Author: szfreiberger

INDENTURED: THE INSIDE STORY OF THE REBELLION AGAINST THE NCAA by Joe Nocera and Ben Strauss

szfreiberger Sports Leave a comment

In 2011 the Pulitzer Prize Winning historian Taylor Branch wrote an article for THE ATLANTIC entitled “The Shame of College Sports” that finally blew the lid off of the NCAA reign of terror of “student-athletes.”  In it, Branch noted that the majority of athletes that played football and men’s basketball were African American.  Further, he noted that the NCAA lets off “the unmistakable whiff of the plantation.”  Coming at the same time as a PBS Frontline episode “Money and March Madness” the NCAA’s reputation suffered greatly and they were forced to answer to the public for a great number of their policies that the article and television program exposed.  The NCAA practices and their rationalization for their numerous rules are exposed further in Joe Nocera and Ben Strauss’ new book INDENTURED: THE INSIDE STORY OF THE REBELLION AGAINST THE NCAA.  The authors’ approach is damning to the decades long reign of the NCAA as they describe the enforcement of rules and regulations with seeming blindness to the effects they have on the athletes and their families that they are expected to regulate.  Nocera and Strauss discuss the different heads of the NCAA and what emerges is a consistent refusal to reform and change policies that were drawn up in the 1950s that have destroyed numerous lives.  The authors trace the development of the NCAA from its beginnings to the era of mega revenues that have economists, politicians, educators, sportswriters, legal scholars, and numerous others referring to it as a cartel that has spent most of its time ruling college sports, but at the same time being exempt from anti-trust legislation.

The book itself could serve as a legal brief against the NCAA as it delineates numerous practices that are detrimental to the athletes they supposedly supervise.  The book is organized into a series of chapters that examine a specific problem with the NCAA.  Each chapter is preceded by a short rendering of a particular case that the NCAA pushed against a particular athlete, their families, or a coach and how they ruled unjustly, and at times unethically.  At issue throughout the narrative is the concept of the “student-athlete” that the NCAA created to justify its actions.  The core of the argument against the NCAA rests on a number of areas.  The lack of health insurance for athletes, particularly when they are expected to train during the off-season and suffer injuries which can cause them to lose their scholarships.  Another area is the practice of having to renew their scholarships each year and how coaches manipulate this practice to gain more scholarships for recruits.  The lack of stipends to assist students who have little or no money for laundry, food outside the cafeteria, and assist them with supplies needed for class is a major issue when university programs are reaping millions of dollars because of the athletes, but the athlete themselves receiving nothing from their labor.   The labor of which is roughly 40 hours a week or more for individuals who play Division I sports of which I am personally knowledgeable since my son played Lacrosse at that level and he did most of his class work after midnight.  The lack of academic support for college players is a travesty, for example, some coaches would hold back the distribution of textbooks until they were satisfied with on field performance.   Lastly, probably the most egregious actions by the NCAA is that their investigative process is dominated by fear.  Since they do not have subpoena power they will use any method to gain information, a process that allows them to bribe people for testimony, accept the statements of witnesses who are stretching the truth to achieve their goal of prosecuting a particular athlete, among other strategies to make athletes ineligible.  Athletes seemed to always make the mistake of assuming that their schools would support them when the NCAA investigated, a major error, as all the schools cared about was their own welfare.

(University of Michigan Stadium on a Fall Saturday afternoon, capacity 102,000)

The authors provide all the relevant statistics to support their conclusions.  College sports generates about $13 billion a year, more than the National Football League.  Though there are 460,000 NCAA athletes engaged in 24 sports, the book focuses in on about 15,000 who play the most revenue driven sports, football and men’s basketball.  While the NCAA uses their self-serving definition of amateurism to reinforce and justify their policies, the amount of money they bring in because of these supposed “amateurs” makes one accept the idea that these athletes are indentured servants.  The historical definition of an indentured servant is “a person under contract to another person for a definite period of time, usually without pay.”  As used historically that person is working for passage to another country or maintenance.  In the case of the NCAA, athletes seem to be indentured servants, but they are not being maintained properly if they are not provided full health care and food.

Based on the article by Taylor Branch there is a racial component to this process.  A large majority of athletes come from poor black families who live close or under the poverty line.  Many of these athletes need remedial education which most universities do not provide, but what they do provide as is evidenced by the University of North Carolina African American history program are “caned” courses where students did not have to attend classes but received passing grades.  This went on under the rule of Coach Dean Smith, regarded as a deity in Chapel Hill and of course was white.  If we turn to the UCLA basketball program under John Wooden, considered a “basketball god” as he earned 11 national basketball titles between 1965 and 1975 overseeing numerous infractions, (i.e.; builder Sam Gilbert was paying his players), that the NCAA let slide because he brought in money, and yes he too was white.  The stories Nocera and Strauss bring to the fore are mostly black athletes who seem to be persecuted by the NCAA.

The growth of revenue at such an exponential level is amazing to this reader.  It all relates to the commercialization and corporatization of college sports.  The creation of ESPN in 1975 and its later offshoot channels, ESPN2, ESPNU, and ESPN Classic created the need for more and more programming, roughly 8000-10,000 hours a year.   Billion dollar contracts have followed over the years and universities rebelled against the NCAA as they believed they could make more money.  Their individual conferences, beginning with the Big 10 decided to create their own networks and negotiate with ESPN, the major networks, and the new sports channels themselves to get a bigger share of the pie.  Once the Big 10 was successful then other conferences like the PAC 10, ACC, SEC and others, did the same.  The result has been musical chairs for universities as the conferences lured schools with the promise of increased revenues to the detriment of schools with weaker athletic programs who could no longer compete for the funds needed to keep up with the new arenas, stadiums, and other facilities of the larger newly realigned programs.   It is obvious that college sports has become a multi-billion dollar enterprise with March Madness, the BCS playoff system for college football, as well as all the other bowls that have corporate sponsors.   My favorites include the Buffalo Wild Wings Citrus Bowl and the Go Daddy Bowl, and I wonder in the future if the NCAA will offer a Kohler Toilet Bowl.

(Theodis Colter, Northwestern University Quarterback and college player’s union advocate)

Aside from the commercialization off college sports, the next motivator for athletes to try and be heard was the proliferation of concussions that have led to CTE in former players.  College football’s “concussion protocol” was non-existent and finally Northwestern Quarterback Theodis Colter began a movement to unionize Northwestern football players with the creation of the college Athletics Players Association.  The organizing of college basketball and football players had been burgeoning for a number of years due to the inequities already discussed, but it seemed that the concussion issue pushed some over the edge.  After the National Labor Relations Board recognized the players right to unionize a vote took place in April, 2014 to approve the unionization of Northwestern players.  After tremendous pressure from alumni and a calculated effort by the Northwestern administration to convince players what they could lose if they voted yes, the players voted down the union concept.

(Ed O’Bannon, former UCLA basketball player who led the fight to renumerate college players for their own “images.”)

One of the most interesting cases involves whether the “image” of an athlete can be used as a commercial product after the athlete graduates (and is enrolled) since that image generates millions of dollars from the likes of EA Sports and other corporations.  Ed O’Bannon, a former UCLA basketball player has sued the NCAA and the authors delve into the legal fight and the nuances and strategies pursued by both sides of this case as they do with a number of other cases throughout the book.  The O’Bannon case is extremely important because it finally showed that their business model of “amateurism” was no longer tenable. It must be asked why college book stores that sell the jerseys of players, and make enormous sums of money, do not share their profits with the athletes who wears the jerseys that make sales possible.  As the O’Bannon case court hearings evolved, Nocera and Strauss reintroduce a number of characters that have been discussed throughout the book.  Men like James Delaney, head of the Big 10, Sandy Vaccaro, a major figure at Nike at one time, Jerry Tarkanian, former head basketball coach at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Andy Schwarz, an economist, Ramogi Huma, a former player and activist for player rights, Mark Emmert, head of the NCAA, and the work of Walter Byers who developed many NCAA rules and regulations among numerous others.  The Final decision in the case struck down the NCAA concept of “amateurism” and promoted reforms for the benefit of the players, many of which the NCAA supported, but this did not stop the NCAA from appealing the decision even though they could remain a cartel whose prerogatives were only tweaked.  But the NCAA and its member schools began tripping over themselves as they tried to institute reforms to benefit the players and as the author’s argue in their closing chapter, “the sky did not fall,” even as the cost to universities for health care, guaranteeing scholarships, and a cost of attendance stipend increased. In reality, revenues for college sports “kept rolling in” to cover these new benefits, in addition to producing further revenues above these new expenses.

(Ed Delaney, former head of the Big 10 Conference)

If an athlete sought to try and get legal redress it was very difficult as the NCAA would rarely settle a lawsuit and its strategy rested on legal obstacles dragging cases out for years.  Since they had the greater resources, few would challenge them.  The key to any reform is for university presidents to grab control of college sports from their athletic directors.  However in a system where some athletic programs, i.e.; Louisiana State University brings in 25% of the schools revenue, school presidents are not likely to push too hard.  The bottom line that emerges from Nocera and Strauss’ excellent research is that “student-athletes” do not control their own lives while they are indentured as college athletes.  If the reader wants to delve further into the debate they include an appendix that present documents that are germane to the material presented in this very readable book.

