper (i.e., granting the Soviet Union 90% control in Romania and 10% in Greece). Stalin famously reviewed the list and simply marked it with a large red tick. The agreement was made without Franklin Roosevelt’s approval.
The reader is introduced to a number of remarkable characters. Cornelia Kapp whose father was an Abwehr agent posing as a diplomat switched sides and worked with the Americans spying on Ludwig Moyzisch, the German attaché in Ankara, Turkey. Helias Doudoulakis sent by Young to set up a network of spies and operators in Salonika, and his brother George was effective in obtaining valuable information about German rail and Caiques schedules, bridge locations etc. Nikolaos Platon the head of the Heraklion Museum on the island of Crete refused to give into the demands of Nazi Commander Julius Ringel whose stolen relics were mostly recovered after the war.
(Helias Doundoulakis in 2012)
Talty is very critical of the British role after the Germans withdrew and their refusal to cooperate with Greek leftists and allow elections which led to a bloody civil war fostered by the emerging Cold War. It would take until 1948 for the National Archeological Museum to reopen in Athens after three years of excavating and recovering relics. Despite the retrieval of thousands of objects, thousands more were not, though over the years many were returned.
Talty’s work tells the story of two sets of agents sent to Greece. Each had a distinct mission. One was to harass and kill Germans by blowing up trains, calling in airstrikes and passing on military secrets. The other group was to safeguard Greece’s treasure trove of archeological riches. Talty does well as he describes the work of these agents and how they survived and were able to make a major contribution to the war effort, in addition to recovering Greece’s national treasures.
(A group of Greek soldiers descends a slope during the war with Italy)
By 1933 the United States had arrived at a crossroad. The country was in the midst of the depression with unemployment at 25% and breadlines blocks long in major American cities like Chicago where despite Franklin Roosevelt’s implementing a New Deal people were growing desperate. Overseas Benito Mussolini embarked on his imperialist goals, Adolf Hitler consolidated power and opened Dachau, and Japan had seized parts of Manchuria two years earlier.
As the American people sought hope to overcome their economic troubles they elected Franklin D. Roosevelt as president to replace the growing hatred toward Herbert Hoover, a man who seemed to lack empathy for the masses. Two days before his inauguration Roosevelt survived an assassination attempt while visiting Miami, however the man who shared his automobile, the mayor of Chicago was killed. As things seemed to go from bad to worse even one of America’s opportunities for escapism, baseball was also experiencing a severe downturn.
As the situation in the United States grew increasingly dire a newspaperman developed the idea of playing a baseball game with the best players competing against each other as part of Chicago World’s Fair. It would offer people something to take their minds off their troubles, even if it was only a few hours. In THE FIRST ALLSTAR GAME: BABE RUTH, FDR, AND AMERICA AT THE CROSSROADS, historian Randall Sullivan explores how the game came about as he weaves together the storied characters and personalities that dominated the news cycle at the time. Sullivan’s monograph is a blend of economic, social, and political history with baseball’s development up to 1933. The author blends the most important aspects of the depression integrating the roles of important figures such as Franklin D. Roosevelt, Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, John McGraw, Connie Mack, and of course Babe Ruth and a host of others.
(The American League prevailed in the first AL vs. NL All-Star Game on July 6, 1933, in Chicago, defeating the NL 4-2. The man in the suit is Arch Ward)
Sullivan brings a sharp focus on the city of Chicago and how it navigated through the depression. The author astutely points out that Chicago had overcome a Depression before as the crash of 1873 which continued on and off into the 1890s with the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893. The story begins with the introduction of the role of Franklin Roosevelt whose reforms were pushed through Congress zeroing in on the crisis in banking, unemployment, farm foreclosures, industrial production and labor. Next we are introduced to Arch Ward, a journalist for the conservative Chicago Tribune owned by Colonel Robert McCormack, who as a sportswriter and promoter came up with the idea of presenting an Allstar game. Lastly, we are introduced to Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, a federal judge who became Commissioner of baseball following the 1919 Black Sox scandal as eight players on the Chicago White Sox threw the World Series against Cincinnati.