WHEN LIONS ROAR: THE CHURCHILLS AND THE KENNEDYS by Thomas Maier

szfreiberger Biography, English History, World War II Leave a comment

(US Ambassador to England, Joseph P. Kennedy, and English Prime Minister, Winston Churchill)

The 20th century was greatly affected by a number of prominent families, but aside from the Roosevelts, few stand out more than the Churchills and the Kennedys, and their relationship with each other.  The interactions between these two families forms the core of Thomas Maier’s recent book, WHEN LIONS ROAR: THE CHURCHILLS AND THE KENNEDYS.  The book explores the different dynamics that existed between the two families and the world around them, be it political, financial, personal, and too often, sexual.  The result is a historical work that at times seems peppered with a bit too much gossip.

As I examined the book I wondered if the author had unearthed anything of substance.  Tackling a topic that has been mined by many excellent historians, it seemed to be a difficult task.  Concentrating on the relationship between fathers and sons; Winston Churchill and his son Randolph, and Joseph P. Kennedy and his sons Joe Jr. and John, the author provides a glimpse into both families and the intensity of their relationships.  The most interesting facet of the book involves how both fathers had such grandiose hopes for their sons, but in both cases, the fathers were to be disappointed.  Randolph spent much of his life trying to emerge from the shadow of his famous father, while remaining loyal to him.  At times father and son would grow to resent each other, Winston disappointed by his somewhat alcoholic and womanizing son who would never reach the heights that were expected of him.  Joseph Kennedy’s disappointment revolved around the agony of losing his eldest son Joe Jr., whose naval bomber was shot down over England.  Unlike Winston, the senior Kennedy, would be rewarded when his second youngest son, John Fitzgerald would become a war hero, and successful politician who would be elected president in 1960.

(The Kennedy Patriarch and his family)

Maier provides the background story of each family that has been told many times before.  His biographical sketches of Winston and Joseph Sr. present nothing substantially new, but it should prove helpful for the general reader.  The most important component is how the two families become dependent on each other.  Maier begins in 1933 with the first meeting of Winston and Joseph Sr., as both men were allies when it came to prohibition.  The senior Kennedy hoped to procure a deal to acquire the distribution rights for English gin and other liquors in the United States as prohibition was coming to an end.  Kennedy would use his close relationship with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s son, James as a conduit to his father and a budding relationship with Churchill to achieve his goals.  Kennedy achieved an economic coup as he set up a company called Somerset importers and landed the contract to distribute Dewar’s scotch, Gordon’s gin and other important liquors.   Maier reviews the instability of Churchill’s income in comparison to Kennedy, particularly when he was out of power.  Churchill had to rely on his writing and the “gifts” of rich friends to survive a lifestyle he could not afford.  One wonders if the future Prime Minister benefited in any way from the future Ambassador to the United Kingdom.  For a wonderful discussion of Churchill’s finances see the new book NO MORE CHAMPAGNE: CHURCHILL AND HIS MONEY by David Lough.

(John F. Kennedy, Joseph P. Kennedy, and Joseph Kennedy, Jr.)

Maier examines the different responses taken by both families to the rise of Adolph Hitler to power in Germany.  Both Churchill and Kennedy offspring follow the leads of their fathers.  Randolph would mimic his father’s preparedness views and the fear that war with the Nazis was inevitable.  Joseph Jr., then a student at the London School of Economics conformed to his father’s views about the Nazis, even expressing a certain amount of anti-Semitism.  John F. didn’t toe the line as much as his elder brother and more and more he came around to Churchill’s viewpoint.  A tendentious problem developed between the fathers as how to approach the militarization and expansion of Nazi Germany.  Once the war broke out and both men were in positions of power, the diplomatic rift between the two was exposed as Kennedy seemed to rely on Charles Lindbergh’s opinion of the Nazis, and his own fears of war and how it could affect his son’s futures.   Kennedy’s overt support for appeasement throughout his stay in London created a great deal of tension between the two men.  Churchill was careful of not pushing Kennedy too far because he realized how dependent he was on the creation of a “special relationship” with the United States, especially after the Nazi seizure of Holland, Belgium, and France in 1940.  Behind the scenes we are told the story of how FDR manipulated both men and how the president could no longer tolerate an ambassador who was undermining his foreign policy, a story that Michael Bechloss has told very effectively in his book, KENNEDY AND ROOSEVELT.

(Randolph Churchill, Winston Churchill, and his grandson Winston)

The one major criticism of the book I would raise is the amount of racy information Maier either states or suggests.  The reader is presented with a series of love triangles, affairs, and the sexual needs of the different characters that appear in the narrative.  Randolph Churchill’s wife Pamela is involved with FDR’s personal liaison to Churchill and later Ambassador to the Soviet Union Averell Harriman, Edward R. Morrow of CBS news, among a number of prominent historical figures.  The affairs of Clare Booth, writer, politician and future husband of Time magazine magnate, Henry Luce, with Joseph P. Kennedy, Randolph Churchill, the American financier Bernard Baruch and numerous others is over the top.  In addition, Sarah Churchill’s relationship with Joseph Kennedy’s replacement as ambassador to the United Kingdom, John G. Winant, and of course Maier cannot leave out the dalliances of John F. Kennedy and after a while, I wondered what purpose this information plays, if not just to spice up a historical narrative that should stand on its own merits.

To his credit Maier distills a number of situations that have remained obscure over the years.  Perhaps the most interesting is that of Tyler Kent, a code clerk in the American Embassy in London under Kennedy’s ambassadorship.  Kent was stealing documents and funneling them to a right wing group in England, conservative pro-Nazi politicians, and the Nazi government.  Documents included sensitive communications between Churchill and Roosevelt among others.  Scotland Yard and MI5 surveilled Kent and Kennedy for over seven months.  Once Kent was arrested, Maier, quite accurately describes Kennedy as an inept administrator who worried more about how things affected the “Kennedy Brand” as opposed to the damage the fiasco caused the war effort.  Kennedy would emerge totally discredited, which reinforced FDR’s negative view of him.  Another tidbit that Maier explores is that of Churchill’s health that resulted in two heart attacks and the belief that his son Randolph who surprisingly exhibited tremendous courage despite his reputation needed to be kept in a safe area as not to overly stress his father, since the Prime Minister was a key to holding out against the Nazis until victory.

(Winston Churchill and his daughter Mary, Lady Soames)

Maier does a competent job tracing the rise of Jack Kennedy from his election to Congress in 1946 to the presidency fueled by the wealth of his father.  Kennedy Sr. lived vicariously through his second son as he wanted him to gain the respect and success he could never attain.  Though there is nothing new in his discussion of Jack Kennedy’s rise to power, Maier does bring to the fore Churchill’s adamant position visa vie the Soviet Union following the war.  After giving his “Iron Curtain Speech” in Fulton, MO delineating the Soviet threat he would follow up by advocating the use of the atomic bomb against the Russians, taking advantage of the nuclear option before the Soviets developed their own which he was convinced they would employ.  Using little known FBI records, Churchill urged Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire, “that if and atomic bomb could be dropped on the Kremlin wiping it out, it would be an easy problem to handle the balance of Russia, which would be without direction.” (433)

(Randolph and Pamela Churchill)

Maier provides the reader with interesting portraits of a number of important historical figures.  Chief among them was Max Aiken, or Lord Beaverbrook, a close friend and companion of Churchill, and the senior Kennedy, who at times professed his own agenda.  Other portraits include; Clementine Churchill, the spouse of the Prime Minister, as well as Rose Kennedy.  The English writer Evelyn Waugh, the financier and FDR confidant, Bernard Baruch, Clare Booth Luce, Kay Halle, a beautiful Cleveland journalist who worked with William Donovan at the OSS and at one time was the paramour of Randolph Churchill, George Gershwin, Averell Harriman, the columnist, Walter Lipmann, and Robert F. Kennedy, among others.  FDR and his advisors, particularly Harry Hopkins are portrayed fairly, as are certain important members of the British parliament.  Overall, Maier’s portrayals captures numerous individuals, and the author is even handed in his approach as he presents his breezy narrative.

Maier’s writing is easy to follow and each component of his story seems to flow into the next in a pattern that maintains the reader’s interest.  His story is carried into the 21st century following the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, as Maier repeatedly seems to conjecture as to what might have been.  Whatever the case, Maier’s work is quite appealing and should interest those who have questions about two remarkable political dynasties.