Sullivan’s monograph is deeply researched with wonderful vignettes concerning the major personalities of the period. The author carefully introduces each character by presenting a brief biographical sketch and integrating the lives he discusses with the economic and societal forces that dominated the period. Sullivan also explores a number of important aspects of his subject that are critical to his story but seem ancillary, but quite entertaining and important. One that comes to mind is the discussion of whether Babe Ruth was of “black” ancestry. In a chapter devoted to race the reader after learning all about Ruth’s life earlier in the book learns that Ruth was one of the few white ball players willing to play with blacks be it on barnstorming tours or other exhibition games. Sullivan discusses in detail the growth of negro baseball dating back to the 19th century introducing men like Cool Papa Bell, Oscar Charleston, Satchel Paige and Josh Gibson and whether black players were equal in performance to those in the white major leagues. Later in his career, Ruth was castigated for his interactions with blacks especially by Commissioner Landis, who was a known racist who suspended Ruth for two months at the outset of the 1925 season.
(Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth)
Apart from t players, the careers of John McGraw and Connie Mack are exceptionally important to the development of baseball. Sullivan describes McGraw’s flawed personality, “will to win,” and overbearing personality all subsumed in an amazing career. Mack’s ownership of the Philadelphia Athletics provides a window into the economic impact of the depression and a championship baseball team that Mack had to repeatedly take apart selling his players to meet the bills and then reconstituting his team as a champion and taking it apart again. As we are exposed to other aspects of baseball history men like Ty Cobb, Jimmy Foxx, Lefty Grove, Lefty Gomez, Frankie Fritsch, Al Simmons, Lou Gehrig, Carl Hubbel, Bill Terry and Pepper Martin, Mickey Cochrane, Hack Wilson among those discussed are integrated into the larger story of the Allstar game and make for wonderful reading for any baseball historian or aficionado.
When you pick up the book and explore its title the reader gets the impression he or she is about to embark on a sports journey. However, Sullivan does an excellent job broadening his topic to create a panorama of the United States from the early twentieth century to 1933. Whether the author is discussing the economic greed and poor decision making that led to the depression, its impact on the economics of baseball, the desegregation of the sport, or the special impact on the American population whether dealing with the Dust Bowl or putting food on the table and locating shelter Sullivan portrays his topic vividly and insightfully.
If there is a criticism to be made it centers on Sullivan’s proclivity spending too much time on “social banditry” or “criminal anti-heroes” introducing Pretty Boy Floyd, Al Capone, Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger, among others. I understand the societal element that made these personalities important, but it does not deserve the time the author devotes to it. Further, the discussion of the Black Sox scandal is too drawn out, but upon reflection I understand why Sullivan dug deeply into that aspect of the sport since a number of players including Ty Cobb and others bet heavily on games during the period.
As for the game itself which took place on Thursday, July 7, 1933, before 49,000 excited fans at Comiskey Park, Lefty Grove came on in the seventh inning to toss three scoreless innings of relief and earn the save for the victorious American League, 4-2. Fittingly, and to the fans’ uncontained delight, the aging Ruth’s two-run third-inning home run provided the victory margin.
Despite a few flaws, Sullivan has written an incredibly interesting book, but whether you come at it from the perspective of a baseball fan, an American history buff, or simply someone looking for an enjoyable, but at the same time thought provoking read, Randall Sullivan’s effort is a book well worth reading.
The last few weeks lends a great deal of credence to the ideas and positions offered by former federal prosecutor, NYU Law professor, and MS NOW contributor Andrew Weissmann. The American people have experienced a President who has put forth a plan to pay convicted January 6th followers from a fund of close to $1.8 billion and provide himself and his family immunity from IRS prosecution from actions taken in the past and what could occur in the future. Further, the man responsible for the fund, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has continued to lie and cover up the Epstein files and prosecute anyone President Trump would like to seek revenge against (yesterday it was announced he was being put forward to be the permanent Attorney General). Trump has also nominated Bill Puilte as DNI to oversee all intelligence services even though he has no experience in the field and his main calling has been to dig up dirt on Trump’s perceived enemies. We are also exposed to the daily untruths put forth by Mark Wayne Mullin, the newly appointed Secretary of Homeland Security dealing with immigration issues and justifying the actions taken by ICE. If that is not enough we can watch the briefings offered by Pete Hesgeth, the Secretary of Defense justifying the murder of people on the open seas and further lies dealing with the conduct and state of the war with Iran. Then there is NSC head and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s verbal machinations about the war in Iran, the state of negotiations, and positions the President actually believes in. Apart from the daily lies offered by the President on a myriad of issues be it the 2020 election, funding for his new ballroom, the reflecting pool, and massive arch he wants to build the public has become increasingly cognizant of the vast sums, roughly $4 billion the Trump family has amassed since Trump’s second term began. In addition, Trump has used “insider trading” to the tune of millions of dollars to augment his personal wealth. The operative words in all of these examples are fraud and lies.
Some might argue that what I have written is too partisan and over the years Democrats are just as guilty. I would point out that history and incontrovertible facts would disagree. The question must be raised; is there a solution to all the lying and corruption that screams from the headlines each day. In his latest book, LIAR’S KINGDOM: HOW TO STOP TRUMP’S DECEIT AND SAVE AMERICA, Andrew Wiessmann reviews examples of corruption and lies and how politicians get away with it and offers solutions on how we can hold people accountable for their actions and statements to try to invigorate our democracy. In a blend of personal observations and sound legal opinions Weissmann confronts the “chipping away of the rule of law” that has been ongoing the last few years. According to the author we need to shore up our legal system against demagogues who seek to use lies to destroy our democracy. Candidly, Weissmann asks why can people lie in politics, to gain office, power, and wealth with no legal consequence, when in other areas of lying and fraud they can be prosecuted? It is clear we are a nation awash in lies and fraud.
(U.S. President Donald Trump, left, and Brazil’s then-President Jair Bolsonaro at Mar-a-Lago in 2020)
Weissmann offers a number of examples to support his critique. The one that is repeated over and over in the monograph is that the 2020 election was a fraud and that Trump actually won (which he repeats on a daily basis). This has become a litmus test for Trump and anyone serving in the government. Trump is allowed to get away with the lies because there is no criminal law that says the lie is illegal – no civil law imposes any punishment for such falsehoods. In the end one-third of Americans support these lies.
Weissmann draws on his vast prosecutorial experience to provide examples of when lies can be prosecuted. He delves into the Enron case highlighted by the actions of Kenneth Lay who was effectively prosecuted as his lies brought material benefit. He focuses on organized crime centered on Vincent Gigante and the Genovese mob family, the environmental lies of Volkswagen and others. Remarkably it is a crime to lie to shareholders, it is a crime to lie to Congress, but it is not a crime to lie to the public. The problem is that lies metastases – i.e., J6 pardons, ICE enforcement and its consequences. We now learn that out of the 1500 J6 people pardoned, 97 have been charged with new crimes unrelated to J6, a number of which deal with sexual abuse and violence.
(President Donald Trump speaks at his Mar-a-Lago club, on Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026, in Palm Beach, Florida, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense)
Our current media marketplace exacerbates the problem as it permits lies to flourish with no accountability. Weissmann is dead on arguing that our “media marketplace is polluted with propaganda, disinformation, and emotional manipulation all in the guise of defending the First Amendment. In short, authoritarians use the cloak of the freedom of speech to promulgate false factual speech and drown out the truth.” With the arrival of AI differentiating the public lie from the public truth is only going to grow harder in the future and as a society we have no strategy to deal with it.
(Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche)
Since we have no domestic solutions to try and mitigate the problem of fraud and lies in the public sphere Weissmann turns to other countries for possible solutions. He explores the case of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil. An example that mirrors that of Trump and how the Brazilian parliament has passed laws that rest on the premise that people have the right to truthful information in elections that supersedes the right of free speech when deliberate falsehoods threaten the democratic order. In France Marine Le Pen is barred from holding office for five years because she engaged in embezzlement and was convicted. In Germany there are laws that forbid free speech pertaining to a particular subject, denying the existence of the Holocaust is a prime example. Interestingly, the United States has laws that do not allow convicted felons to run for office, but it is only a state statute and does not exist on the federal level.