(Joseph P. Kennedy and Winston Churchill outside 10 Downing Street)

szfreiberger Uncategorized Leave a comment

Last night my wife and I had the pleasure of seeing the documentary film, FOOD FIGHT at the Music Hall Theater in Portsmouth, NH.  It was wonderful as it captured the relationship between the management team and its CEO, Arthur T. Demoulas, their associates, and customers in a deep and personal manner.  Serious at times, humerous, it is an exceptional film for anyone interested in the events of July 2014 and onward.  My family has been lucky to have known the Demoulas and their generosity and we recommend this film to all.  The film corresponds to the wonderful book WE ARE MARKET BASKET by Daniel Korschun and Grant Weller that I reviewed on this website in September, 2015.

slides3

 

 

THE NEW TSAR: THE RISE AND REIGN OF VLADIMIR PUTIN by Steven Lee Myers

szfreiberger American Diplomatic History, Biography, Russian History, United States Foreign Policy, War on Terror Leave a comment

If you are seeking an explanation for Russian President Vladimir Putin policies, domestically and externally, you should consult Steven Lee Myers recent book THE NEW TSAR: THE RISE AND REIGN OF VLADIMIR PUTIN.  According to Myers it was the Ukrainian Presidential election of 2004, coming on the heels of the Beslan school massacre of September 3, 2004 that pushed Putin to recalibrate his plans.  When Chechen terrorists seized close to 1000 people on the first day of the school year, resulting in the death of 334 hostages, 186 of which were children, Putin was beside himself.  With repeated Chechen terror attacks inside Russia, and a war that was not going well, Putin resorted to his predictable stonewalling excuses.  Outside Russia events did not go Putin’s way either. Already resentful of what he perceived to be western encroachment in the traditionally Russian sphere of influence in the Baltic, along with the election of Viktor Yushchenko as the Ukrainian president, a man who favored NATO membership and closer ties to the west, the Russian leader was forced to face another uncomfortable situation fostering a drastic shift in Russian policy.  Myers, a New York Times reporter spent seven years in Moscow during the period of Putin’s consolidation of power, has written a remarkably comprehensive biography of the Russian president that should be considered the standard work on this subject.

The books title, “The New Tsar” is a correct description of Putin’s reign that even included a Tsarevitch, Dimitri Medvedev, as Putin’s handpicked successor as President of Russia in 2008.  For Putin the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the collapse of the Soviet Union, a belief that provides tremendous insight into his policies.  Emerging from the corruption and incompetence of the presidency of Boris Yeltsin, Russia by 1998 was in deep trouble economically and politically.  Yeltsin also hand-picked his successor, a former KGB operative, who was stationed in Dresden, East Germany in 1989, Vladimir Putin.  Meyers presents an objective approach to Putin’s life before the Berlin Wall came down.  Putin would grow up listening to stories of his father, Vladimir, fighting on the western front during World War II and being wounded by the Germans.  His mother, Maria survived the siege of Leningrad and escaped into the countryside.  The harrowing experiences of his parents left an indelible impression on the young Putin.  His father suffered with a limp after the war, and his mother was overly protective of her son.  Putin had a slight build as a child and turned to the martial arts to deal with bullies.  His success at Judo provided Putin with a certain toughness and a means of asserting himself.  Putin craved orthodoxy and rules, neither of which he found in religion and politics.

(People tearing down the Berlin Wall, November, 1989)

Myers stresses Putin’s education in economics and law school, but more importantly he points to Putin’s time in the KGB when he was stationed in Dresden.  While being posted to East Germany Putin was exposed to the Stasi and their practices.  Putin was involved in intelligence operations, counter intelligence analysis, and scientific and technical espionage.  The KGB’s goal in East Germany was to gather intelligence and recruit agents who had access to the west, especially individuals who had relatives near American and NATO military bases.  Putin was heavily involved in recruiting and running agents to determine East German support for the Soviet Union.  In 1987, Putin who was very popular with his superiors was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel and the Dresden Station Chief’s senior assistant, or enforcer.  Myers traces Putin’s actions as Mikhail Gorbachev instituted Glasnost and Perestroika and his reaction to events in November, 1989 as the Berlin Wall came down.  Two years later, the Soviet Union finally gave way after a failed coup against Gorbachev, and Yeltsin emerged as the dominant political figure in Russia.  Putin’s reaction to events led him to resign from the KGB.   The future “Tsar” was now cast adrift.

In contemplating Putin’s career one must ask, how he progressed from being a former intelligence operative to President of Russia in seven years.  Myers does an excellent job framing Putin’s behavior and beliefs following the collapse of the Soviet Union.  Rising to the position of Deputy Mayor of Leningrad he attached himself to the coattails of a former law professor at his alma mater, Anatoly Sobchak.  It was during Sobchak’s administration that Putin, because of his economics background negotiated no bid contracts with newly created corporations that involved numerous kickbacks and extensive fraud.  Leningrad’s treasury was almost empty and casino gambling was seen as a source of revenue.  This would lead to organized crime and the emergence of the new corporate oligarchs controlling the local economy.  Myers points to rumors of Putin’s involvement, but can’t make a definitive case.   It was at this time that a number of these new oligarchs that emerged under Yeltsin, businessmen like Yuri Kovalchuk and Vladimir Yakunin whose metal company received licenses to export aluminum and non-ferrous metals grew very close to Putin, and years later would become titans of Russian industry.  Putin’s role in Leningrad’s economy increased under Sobchak and more and more cronies from his KGB past were given prominent positions in the city’s government.  Myers refers to these men as the “St. Petersburg boys,” who would emerge as important players when Putin assumed power.  Sobchak’s goal was to make his city the friendliest to foreign investment in the entire country.  Putin’s goal was to help create a new “window to the west,” the first major transformation of its kind since Peter the Great.  Putin would operate in the background with no fanfare and little emotion.  He knew how to slice through the bureaucracy and Russia’s opaque laws and used his Leningrad experience as a primer on how to get things done.

(Russian President Boris Yeltsin)

Putin would remain in Leningrad until 1996 when Sobchak was not reelected mayor.  Putin was without a job, but Yeltsin would be his savior.  Yeltsin’s own support in the presidential election of 1996 were the bankers, media moguls, and industrialists who had acquired controlling interests in major industries in return for keeping Yeltsin’s government afloat.  Putin was appointed to the Presidential Property Management Directorate to oversee the legal issues as he was in charge of reasserting the government’s control over certain properties and dispensing with others.  Seven months later Putin was put in charge of investigating abuses of Russian property and restoring order, and ending the corrupt schemes that were destroying the Russian economy.  Putin’s work brought him into contact with the FSB (really a new KGB with another name!) and earned a graduate degree with a thesis focusing on Russia’s natural resources.  More and more Putin believed that the state had to reassert its control over its own natural resources that were being pilfered by “oligarchs.”  This belief would form the basis of Putin’s economic policy once in power as he would use Russia’s vast energy resources as a tool against the west and former Soviet republics that did not conform to his vision of Russia’s spheres of influence.

Putin had gained a reputation as a competent, hard-working individual who did not press a particular agenda on Yeltsin.  With the corruption in the FSB, the economy imploding, Yeltsin appointed Putin as the head of the intelligence agency, Putin had come full circle.  Myers description of Yeltsin’s reign as president is one of economic disaster, corruption on a scale not imagined by many in his inner circle, and navigating from one crisis to another.  Throughout it all Putin was loyal and conducted himself in a ruthless and efficient manner that made him essential to Yeltsin’s political survival and he rewarded Putin with the leadership of the Security Council in addition to his duties as Director of the FSB.

Myers successfully integrates the second Chechen war into the narrative on top of Yeltsin’s domestic troubles.  This occurred at the same time NATO was bombing Serbia because of its actions in Kosovo, and the Russian leadership was powerless to support its Slavic brothers and  greatly feared that the west could do the same in Chechnya.  Yeltsin could not run for reelection in 2000, so he needed an heir that he trusted.  He offered Putin the office of Prime Minister and then he would resign before the election, to provide the little publicly known Putin a leg up on the presidency.  Myers does a superb job describing these machinations that resulted in Putin’s elevation.  One of his first moves upon assuming office in September, 1999, was to send Russian forces back into Chechnya, after four attacks in and around Moscow that killed over 300 people, a move he would stand by for years despite negative results.

(Russian troops bring out the dead and wounded after their assault on the Moscow theater to free hostages from Chechen terrorists, October 23, 2002)

Myers discussion of Putin’s reign is sharp and focused and explains many of the problems that the United States faces today with the Russian leader.  Putin’s approach to government is his version of the “dictatorship of law” or “managed democracy,” which may reflect some of the trappings of democracy, but are fixed or manipulated to accomplish certain ends.  Putin was aided by the strong recovery in energy markets after his election in 2000.  With increasing funds in the Kremlin coffers, Putin prosecuted his war in Chechnya in a vicious fashion.  This would produce a series of terrorist attacks that would cost Moscow dearly.  When Putin’s leadership and tactics were questioned during terrorist attacks at a movie theater on October 23, 2002 in southeast Moscow that resulted in the death of 130 hostages, and the terrorist siege of a school in Breslan in North Ossetia, the Russian President stonewalled any explanations for his military responses.  This was Putin’s pattern in a crisis, as was evidenced earlier when the nuclear submarine Kursk sank in 2000 with the loss of 118 men.  Despite these disasters and the Chechen war that was turning into a quagmire, Putin’s popularity could not be questioned, in large part because reporters, commentators, or politicians who raised issues or made negative comments about Putin, tended to disappear.  Putin had a carefully crafted image supported by his media friends who would not pursue the truth concerning the assassinations of Anna Politkoyskaya, a journalist critical of Putin, Alexsandr Litvinenko, a former FSB operative who exposed corruption and bribery in the agency, among numerous others.