Weissmann proposes a Truth in Elections Act built on existing law. The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 redrawn in 2013 criminalizes lying about military honors with the “intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefits” which has survived a Supreme Court challenge. For Weissmann the courts are the key to any reform. Due process has the ability to get at the truth – we have a jury system that in most cases people take seriously. However, you need a Justice Department that is not headed by the President’s personal lawyer whose sole purpose is to carry out the revenge whims of the occupant of the White House. Some might find Weissmann’s short volume a polemic, however, his views are based on facts and the law, two things that most people would have difficulty arguing with, unless your name is Trump.
(President Donald Trump arrives to speak to supporters on January 6th)
The American Civil War resulted in the death of over 650,000 soldiers. The carnage was unimaginable as new technologies were applied to combat. Apart from death on the battlefield was the loss of life in prison camps. Conditions were insufferable and the loss of life and the horrors experienced in the camps was extraordinary, particularly in Confederate camps like Andersonville. In W. Fitzhugh Brundage’s latest book, A FATE WORSE THAN HELL: AMERICAN PRISONERS OF THE CIVIL WAR the reader is exposed to the dread that was experienced in camps, attempts to improve conditions, the courage and tenacity of those who found the will to survive in a system that produced over 400,000 prisoners involving both sides in the war.
Brundage has written the most comprehensive monograph dealing with Civil War prisoners relying on diaries of the prisoners and officials who ran the camps in addition to other primary and secondary sources. Brundage’s account seems to cover every aspect of his topic ranging from the governments that controlled the prisons, the personalities on both sides that were the decision makers in determining prison policies, the travel that prisoners were subjected to, the training, or lack of training for Doctors, the exchange of prisoners, to the different treatment of officers and regular troops, and post-war issues. The author begins his study by introducing Andrew Jackson Riddle, a photographer who chronicled the only visual record of the notorious Confederate prison – Andersonville. Riddle would become a witness to the “mass prison pens” and produced a catalogue of POW experiences matched by few written accounts. Riddle’s photographs provided incontrovertible evidence supporting the written descriptions offered by POWs, i.e., acute deprivation, no permanent buildings to house prisoners, absence of sanitary facilities, and extreme overcrowding. Though Riddle’s photos dealt with Andersonville the author offers evidence that it was the norm not the exception in Civil War prisons, Confederate and Union, however it must be noted the Confederate prisons were crueler.
r prison on Belle Isle
(Belle Island Prison, Richmond, Va.)
Brundage’s template for each topic is to introduce a historical figure; a soldier, a physician, an officer, government bureaucrat, or family member at the start of a chapter and build the storyline around that figure. The author develops a number of important themes which are the core of the monograph. First, as the fighting progressed and the war lasted from year to year the treatment of prisoners and the facilities they were incarcerated in declined precipitously. A second important theme rests on how prisoners were exchanged, which greatly impacted the number of POWs who languished in captivity. The Confederate authorities refused to exchange black soldiers for white soldiers on an equal basis leading to President Lincoln’s refusal to continue to exchange prisoners equally which was the standard for the first two years of the war. Lincoln ruled out any further prisoner exchanges as long as black soldiers were excluded. In July 1863 he ordered that for any union soldier killed in violation of the laws of war, a Confederate prisoner would be executed; for any returned to slavery, a Confederate prisoner would be sent to hard labor. The Confederate view that a black soldier was nothing more than an escaped slave greatly impacted decision-making on both sides especially after the announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation and Lincoln’s realization that black soldiers were needed to help win the war. The key point is that had prisoner exchanges continued throughout the war, the prison population would have been greatly reduced leading to better care of POWs. Men like Walt Whitman argued that he was willing to sacrifice black POWs if it would save white ones, reflecting the undercurrent of racism that existed throughout the fighting.
Brundage offers personality studies of important decision makers like General H. Winder who was the architect of the Confederate POW system and created the abhorrent prison pens and guidelines for treatment of union captives. Winder, like other Confederate officials, never fully accepted the obligation to provide for POWs in the absence of exchanges. They saw prisoners as a security liability that imposed no ethical imperative. Union decisions were left in the hands of Lt. Colonel William Hoffman who under orders from Quartermaster General Montgomery Meigs, implemented strict, frugal policies to manage Northern camps and would always respond to the maltreatment of Union soldiers in Confederate hands with similar treatment in Union prisons. On both sides government officials found it difficult to find competent men to run and supervise the camps leading to men like Captain Henry Wirz who oversaw Belle Island and Andersonville and later was hanged for his treatment of Union prisoners.
1863 became the turning point for the treatment of POWs as the south’s low population did not produce enough prisoners to try and keep prisoner exchanges going. The result was Confederate prison populations markedly increased. Prisons would evolve from temporary holding pens to long term captivity facilities, the new prisons by design were mercilessly primitive leading to appalling conditions which the author carefully delineates.
(Elmira Prison, NY)
An interesting component of the book is how Brundage explores the social hierarchy of the prison populations. Each prison developed their own culture and tasks for the prisoners who in many cases policed themselves. They would create cultural and sports activities to pass the time and would rely on each other for survival as they dealt with the “half-witted cruelty” dealt out by prison guards and an environment that lacked any semblance of privacy. It was clear that those men who established social bonds were better able to survive than those who did not. Many POWs equated captivity with slavery!
It is clear that on both sides the war took precedence over the treatment and plight of POWs. Brundage’s chapters dealing with medical care bears this out as for the first time governments had to experiment with improving medical care on a scale they had never experienced. The problem rested on the lack of any effective medical infrastructure to train and appoint doctors to prison camps. Hunger was the key issue, and no medical care would suffice if food rations were inadequate. Even though the concept of the general hospital emerged from the war it did little to assist POWs who suffered from scurvy, diarrhea, exposure, and diseases like smallpox as overcrowding made it easier for disease to spread. The hospital at Andersonville was described as a death house as 12,541 POWs died there between February 1864 and April 1865.
As the war spread to areas where prison camps were located POWs had to be moved quickly. Brundage’s example of General Sherman’s march through Georgia perfectly encapsulates the problem as prisons were about to be overrun. Prisoners were transported by train, steamboat, and walking as prisoners were subjected to a captivity that saw them travel over 2000 miles throughout the south in a period of ten months. The process was brutal for prisoners and reflects a key component of the horrors they had to endure.
Captain Henry Wirz, commander of Andersonville Prison)
Once the war was concluded between April and November 1865 about 800,000 prisoners were transported home. Brundage spends the last hundred pages of his study exploring topics that included legal responsibility for the atrocities that are associated with the treatment of POWs, the trials and tribulations they experienced upon release, particularly readapting to society which today we would place under the heading Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome which the author does not mention, and how the war and its prison systems were described in the art and literature that followed for the next century.
Brundage focuses on a number of ancillary topics as he closes his study. First and foremost are the Civil War created precedents that come under the heading of war crimes. By 1862 allegations of deliberate cruelty against Union prisoners had accumulated and influenced Union policies . With victory the opportunity presented itself based on Lincoln’s General Order 100 to support the concept that transgressions by the enemy would be punished which would lead to the prosecution of Henry Wirz and other former Confederates which would establish a precedent not only for American law but international law. The trials are seen as the origin of the modern prosecution of war crimes.
Lincoln appointed Judge Advocate Joseph Holt to oversee the prosecutions who believed it “was essential to deprive the rebellion it’s architects of any residue of legitimacy.” The trials were designed to strip the Confederacy of any esteem or honor it still retained. Interestingly the two men most responsible for Confederate policies, President Jefferson Davis and Secretary of War James Sedden were never tried due to the attitude of President Andrew Johnson and the acceptance that justice was sacrificed in the craven pursuit of reconciliation. Another important issue Brundage raises is the concept of “custodial” POW camps. Over time they were generally accepted, the problem was how they could be effectively run with less negative impact on prisoners. However, these types of camps would appear in the future ranging from the Boer War, the war in the Philippines, World War I and II and onward.