Myers does a commendable job explaining the second “rape” of the Russian economy, the first under Yeltsin that produced the first wave of oligarchs, the second under Putin.  Names like Yukos, Gazprom, Rosneft, and their CEO’s are explored in detail and the reader acquires an inside look at how Putin dealt with economic threats to his regime as he sought to recover the state’s assets.  However, at the same time he allowed many of the “St. Petersburg boys” access to new wealth, creating a second wave of “new” oligarchs.  The trial of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the head of Yukos, the largest oil company in Russia is emblematic as to how Putin operated.  The end result is that Putin gained control of all aspects of the Russian economy, and of course with the attendant corruption, his own wealth accumulated tremendously, estimated at about $40 billion by Russian journalists and the CIA.  As an editorial in Kommersant opined, “the state has become, essentially a corporate enterprise that the nominal owners, Russian citizens no longer control.”

(the nature of American-Russian relations is obvious from the faces of Presidents Obama and Putin)

When Putin first rose to power many hoped a strong relationship between the United States and Russia would result. Putin was very supportive following 9/11 and approved of American military bases in former Soviet republics to conduct the war against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.  After meeting Putin for the first time, President George W. Bush had a positive reaction as he said, “I looked the man in the eye, I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy…..I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country.”  Bush was either naïve or uninformed about Putin and the course he pursued.  Putin grew angry at the United States when the Bush administration refused to alter provisions of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM), and the eventual American withdrawal from the treaty.  Further, Putin was against the American invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and this was capped off with the Ukrainian election of 2004 where reformers and government protestors wanted to move closer to the west and become members of NATO.  Putin’s frustration and anger at the United States further increased when President Bush decided to negotiate with Poland and the Czech Republic for bases for a Missile Defense System.  This led to the February, 2007 Putin speech at the Munich Security Conference where the Russian president excoriated the Bush administration in what Myers describes as similar to Winston Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech.  With the economic collapse of 2008 and its effect on the Russian economy, Putin would only blame the United States.  Further, the election of Barrack Obama, the Russian invasion of Georgia, trade disagreements, events in the Ukraine and Crimea, and the current Syrian crisis, it is not surprising that it seems we are now witnessing a second Cold War.

Putin could not run for reelection in 2008, but as Myers points out, like Yeltsin he also had an heir, Dimitri Medvedev, a former head of Gazprom, and an individual who appeared to be easier to deal with.  However, with Putin as Prime Minister pulling the strings, Kremlin policy remained the same, accept with a softer face.  During his presidency Medvedev was consistently forced into the background be it the 2009 economic crisis, the Russian invasion of Georgia, and other issues-Putin just could not stay in the background.  Medvedev’s speeches were vetted by Putin and it was demeaning for the Russian president as he was now overshadowed by his Prime Minister.

After reading Myers’ book, the reader should have a handle of who Putin is and what he believes in.  I agree with Gal Beckerman’s description of Putin as a man who represents his country, represents stability, and “stands against the chaos of the street; one man who still believes in the unique power of the state personifies its sovereignty and its prerogative to defend its interests; one man who embodies calm, measured authority resists the emotional swell of undisciplined, angry people, and understands that the appearance of forcefulness and obstinacy can be as powerful as an actual show of force.”  After digesting Myers’ narrative of Putin moving from crisis to crisis, some self-created and some external to Russia, it becomes clear that he simply believes that “he’s the last one standing between order and chaos,” whether he is dealing with protesters challenging his return to the presidency during and after the 2012 elections, “Chechen separatists, E.U.-loving Ukrainian politicians or the West as a whole, working through nefarious pro-gay N.G.O.’s or NATO.” (New York Times, November 2, 2015)

(Demonstration against Ukrainian government in Independence Square, Kiev, February 2, 2014)

Putin’s greatest gamble according to Myers was his illegal seizure of the Crimea in reaction to the violence in Kiev on February 2, 2014.  Protestors had taken to the streets forcing Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to flee the capitol.  Putin was presiding over the closing ceremonies of the Sochi Winter Olympics and saw events in the Ukraine as a western plot to deny Russia the accolades that it deserved because of the success of the games.  Incensed, Putin met privately with a few trusted advisors and planned to foster the breakup of the Ukraine by seizing the Crimea.  The Russian invasion began on February 27, 2014 negating the argument he employed against President Obama about unilaterally invading countries as the US had done in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.  Putin correctly calculated that since that the west would not react as it had in 1990 removing Saddam Hussein’s forces from Kuwait, as it had not acted against the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008.  Putin’s fait accompli would not be reversed and his rationale of protecting “ethnic Russians” was domestically popular and would later be used to justify Russian military moves in Eastern Ukraine.  Even after the dubious referendums in Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk; in addition to the Russian shoot down of a Malaysian airliner, Putin was convinced the west would do nothing, and he would rally his country against the foreign conspiracy to isolate Russia politically, and hurt her economically with sanctions.  Not only did Putin not worry about western actions, it seemed he no longer cared as is evidenced by the current situation in Syria as Russian planes continue bombing to prop up the regime of Hafez el-Assad, as opposed to his public position of fighting ISIS.

Myers conclusion that Putin no longer cared to rule pragmatically as he had done during his first two terms in office, and would focus on reasserting Russia’s power with or without the recognition of the west, is correct.  Myers should be commended for his work and anyone interested in understanding, the “new tsar” should consult it.

UNITED STATES OF JIHAD: INVESTIGATING AMERICA’S HOMEGROWN TERRORISTS by Peter Bergen

szfreiberger Middle Eastern History, United States Foreign Policy, War on Terror Leave a comment

 

United States of Jihad: Investigating America's Homegrown Terrorists

(Among the topics discussed by Mr. Bergen is the Boston Marathon, April, 2013)

Peter Bergen, prolific author, and CNN national security analyst has written a number of important books dealing with terrorism.  They include monographs on Osama Bin-Laden and three others which were New York Times best sellers.  His latest work UNITED STATES OF JIHAD: INVESTIGATING AMERICA’S HOMEGROWN TERRORISTS is an important addition to two other recent books, Scott Shane’s OPERATION TROY and Charlie Savage’s POWER WARS: INSIDE OBAMA’S POST 9/11 PRESIDENCY.  Bergen builds on the work of these authors in trying to explain why American citizens have engaged in treason against their country by engaging in, or planning acts of terrorism.  Bergen further explores how American institutions and the Moslem community have responded to the terror threat and how this threat on American soil has changed us.  One could argue that Bergen’s book is a who’s who of American jihadism, beginning with the Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, Omar Hamami who grew up in Alabama and fought for al-Shabaab in Somalia, David Coleman Headley who helped plan and carry out the Mumbai massacre, and numerous others.

Bergen concentrates on the 330 militants who have been arrested and charged with terrorism crimes in the United States, 80% of which are American citizens or legal permanent residents.  He argues that they appear to be as average, well educated, and emotionally stable as typical Americans.  According to Bergen their average age is 29, more than a third are married – many with children, and one out of six are women.  There is nothing particularly special about them as they are just ordinary people.  If this is so, then why have so many engaged in terrorism, and why is the “home grown” threat a major source of concern in the intelligence community?  Bergen argues forcefully that it is due to a number of criteria.  First, Moslem outrage at United States foreign policy in the Middle East is a dominant theme.  Anger about American wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, American drone strikes in Yemen causing tremendous collateral damage, the bombing of Syria, and U.S. support for Israel all contribute to this feeling.  Secondly, jihadism offers people an opportunity to be somebody, and at the same time belong to something bigger than themselves. What is interesting about this threat to the American homeland is that since 9/11, 45 Americans have been killed by Islamic terrorists, but at the same time 48 Americans have been killed by right wing extremists.

(Anwar al-Awlaki, American born Islamic cleric, October 4, 2001)

Bergen examines a wide range of terrorists who originated on American soil drawing on his vast network of sources in the intelligence world.  He argues that most are second generation immigrants who did not start out as observant Muslims.  However, once they became devout they often left their mosques because what was being preached was not radical enough.  In addition, they would congregate with like-minded individuals and bond by watching jihadi videos, and simulate combat by playing “paint-ball.”  Bonding activities are extremely important in creating a jihadist community with an ultra-fundamentalist outlook. Bergen also dispels a number of myths in dealing with his subject by arguing that most of these jihadist had no formal links to outside terror organizations, further most terrorists began their education in a secular environment, not madrassas.  In reviewing their studies it is clear that there is a strong link between their technical education and their terrorist activities, as 50% of them attended college.  Overall, social bonds between jihadists were more important than ideology.

In presenting his thesis Bergen explores the activities of numerous terrorists, many of which are known to those who follow the news.  The individual who takes up more time than any other is the American born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki who was the mentor to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the “underwear bomber” who tried to take down a Northwest Airliner over Detroit Christmas day, 2009.  Awlaki is also linked to Nidal Hassan, the Fort Hood killer and numerous others.  Awlaki stands out as a sophisticated individual who used his American upbringing and cultural knowledge with his social media savvy to recruit jihadist in the United States and eventually was killed by an American drone in Yemen authorized by President Obama which had sparked an intense debate as to whether it was legal for the United States government to assassinate one of its citizens.  Scott Shane’s book explores this controversy in greater detail than Bergen, but the author does a good job summarizing the most salient points in the debate and points out that “t follow the trail of Awlaki’s influence is to trace the post 9-11 evolution in evolving Americans.”  Of the 330 jihadists charged or convicted in the United States, more than 80 had Awlakis writing and sermons in their possession, and another 7 more corresponded with him or traveled to Yemen to meet him.