In the end Brundage offers a deeply researched and well written account of Civil War prisons. It is a sensitive and important study of a neglected topic, whose implications go far beyond the battlefields of the war between the states to present day conflicts be it Ukraine, Iran, Lebanon, Gaza and elsewhere.
In 1972 English writer Frederick Forsyth published a novel, THE ODESSA FILE which encompassed the adventures of a young German reporter attempting to discover the location of a former SS concentration-camp commander, Austrian Nazi SS-Obersturmfuhrer and Commandant of the Riga Ghetto during 1943, Eduard Roschmann who earned the nickname the “Butcher of Riga.” In the novel, the German freelance crime reporter, Peter Miller learns that Roschmann was responsible for the death of his father and had committed acts of immense cruelty, torture, and mass murder. Forsyth’s novel, a blend of fact and historical fiction, follows Miller’s quest and learns that Roschmann is not alone. He is part of something more ominous: Odessa.
The name ODESSA is an acronym for the German phrase “Organisation der ehemaligen SS-Angehörigen”, which translates as “Organisation of Former Members of the SS”. The novel depicts ODESSA as an international Nazi organization established shortly before the defeat of Nazi Germany for the purpose of protecting former members of the SS after the war. What was most concerning for Miller was that the organization was about to give birth to a new Reich—beginning with a nightmarish plot to regain their former power and carry out Hitler’s “Final Solution.”
Fifty years later, Forsyth, the author of worldwide bestsellers; THE DOGS OF WAR, THE FIST OF GOD, THE AFGHAN, THE KILL LIST among his thirteen novels and his co-writer, Tony Kent, a renown English writer in his own right has revisited the secrets of Odessa in their novel REVENGE OF ODESSA. Today we find Peter Miller is a retired journalist who is devoted to raising his grandson, Georg ever since his son and daughter-in-law died in a tragic car accident. Georg is also an accomplished writer who is investigating a series of terrorist attacks in Germany now finds himself the target of assassins and up against individuals involved with a resurgent ODESSA.
(Bestselling thriller author Frederick Forsyth)
The novel begins with the death of Ohio Senator Jack Johnson and his intern Sophie Arnott in a house fire. The authors soon turn their focus to a Stuttgart soccer stadium where a mass terrorist event takes place. In the ensuing mayhem we are introduced to journalist and podcaster Georg Miller who was at the stadium and following his instincts goes to the hospital to report on casualties representing the Komet news magazine. Georg fears that the right-wing shift by German politicians and newspapers will use an Islamic terror attack as a means of limiting the civil liberties of Germans and immigrants for their own political agenda. The authors set the stage of a recurrent racism, anti-Islamism, and the rise of the Christian right represented by some of the soccer players who argue it is time to fight back. Georg believed this was a recipe for mass unrest since the stadium shooting followed other attacks months before which was unleashing unbridled hatred.
While investigating the shooting at the hospital Georg came across an elderly man who was suffering from dementia who believed that Georg was his father, Horst Miller who had been with the Federal Police, later the Bundesnachrichfendienst (BDN), Germany’s foreign intelligence service. Ackermann would inform Georg that he was responsible for his parent’s deaths and after conducting extensive research concluded that he was a policeman who moonlighted as an executioner for Odessa whose goal was to complete the work Hitler started. In his investigation Georg interviewed Ackermann’s wife Elke who reaffirmed her husband’s actions and ties to Odessa. Georg’s parents were killed when he was ten years old and raised by his elderly grandparents.
The authors are very cognizant of the contemporary shift politically worldwide and use these ideological movements to explain the resurgence of the Odessa, a more sophisticated and powerful rendition than its earlier historical phase. For example, was Odessa ratcheting up the Islamic threat as a means of increasing German right-wing nationalism as the Nazis did with the Communist threat in 1934 culminating in the Reichstag Fire?