(Tsarnaev brothers at the Boston Marathon, April, 2013)

Bergen labels these American terrorists as “lone wolves.”  One of these individuals described is Carl Bledsoe, a native of Memphis, TN who was self-radicalized and wound up killing one marine and wounding another at a marine recruiting center in Little Rock, AK on June 1, 2009.  He follows this with an in depth exploration of the motivations and actions of Major Nidal Hassan, a military psychiatrist whose conversion to fundamentalism differed from Bledsoe in that he was already a Muslim.  But their radical journey had many similarities including their gradual isolation from their families, preoccupation with piety, and what was considered to be a true Muslim.  They both embraced Salafist ideas and practices as do most jihadists, and as they looked at US foreign policy they became obsessed with the idea of Jihad to defend Islam.

 
 (November 26, 2008 witnessed a highly detailed terror attack that left an entire nation in shock and nearly 200 people dead in a span of three days.)
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai
The gruesome terror attacks began on 26th November and continued till 29th November, where Indian security services killed 9 out of 10 terrorists and captured Ajmal Amir Kasab, alive to regain control of South Mumbai terror sites i.e. the Leopold Café, the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, the Taj Mahal, the Oberoi & Trident, Cama Hospital and Nariman House.(AP photo)
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai
Mumbai was witnessing one of the worst terrorist attacks in the history of India. Leopold Cafe in Colaba was attacked first when five terrorists opened fire at the cafe.(AFP photo)
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai
The attack left behind indelible scars… bullet marks on the walls and counter; the mirrors broken; doors with holes and a mini-crater on the marbled floor, caused by the grenade attack.(AFP photo)
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai
This was perhaps one of the most heartbreaking scenes for any Mumbaikar. Images tell the story of the barbaric assault by terrorists who held the Taj Mahal hotel to ransom for 58 hours.(AFP photo)
26/11: How terror struck Mumbai

 

Bergen reviews the close calls that have occurred since 9-11 discussing the case of Najibullah Zazi, who along with two others tried to replicate the London underground bombing of 2005 on the New York City subway system.  He was thwarted by the FBI after receiving a tip from the British intelligence.  Another case is that of Faisal Shazad, who drove a bomb laden van into Times Square in Manhattan on May 1, 2010.  Trained by the Pakistani Taliban, the bomb did not explode due to poor components.  The focal point was not any intelligence, but US drones over Pakistan that did not allow for sufficient training.  The key for Bergen is that these individuals fit the profile he discusses which was also accepted by American intelligence analysts.  But in fairness to law enforcement, Bergen points out the difficulties in tracking lone wolves.

(arrest of Najibullah Zazi who attempted to set of a bomb in Times Square, Manhattan on May 1, 2010)

One of the most interesting aspects of the book is how the Obama administration has approached the domestic terror threat.  Soon after the failure of the “underwear bomber” over Detroit, President Obama ordered a vast increase in the use of drones and NSA surveillance programs, the most controversial of which was the bulk collection of American telephone Meta data.  After the Edward Snowden fiasco this program was rolled back and Bergen argues it had little effect on preventing terrorism and traditional approaches to intelligence were more reliable.  Today, Republican presidential candidates describe Obama’s approach to the war on terror as rather feckless, however if one examines his role as commander and chief one sees a continued involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, and a marked increase in the use of drones as compared to the Bush administration.  According to conservative estimates, by the end of 2015 the Obama administration had presided over the killing between 3-4,000 people in drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen. Bergen aptly summarizes his view as Obama dryly remarked, “Turns out I’m really good at killing people.”  Didn’t know that was going to be a strong suit of mine.”  If you are interested in an in depth analysis of Obama administration practices and their legalities consult Charlie Savage’s POWER WARS.

Another important aspect of Bergen’s narrative is the approach taken by American intelligence agencies.  We witness the development of the NYPD’s separate intelligence department that is almost up to par with the CIA and FBI.  We also witness the continued issue of sharing intelligence and acting in concert for the greater good of the American people.  The major change in the FBI’s approach to terrorism after 9/11 would be its transformation from a crime solving organization into entities whose primary mission was to prevent terrorist attacks.  The NYPD’s creation of a separate intelligence component allowed it to pursue a similar approach.  Over the last decade and a half over 15,000 informants have been employed, and numerous sting operations of suspected terrorists designed to root out terror plots, but this has resulted in an increasing number of complaints of entrapment.  In addition, in 2004 the National Counterterrorism Center was created to connect “the dots” between all intelligence agencies.  Bergen provides an astute analysis of American intelligence policies including their concrete successes, ”near misses,” and failures, including a useful chapter on the Tsarnaev brothers who were responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing in April, 2013.

Bergen correctly arguing that the older of the brothers, Tamerlan fit the NYPD terror profile and radicalized his younger brother, Jahar who was extremely secular and Americanized.  The bombing could have been prevented if not for another case of missed signals, and of a lack of communication between U.S. law enforcement agencies.  If FBI allegations are correct, Tamerlan was involved in a triple murder in Waltham, MA in 2011 and was a dangerous killer long before April, 2013; one must ask how did he not appear on the “no-fly list,” particularly after warnings from Russian intelligence in 2011? Tamerlan would fly to Dagestan in the Caucasus and try and join the Union of the Just, an anti-American Islamist group to fight the Russians, as well as attending Salafist mosque.  By his return to the United States in July, 2012 Tamerlan was fully radicalized.  Both Tamerlan and Jahar came to believe that 9/11 was engineered by the US government to create mass hatred of Muslims.   With these beliefs, it is not surprising they carried out their attack.

The rise of ISIS is not explored until the final chapter of the book.  Here Bergen reviews and synthesizes much of the material that has been presented by Joby Warrick, Michael McCants, Jessica Stern, J.M. Berger, Michael Weiss, and Hassan Hassan.  The use of social media and the virtual world has allowed ISIS to be the next generation of al-Qaeda and attract over 30,000 foreign fighters and claim to have established a caliphate, successes that Osama Bin-Laden could never fathom because of his world view.  Bergen dissects American fears of an ISIS attack in the United States, and despite what occurred in San Bernardino he correctly argues that “lone wolf” attacks are a threat, but they are a minimal threat because of the safeguards that have been put in place.  We must realize that we can never be 100% secure and that there always will be a low level threat in the United States for years to come.   But as Bergen shows in his closing argument, presenting the wife of a murdered victim of the Fort Hood massacre, and her support of an organization created by Nidal Hassan’s cousin to foment better understanding and relationships between Muslim and non-Muslim Americans, there are many ways to fight terrorism.  Bergen has written another excellent book that should be read by all who want to try and understand the problems that contribute to the enlistment of jihadists in America and how that has changed our country.

(Boston Marathon Bombing, April, 2013)

FORTUNE’S FOOL: THE LIFE OF JOHN WILKES BOOTH by Terry Alford

szfreiberger American Civil War, Biography Leave a comment

(Lincoln’s assassin, John Wilkes Booth)

Terry Alford’s FORTUNE’S FOOL: THE LIFE OF JOHN WILKES BOOTH is an important contribution to the literature dealing with Lincoln’s assassin, the life he lived, and the reasons behind his actions.  Alford has filled a void by preparing the first full length biography of John Wilkes Booth through the exploration of a vast amount of primary and secondary sources used to correct many of the myths surrounding his subject, and the assassination itself.  Alford provides numerous insights into Booth’s personality, career as an actor, and the evolution of his political views that led to the death of the president.  Alford accomplishes his task by a thoughtful approach to his research material that he successfully integrates into his narrative.  Primary source quotations from family members, friends, stage acquaintances, conspirators, and others abound as Alford takes the reader inside Booth’s mental state at various stages of life and what emerges is a complete picture of his protagonist.

From birth Booth had an albatross around his neck in the name of Junius Brutus Booth, his father.  The senior Booth was one of the most creative actors of his era, and his son had to deal with his father’s successful career to the point that he would not use his own last name for a good part of his own career.  In addition, Junius Brutus was an alcoholic prone to wide mood swings who beat his children, and left child rearing to his wife, Mary Ann. Throughout his life Booth and his friends worried about the effect of alcoholism on his own behavior.  Alford includes numerous quotes relating to this fear, and when Booth abused alcohol, he was prone to violence.  This created a very strong bond between Booth and his mother to the point when the Civil War broke out, despite his strong pro-southern views he refused to join the Confederacy in order to care for his mother.  Alford speculates a great deal about the effect of Booth’s childhood on his later actions particularly being raised in Baltimore and the Maryland countryside.  Though Maryland would be a border state and stayed out of the Confederacy during the Civil War the southern part of the state was a hotbed of pro-southern sentiment, and it was here that Booth attended boarding schools that reflected his “deep southern seasoning.”

The first half of the book is devoted to Booths early years and apprenticeship as a stage actor.  Booth began his acting career in 1857 in Philadelphia and Richmond where he remained until 1860 under the name of J. B. Wilkes.  The early years were difficult as he feared disgrace and failure as he abhorred comparisons to his father.  By 1862 he became a star in his own right and returned to Baltimore.  Alford does an excellent job tracing the evolution of Booth as an actor referencing critic’s reviews and peer reactions to his performances.  During the first three years of his career Booth took on many different roles, mostly small parts in numerous plays in order to refine his craft.  Booth had to overcome the obstacles of a poor memory and general nervousness to achieve success.  Many who knew him felt he was extremely vain and lazy in learning his craft, which created a great deal of difficulty.  As an addendum to Booth’s life story, Alford provides the reader with a useful history of American theater during the 1850s and 60s.  In doing so Alford conveys the difficulties young actors faced and this allows the reader to understand what obstacles Booth had to overcome.  As Booth’s acting career developed a number of things become very clear.  First, his sensitivity to the mixed legacy of his father.  Second, his own battle with alcohol and a fierce temper.  Lastly, his intense southern nationalism.