(co-author, Tony Kent)
Georg’s grandfather, Peter, a well-known journalist in the 1960s and 70s who publicized the Odessa threat, was scared that his grandson’s investigation would make him a target. Peter believed that the organization of ex-SS officers loyalists had never gone away and could not be killed. When Ackermann and his wife are murdered because they disclosed the existence of Odessa, Georg is convinced he is their next target, as is his grandfather Peter.
The plot moves back and forth between Germany and the heart of Washington as the death of Senator Johnson and his replacement by Cole Grisham in the Senate and events in Germany are somehow linked. The authors create an explosive tension that reflects the stakes that are now global. The resurgence of Odessa as a ruthless force infiltrating politics and terror cells worldwide is chillingly plausible. At a time when far-right movements, disinformation and political polarization are only too real, this novel taps into many anxieties and fears. Revenge of Odessa challenges the accepted conclusion that the defeat of Nazi Germany was final, that justice was served, and the horrors ended forever. Instead, the novel chillingly suggests that the defeat was only temporary; ideologies may go underground, but their roots remain.
A parallel story line is developed which involves a plot to Replace President Robert John Bauer’s Vice President with Cole Grisham. Both men are ideological soulmates creating a populist front but have the support of a fringe white supremacist movement in the United States. Their cover is very Donald Trump like – suppposedly standing up for those who feel betrayed by traditional politicians with their own economic agenda. The heart of the novel centers on the link between the two American politicians and Odessa.
The link is partially uncovered by the work of Vanessa Price, the only remaining staffer from deceased Senator Johnson remaining on Grisham’s staff. Two others have already been purged by Katie Braid, Grisham’s Chief of Staff. Vanessa soon learns that an American political action committee – America Tomorrow has been funded by a number of German corporate interests. Further, Vanessa learns that Braid and two other members of Grisham’s staff were also staffers on America Tomorrow since 2018. The key question was “what did a German fund have to gain from a White House administration dominated by Bauer and Grisham?
In this multi-layered historical thriller, the authors have created a number of questionable characters. First and foremost is Ben Klein, a police friend of Georg’s father who once he was killed served as his protector. Another is Scott Brogan, Georg’s god son and former British MI6 agent whose skills, though deplorable, uncover the depth of the Odessa resurgence. We are also introduced to Leo Renner, who may have seen himself as the new Fuhrer or at the very least “a nationalist messiah,” as well as the Krantz brothers who formed the muscle for Odessa. The authors effectively weave events in Stuttgart, Hamburg, and Washington alternating chapters until the various plot lines come together.
REVENGE OF ODESSA is a historical thriller that challenges the accepted conclusion that the defeat of Nazi Germany brought about the destruction of the Third Reich. Instead, the novel chillingly suggests that the defeat was only temporary; ideologies may dissipate, but their ideological core remains. Forsyth and Kent deliver a warning that evil does not always disappear. It asks how many resolved conflicts remain dormant and how many defeated ideologies remain underground to reemerge later. With that being said, the conclusion of the novel is predictable and though it lays the basis for a sequel it does not measure up to the original ODESSA FILE.
Recently my wife and I discovered the Rizzoli and Isles television series that was broadcast on TNT between 2010 and 2016. We were immediately taken by the Boston detective series and have been binging it for the last few weeks. We were impressed by the plots, the interaction between the characters, the acting, especially Angie Harmon and Sasha Alexander, and the use of science to determine outcomes. After a little research we learned that the series was based on author Tess Gerritsen’s thirteen crime novels on which the program was based. Immediately I purchased a copy of the first novel in the series, THE SURGEON, which had a different approach to some of the characters but was well worth reading.
The novel begins with the murder of two women. First, Diana Sterling, who was employed at the Kendall and Lord Travel Agency in Boston, second, a year later Elena Ortiz who was employed at Celebration Florists, also in Boston. When detectives arrived on the scene, they found Ortiz’s body immobilized by duct tape with incisions in the abdomen. They immediately realized that the two cases were similar though they took place a year apart.