We first learn of Booth’s political views and attitude toward slavery in November, 1860 when he attends a debate between Alabama Congressman William Yancey and Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas.  At that point in his intellectual development Booth appreciated the defense of states’ rights, but recoiled from the consequences of disunion.  Alford does a credible job tracing Booth’s ideological evolution as he “held views more common to the Upper South than in deepest Dixie.”  He deplored the election of Lincoln because he felt it would tear his beloved union apart.  His unionist views were roundly attacked while he performed during this period in Birmingham, Alabama and this led to an emotional crisis and forced him to leave for New York.  His motto at the time was “concession before secession.”  For Booth the main culprit for all of the nation’s problems were the abolitionists who he felt were as radical as secessionists.  This view would hold for Booth’s entire life as Alford includes his scathing commentary in dealing with the opponents of slavery.  Booth’s viewpoint rested on the belief that the south only wished to tend to its own business and maintain its traditional rights as it held an unassailable moral high ground in the debate.  Booth wrote after Lincoln’s election, “I will not fight for secession.  This union is my mother.  A Mother that I love with unutterable affection.  No, I will not fight for disunion.  But I will fight with all my heart and soul, even if there’s not a man to back me for equal rights and justice to the south.”  Many questioned why Booth did not join the Confederate army.  Alford’s answer is simple in that he viewed his promise to care for his mother as sacred.  This did not stop Booth from fiercely advocating for the southern cause as he traveled widely for his acting career.

(Booth as a member of the 1st Regiment, Virginia Volunteers)

Alford spends a great deal of time analyzing Booth’s character.  He seemed to be a person of extremes.  On the one hand he was mild and somewhat engaging so most people seemed to enjoy and wanted to be in his company, especially women!  But his persona could easily shift to one of nastiness and temper tantrums depending on the situation he found himself.  For Booth fist fights were very common.  The behavioral extremes can be traced to his childhood in dealing with a very dysfunctional family situation.  Most people who knew Booth felt that once he made up his mind it was impossible to change it.  According to Alford, “Booth never had a new thought after his core opinions were formed in his teenage years.”  He was a very close minded individual who was confounded by his inability to let go of his troubles.  He could be the nicest person, but too often his nasty disposition took over.  Booth “did not want to hear what he did not want to,” and developed the ability to rationalize things that did not go as he expected, particularly news that was detrimental to the south during the Civil War.

According to contemporaries, Booth developed into an exceptional actor considering he only spent seven years on stage.  The first three as an apprentice, a year as a fledgling lead, and three years as a star.  Alford dissects his career and concludes that his acting reflected genius and greatness as he performed as Shakespeare’s RICHARD III, Raphael in THE MARBLE HEART, and as Pescaria in THE APOSTATE.   As the New York Times noted, “His Richard is acknowledged to be without a rival on the American stage.”  The turning point for Booth came with the announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation in January, 1863 which confirmed Booth’s worst fears regarding Lincoln and the war.  From this point to May, 1864 when he quit the stage, Booth was in a quandary as what path his life should take.  He believed that his career was hard and lonely work and his success came at a high cost to his mind and body.  He never liked touring and felt he was a slave to the north because more and more he could not express his opinions.  As Lincoln’s reelection grew nearer he decided to break his pledge to his mother as he could tolerate a war that was a stalemate, but with the north on the verge of victory, he had to take action.

Alford spends a great deal of time discussing Booth’s plan to kidnap Lincoln and trade him for southern prisoners of war.  The south suffered from a manpower shortage with 66,000 Confederate troops in northern prison camps.  He believed that if he could capture Lincoln and exchange him for southern prisoners he could change the course of the war.  Alford follows Booth and his conspirators as they plan Lincoln’s capture, delves into the disagreements among Booth’s accomplices, and the final failure of all of his planning.

Any biography of Booth must treat the Lincoln’s assassination in great detail and Alford measures up strongly to others in his coverage.  Booth acted on his own as he developed plans to assassinate Lincoln and never considered acting in concert with the Confederate government as a letter Booth wrote located soon after the assassination attested to.  Booth believed that Lincoln was a tyrant and a dictator and something had to be done.  Alford develops the argument that Booth’s acting roles in Shakespearean plays contributed to his thought pattern in developing his assassination plot.  This is not a far-fetched approach as Booth when on stage had the ability to become the person that he played, including their mindsets.  For Booth in discussing Brutus, “the humanity and high motives of Caesar’s assailant were compelling.  His patriotism and decency were beyond question,” and this may have weighed heavily on Booth’s thought process as did his “terribly earnest and emotional temperament.”  Alford is correct in arguing that Booth was fueled by his ambition to be great and was “fired by guilt over his failure to become a soldier,” and he told friends in Baltimore that “he was going to do something that would bring his name forward in history.”

After the fall of Richmond in early April, 1865 Booth grew more and more depressed.  According to friends he began to drink heavily and grew increasingly irritable, restless, and suffered from wide mood swings.  When Lincoln entered Richmond on April 4th and sat in Jefferson Davis’ chair, Booth was provoked beyond measure.  The news from Appomattox a few days later that Lee had surrendered was the last straw.  Once Lincoln announced that he favored voting rights for Negroes Booth told a friend “that is the last speech he will ever make.”  Alford then follows Booth’s actions until he enters Ford’s Theater and assassinates Lincoln on the 14th.  Alford’s description brings the reader inside Booth’s mental state and it continues as Booth escapes and makes his way into the Virginia countryside.  Alford’s detail is exceptional as Booth is finally seized and shot on April 26th.

Alford brings his narrative to a conclusion with an excellent Epilogue that concentrates on the many myths associated with Booth’s death, and the deification of Abraham Lincoln.  Alford also includes a brief annotated bibliography for those interested.  Overall, Alford has written the definitive biography of Booth and one that historians and Civil War buffs will be consulting for a long time to come.

RADIANT ANGEL by Nelson DeMille

szfreiberger Mystery/Thrillers Leave a comment

No one can ever argue that Nelson DeMille’s novels do not reflect contemporary trends in the world.  At a time when Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to restore Russian prestige and its place on the world stage through his actions over the last ten years in Georgia, the Crimea, Ukraine, and now Syria, DeMille offers a plot line that seems to fit the Kremlin’s current agenda.  DeMille’s latest book in the John Corey series, RADIANT ANGEL begins with a sense of mystery as Colonel Vasily Petrov, formerly of the KGB, now a significant actor in the Russian intelligence service, SVR, attached to the Russian mission to the United Nations, receives a message from his superiors along with a package requested weaponry.  Petrov’s title is Diplomatic Representative of the United Nations for Human Rights Issues, but for former NYPD homicide detective, John Corey, now on disability after being severely wounded, Petrov is the equivalent to a CIA station chief.  Corey’s concern about Petrov’s background is warranted as he was the son of Vladimir Petrov who once head of SMERSH, the assassination arm of the old KGB, and had been implicated in rubbing out a number of Putin’s political opponents.  For example, the British government recently concluded that Putin ordered the assassination of Alexsander Litvinenko, a former FSB secret service agent in 2006.  Litvinenko had accused Putin of staging apartment bombings in Russia to raise the terror scare to facilitate his rise to power.  He further charged that Putin had ordered the assassination of journalist Anna Politkovskaya who was a thorn in Putin’s side.

Corey’s new job is with the Diplomatic Surveillance Group (DSG) as a contract agent is to follow Petrov’s movements around New York.  He is accompanied by Tess Faraday, a lawyer who supposedly hoped to become an FBI agent or was she a CIA or State Department Intelligence agent?   Whatever the case, she was able to keep up with Corey’s sarcasm and sardonic wit!  As they follow Petrov out to the Hamptons, the Russian vehicle turns into the estate of Georgi Tamorov, a billionaire oligarch thus exceeding the twenty five mile radius that Petrov is allowed from the UN.  As Petrov emerges from his car and enters Tamorov’s mansion, Corey grew concerned as to what Petrov was up to, and in addition he wondered who Tess Faraday really was, and what was she hiding.   No matter what was about to occur it is clear that DeMille has taken advantage of the renewal of the Cold War between the United States and Russia to formulate an interesting great power scenario that Corey will find himself in the middle of.

As DeMille develops the story he returns to a theme exhibited in a previous novel, WILDFIRE, the issue of “loose nukes” from the old Soviet Union.  The reemergence in the plot of “suitcase nukes” as a threat to the United States is very real, and this time it involves Putin’s Russia, not the fear of Islamic extremism.  In his current volume, DeMille does not seem to develop his characters as fully as he has done in previous books which detracts a bit from the overall experience.  To DeMille’s credit, the scenario that he develops is not that farfetched in the current world climate and I hope that American intelligence officials have gamed this type of operation against the United States.  What is important in the real world is that DeMille is pointing out how weak security is in American harbors and what tempting targets they are, and how poorly intelligence agencies communicate with each other to the detriment of the American people.