The detectives involved were Jane Rizzoli, who recently had transferred from Vice and Narcotics to the Homicide Division, and Thomas Moore, the senior detective in the group. The personalities of the two form a key theme in the story. Rizzoli came across as a prickly woman who was very protective about her “turf” after years of dealing with the misogyny of the Boston Police Department and had grown tired of men getting the credit for all her hard work. Moore, on the other hand, was very tolerant and a warm individual who played by the rule book and had earned the nickname, “Sir Thomas Moore,” even Rizzoli admired him.
After Medical Examiner Ashford Tierney examined Ortiz’s body, he observed the preciseness of the cut wounds suggesting that the murderer was a medical professional. Tierney noticed that the uterus had been surgically removed which supported his thesis.
Similar to the television series Gerritsen’s novel creates a story line that immediately draws in the reader and what follows is a carefully constructed thriller centered around a series of murders focusing on Emergency Room Doctor, Catherine Cordell who had survived a similar attack while working in a Savannah, Georgia hospital two years earlier. Cordell was able to escape her assailant, a medical colleague, Dr. Andrew Capra and in the end, she was able to reach for her gun and kill him. Cordell would move to Boston to try and escape her demons. A third victim would emerge who was coincidentally brought to Cordell’s ER which would set off her own PTSD. She was an excellent general and vascular surgeon, but her private life was filled with memories and fears brought on by her attack two years earlier.
Rizzoli would make the connection between Cordell’s arrival in Boston and the series of murders. This would create a series of dialogues that Gerritsen excels at between detectives. One of which is Darren Crowe, a wise ass who demeaned women who Rizzoli could not tolerate; Moore who was willing to work with Rizzoli but made the mistake of becoming emotionally involved with Cordell; and Lt. Marquette who oversaw the investigation.
Gerritsen creates a number of characters that reflect the Boston Police Departments approach to the investigation. Dr. Lawrence Zucker, a criminal psychologist, provides insights into the criminal they are dealing with. Alex Polochelk, a forensic hypnotist who will work with Cordell as she tries to remember what happened to her two years earlier once detective realized that she was being stalked by someone similar to Andrew Capra, but he was dead, This forms the crux of the investigation – was Cordell the murderer or the victim? Gerritsen’s novel creates a superb plot – two killers, one dead and one alive, but what bonded them together? Was it Dr. Cordell?
A major theme that the author develops centers around rape and how women react in the short term and cope in the long term. They hide their feelings, particularly from men seeing themselves as “damaged goods,” blaming themselves for what has occurred. It is left to female medical professionals to help these victims and Gerritsen effectively uses her dialogue to explore this issue. A poignant example is Cordell’s conclusion that “a rapist never disappears from your life. For as long as you live, your always their property.”
Gerritsen is a master at developing her characters, providing important background. Rizzoli’s upbringing in a male dominated family with two brothers, one of which is a Marine and seen as the star of the family and a compliant mother. She believes she received no recognition from her family, and this helps explain her inability to deal with certain male detectives. Moore on the other hand had a wonderful twenty-year marriage when his wife died suddenly a few years earlier and he is still grieving, which explains in part how he treats Cordell. In terms of character development, Gerritsen excels at uncovering the egos involved in the investigation and how everyone navigated their relationships with colleagues. The Rizzoli-Moore connection is integral to the story and understanding how two people under immense pressure lean on each other, then are forced to face the reality of who they are. Their tenuous association offers an important context to events that occur throughout the novel.
The core of the novel focuses on establishing a number of important links between a series of murders and trying to determine who is responsible. It is fascinating how the author weaves together her plot and the characters within. None stand out as much as Rizzoli, who by the end of the novel learns a great deal about herself and her own insecurities as well as the perpetrator of these hideous crimes, who had a normal upbringing and appeared as ordinary as the next person. Gerritsen has constructed a real page turner involving forensic science, detailed descriptions of anatomy, and imagination to maintain the reader’s interest throughout.
_02_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
Doc's Books 