Overall, DeMille has written another successful John Corey adventure and I assume others will follow in the near future.

 

For a note from Nelson DeMille visit my website at http://www.docs-books.com

January 2016
A Note from Nelson DeMille
Radiant Angel
I was just reading a capsule review of 2015. I didn’t realize 2015 was that bad, but when you read about it, the year really sucked. I mean, if 2015 was a movie, it would get, like, half a star. If it was a book, nobody would buy it.

Anyway, Happy New Year. I hope your Holidays were wonderful, including the eight days of Hanukkah. Yes, I said nine days in my last Newsletter, but that was because my nine-year-old said they told him in school that it had changed to nine days. I see a career in politics for him.

Some of my readers were upset about what happened between John Corey and his wife Kate Mayfield in Radiant Angel. Well, things happen. But I can now report that John and Kate are in marriage counseling, and they are working out their problems. John has admitted to being a male chauvinistic pig and a wise ass. Kate has admitted to being a humorless FBI tight-ass. They’re getting in touch with their feelings and making progress, so most likely they will appear together in the next John Corey novel.

My next novel, however, will not feature John Corey. I’m introducing a new male lead character whom I have not yet named. Any suggestions?

The book, too, is unnamed, but it’s set in Key West and Cuba, as I’ve said, and I’m excited about the subject and the setting. When I was in Cuba in November, I made a good contact, code name Lola, who is providing me with inside information about the underground opposition and also advice on investing my money in Cuba. “Lola” says I can buy a cigar factory for ten thousand American dollars which he asked me to send to him via his cousin “Pablo” in Miami. Pablo emailed me a picture of the cigar factory which looks more like a sugar refinery. I have to think about this.

On another subject, my last novel, Radiant Angel, will be issued in trade paperback on January 19. If you haven’t read the hardcover or the eBook, or haven’t listened to the audiobook, maybe it’s time to buy the paperback. No pressure here, but you’d be doing yourself a favor. Trust me.

Thanks for all your suggestions about who should play John Corey and Kate Mayfield in the Corey TV series. They were all good picks, especially from those who said I should play John Corey. I’m available.

January, as we know, is named after the two-faced Roman god Janus who looks forward and backward, which is easy to do if you have two faces. And this brings me to my book The Quest, in which there is a reference to Janus, which leads one of my characters, Vivian, to quote King George VI’s New Year message to the English people in the darkest year of the war.

“I said to the man who stood at the gate of the year, Give me a light that I may tread safely into the unknown. And he replied, Go out into the darkness and put your hand into the hand of God. That shall be to you better than light and safer than a known way.”

My best wishes to you and yours for a happy, healthy, and peaceful New Year.

Sincerely
Nelson DeMille

P.S. Please consider sharing this Newsletter with a friend

 

 

WILDFIRE by Nelson DeMille

szfreiberger Mystery/Thrillers Leave a comment

Wild Fire (John Corey Series #4)

Nelson DeMille’s WILDFIRE continues the raucous adventures and career of former New York Police Department homicide detective John Corey.  DeMille’s latest scenario takes place a year after 9/11 with newspaper and cable news blaring headlines that President Bush is about to launch an invasion of Iraq.  Corey, who retired on disability after being wounded three times is a special contract agent who is attached to the Federal Anti-Terrorist Task Force (ATTF).  The ATTF is an amalgam of FBI agents, NYPD detectives, special agents, Immigration and Custom Enforcement agents, Port Authority detectives, and of course CIA types.  The story begins when special agent and former NYPD detective, Harry Muller is sent on a surveillance mission in upstate New York designed to gather information concerning the Custer Hill Club, or as Muller describes as the “right wing loony lodge.”  While taking photos and observing the membership, Muller is captured and taken inside the club.

Once inside the reader meets Bain Madox, president and owner of the Custer Hill Club and Global Oil Corporation.  Other members of this right wing cabal include Scott Landsdale, a CIA official; General James Hawkins, USAF and a member of the Joint Chiefs; Paul Dunn, a member of the President’s National Security staff; and Edward Wolffer, Deputy Secretary of Defense.  After his seizure, Muller observes an executive board meeting of the Custer Hill Club where he learns of the memberships concern about a possible nuclear attack from a dirty bomb on American soil.  Since the collapse of the Soviet Union a number of these small nuclear devices, referred to as “suitcase nukes,” have been disseminated worldwide.  At the meeting Muller learns of a secret government protocol developed during the Reagan administration called “Wildfire,” a hardwired, meaning the American response to any nuclear attack will happen automatically with no presidential influence.  The response is focused on an Islamic terrorist nuclear attack against the United States that is designed to destroy the Islamic world.  Muller sits in the meeting and wonders if this is a fantasy of the “wacko birds on the right,” or were these men serious.

Since Arab governments were informed of “Wildfire” it was designed to operate like the Cold War concept of mutually assured destruction or MAD, and it provided governments a strong incentive to control any terror plots in their countries.  An added bonus for Madox and company was that any US response would also allow the seizure of Arab oil fields.  Since the likelihood of any nuclear terror attack by Islamic extremists was low, Madox argued that the US should attack two of its own cities which would trigger “Wildfire.”  For Madox this made sense because the US was about to launch an invasion of Iraq and as a Vietnam veteran he argued once war begins one does not know where it will take you.  The Custer Hill Club members developed Project Green, an immediate attack on two US cities that would launch a nuclear response and destroy the Islamic world, negating a need to invade Iraq.  Landsdale believed that Muller was sent to scare the Custer Hill Club into action, ordered by higher ups in the government that were not club members.  The man behind the plot is Ted Nash, a former CIA operative who was supposedly killed in 9/11.  Nash was also an old enemy of John Corey, who with his wife Kate Mayfield, an FBI agent, were committed to solving a murder that would lead them to “Wildfire.”

DeMille scenario is extremely scary.  However, if one thinks about the last fifteen years of American policy in the Middle East is it beyond the pale that someone might have thought of it and possibly kept it on the back burner for the appropriate time.  I am certain that the reader will engender some of these thoughts as they read DeMille’s novel as John Corey and Kate Mayfield are dispatched to locate Harry Muller and they soon confront the possibility of a nuclear holocaust.

DeMille provides his usual sharp and crisp dialogue, enhanced by Corey’s sarcasm and witty comments.  The characters that are created are purely fictional, but DeMille tries to leave some doubt in the reader’s mind that they are 100% fictional.  As usual the conflict and poor communication that existed before 9/11, and probably still exists today between the NYPD, State Police, CIA, and many other agencies is well represented in the plot.  Overall, the conclusion of the story is predictable, but because of DeMille’s talents, WILDFIRE is a good read.

(the site of WILDFIRE)

PLUM ISLAND by Nelson DeMille

szfreiberger Mystery/Thrillers Leave a comment

Plum Island (John Corey Series #1)

For years Nelson DeMille was one of my favorite fiction writers, and for some reason I did not pick up another of his books for a number of years.  After reading an interview with Greg Iles, who mentioned that DeMille was one of his favorite writers, I decided to revisit his work.  While perusing my bookshelves I noticed that there were three John Corey novels that I had never read so I immediately took the plunge and opened PLUM ISLAND.

After the recent Ebola crisis in Africa that resulted in a few cases of the disease in the United States my choice of PLUM ISLAND was rather timely.  The title of the book was the location and name of an animal disease center research facility on the tip of Long Island.  The center becomes a focal point for a murder investigation involving New York police detective, John Corey.  Corey, recovering from three bullet wounds suffered six months earlier is sitting on his uncle’s porch convalescing peering out into the Long Island Sound.  Corey, a rather sarcastic and humorous individual is approached by Sylvester Maxwell the Chief of Police in Southold Township in Suffolk County, who asks for his assistance with the murder of two Ph.D. biologists who conducted biological research on Plum Island, Drs. Tom and Judy Gordon.  Plum Island is part of the Department of Agriculture and theoretically conducts research to prevent disease and pandemics.  For Corey, their job description lies under the heading of “biological germ warfare.”  Corey is paired with a local homicide detective, Elizabeth Penrose and must navigate the bureaucratic jealousies of the CIA, FBI and possible other government agencies represented by FBI agent, George Foster, and the supposed Department of Agriculture operative, Ted Nash.

The question from the outset is why these two young research scientists were killed?  Was it a burglary gone wrong?  Was it a drug deal of some sort or possibly something else?  After a visit and tour of the Plum Island facilities, a visit sanitized by the federal government, another possibility emerges.  Dr. Karl Zollner, the head of the research facility tries to convince everyone that it was impossible for any dangerous pathogens to have left the island and he introduces the idea that if any substance had left the island it was probably a preventative drug that was designed to stop the spread of a pandemic.  The Gordons were working on genetically altering a simian Ebola virus so that it could not cause disease, but would produce an immune response in animals.  The scenario that Zollner put forth is that the murdered couple may have tried to sell their research to a pharmaceutical company for money.   Corey is not convinced by this explanation and believes that it is a government “line” designed to alter the truth.

As Corey proceeds in trying to solve the murder, avoid government interference and other obstacles his patter is caustic, pointed, and always humorous.  The more Corey thought about the murders he grew convinced it was some sort of conspiracy and was being covered up.  The question was what was hidden and how he could solve the murders.  From this point DeMille has gained the reader’s attention and the novel becomes intriguing.  DeMille’s character descriptions and pithy dialogue is very entertaining.  Corey’s relationships allow the reader a glimpse into his personality and perhaps the persona that he shows the public hides numerous insecurities.  As far as the plot is concerned, the reader is led down a number of paths and then all of a sudden Corey’s intuition changes and the storyline shifts dramatically.  DeMille does a nice job introducing the different personalities in the book and his comments on “eastern Long island society” seem dead on.  The story evolves at a measured pace, and the reader will be surprised by the number of twists and turns it takes.

Overall, PLUM ISLAND measures up to DeMille’s previous efforts be it a John Corey novel, writing about Vietnam or the myriad of topics he has produced.  It is a good read and I look forward to tackling another John Corey novel next.

THE BONE TREE by Greg Iles

szfreiberger Historical Fiction, Mystery/Thrillers Leave a comment

The Bone Tree (Penn Cage Series #5)

Greg Iles begins his latest novel in his Penn Cage trilogy by reintroducing the term “The Bone Tree,” which forms a very important component of his story of the same name.  According to Iles, the Bone Trees’ location was the dumping site of a radical KKK offshoot from the 1960s called the “Double Eagles,” where they deposited the bodies of their victims.  Historically, it may have formed a killing ground that dated to the pre-Columbian years of the Natchez Indians.

The novel itself begins where, NATCHEZ BURNING, Iles’ previous effort ended with Penn Cage, the mayor of Natchez, MS and a former Houston prosecutor lamenting his decisions that led to the death of Henry Sexton, a journalist who spent decades investigating the deaths of 12 civil rights murders from the 1960s, and Sleepy Johnson, who had witnessed two of those murders and the fire that destroyed all of Sexton’s evidence.  Cage suffers from extreme guilt that he allowed his father, Dr. Tom Cage’s disappearance cloud his judgement, as his father had been accused of murdering his former nurse as well as a Louisiana State trooper, in addition to jumping bail.  With an all-points bulletin with a shoot to kill order facing his father, Penn Cage must figure out how to save his father from himself in an environment of political and legal corruption that dominates the state of Louisiana at all levels.  When an author prepares to write a trilogy they expect that each volume can stand alone.  In this case, despite the fact that Iles’ provides a great deal of background to link the novel with its predecessor, it might prove difficult for the reader to understand certain components of the story without reading the previous book.

Dr. Tom Cage is resigned to his own death.  With a severe heart condition, accused of two murders, on the run for jumping bail, with assassins after him, he has given up until he receives a text from his future daughter-in-law Caitlin Masters.  Masters, the editor of the Natchez Examiner informs Cage that she is pregnant and he realizes that he now has something to live for, another grandchild and possibly a name sake.  At the age of 73 he see himself anew as the patriarch of a larger family.  Having escaped the assassination by two thugs, Tom’s dilemma is what should be his next course of action.  Iles’ novel has many subplots and one of them is how Tom will navigate his situation.  Another is how his son Cage, and Masters will handle events particularly the remnants of violence and corruption existing in Louisiana in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina despite the death of Brody Royal, the perceived puppet mastering murderer from NATCHEZ BURNING.

We learn that the true source of lawlessness in the state aside from the greedy real estate developers, bankers, and politicians whose vision is to rebuild New Orleans in their own image by forcing out blacks from neighborhoods and ethnically cleansing the city in order to make millions of dollars, are elements in the Louisiana State Police (LSP). To achieve their goal they need to control the New Orleans Police Department, employing Forrest Knox, second in command of the LSP, as an ally.  Forrest Knox is the head of the Knox family crime organization who are at the center of the Double Eagle faction, and is involved in a statewide meth operation along with an army of avaricious politicians and hungry police officers that have allowed him to build a criminal network with unrivaled reach and power in the southern part of Louisiana.  As a Lt. Colonel in the Louisiana State Police Knox has tremendous influence on events, but as Head of the Louisiana State Police he would become totally insulated from any legal problems from the FBI or other agencies.  As he tries to achieve his goal by destroying his superior officer the novel becomes a fast ride for the reader as the different threads that Iles has created come together.

One of the threads involves the jurisdictional differences that exist between the FBI, state and county law enforcement.  Each has its own agenda and conflicting interests, for example, John Kaiser, the FBI Special Agent’s investigation of possible links between Tom Cage, the Double Eagles, Carlos Marcello, and the Kennedy assassination permeate the novel.  For Penn Cage and Concordia Parish Sheriff Walker Dennis solving the civil rights murders by bringing down Forrest Knox and the Double Eagles, and exonerating Tom Cage is paramount. The reader is also privy to the inner working of the Knox family operation that includes County Sheriff Billy Knox, and a murdering psychopath, Snake Knox, in addition to the Lt. Colonel in the Louisiana State Police. Each agenda is intertwined with each other, and Iles does a masterful job in creating a constantly evolving scenario that keeps the reader mesmerized.

The book exposes the reader to a great deal of violence, betrayal, menace and at times is very intense.  Despite the fact its genre is crime fiction it does an exceptional job highlighting many aspects of human behavior, especially the tragedy of race relations that dominates our history.  THE BONE TREE also exemplifies the role that the past plays in our lives and how difficult it is to escape its tentacles.  The book is illustrative of a line by William Faulkner: “The past is never dead.  It’s not even past.”  (Washington Post, May 11, 2015)  Iles’ work is illustrative of this theme and to his credit he has created an evocative story that will cause the reader to look forward to the concluding volume of his massive trilogy which is due out later this year or early 2017.

What follows is a great interview conducted by the Christian Science Monitor and Greg Iles in April, 2015.

‘Natchez Burning’ author Greg Iles discusses ‘The Bone Tree,’ the twist-filled sequel

Iles’s new book, ‘The Bone Tree,’ includes an investigation into the JFK assassination. ‘If Oswald did not act alone, then I would say there’s a 95% chance that a conspiracy of the size and type that I laid out in this book is the most likely thing to have happened,’ Iles says.

By Erik Spanberg APRIL 21, 2015

 

Greg Iles calls himself a 20-year overnight success story. This despite the fact that his first book, published in 1993, hit The New York Times best-seller list.

Iles mentions the possibility of overnight success while discussing a soon-to-be-announced cable TV adaptation of his 2014 epic novel, “Natchez Burning.” He promises a series or miniseries with the production quality of “True Detective” or “Game of Thrones.” Until all the contracts are signed, though, he is forbidden from disclosing which network is buying the rights.

“Natchez Burning,” published last spring, spanned 800 pages and blended the pulse-pounding machinations of a thriller with Southern Gothic elements while dazzling the likes of Ken Follett and Stephen King. AARP Magazine described the atmospherics and narrative as a mash-up of William Faulkner and Stieg Larsson. Most of all, “Natchez Burning” left readers desperate to know what happens next in the lengthy tale of violence, corruption, and racial strife.

Recommended: Whosolvedit? Take our famous literary detectives quiz!

Now comes “The Bone Tree,” the second book in Iles’s trilogy. The novel picks up where the last one left off but veers off in the direction of constant action and twists and turns without answering one of the central questions posed in the earlier book.

TEST YOUR KNOWLEDGE Whosolvedit? Take our famous literary detectives quiz!

PHOTOS OF THE DAY Photos of the weekend

Instead, Penn Cage, the mayor of Natchez, Mississippi, and Iles’s main character (Penn happens to be both an author and former prosecutor), spends much of his time trying to find his father, a small-town doctor accused of murder, and sorting out whether his family played a role in the death of President Kennedy at Dealey Plaza.

At the same time, conspiracies involving New Orleans mobsters, rogue CIA operatives, and other nasty characters thwart Penn as he teams with crusading reporters and a hell-bent FBI agent in an attempt to solve a string of cold cases from the Civil Rights era.

Late next year or in early 2017, Iles will publish the last book in the trilogy. Whether Penn can save his hometown and his shattered family is one of several prominent questions left to be resolved in the final book.

Penn Cage starred in several stand-alone novels before Iles was in a near-fatal car wreck four years ago in his hometown of Natchez. Doctors kept Iles in a medical coma for eight days after the crash and his injuries included a torn aorta and the loss of his right leg below the knee.

He still struggles with rehab, but his writing career is on a roll. And he remains a member of The Rock Bottom Remainders, a literary garage band featuring Amy Tan, Dave Barry, Stephen King, and Scott Turow, among others.

Iles was the singer and guitarist in his own rock band, Franky Scarlet, after graduating from Ole Miss in 1983. Later, he ditched rock and roll for a career in thrillers, a path similar to the one taken by Norwegian thriller writer Jo Nesbo.

Before setting off on a book tour, Iles spoke to the Monitor about chasing the ghosts of JFK and Civil Rights victims as well as what’s ahead for the self-proclaimed overnight sensation. Excerpts from our conversation are below.

On his interest in President Kennedy’s assassination:

I really wasn’t [intending to go there] and I’ll tell you what’s funny. There’s a guy who interviewed me for Publishers Weekly [Lenny Picker in 2013]. They did a thing on the 50th anniversary [of the assassination and the fiction and nonfiction books around JFK’s death]. And this guy’s going to kill me. Because he called me and he quoted me a couple of times in the article, but I kept telling him, ‘Look, these books really are not about the Kennedy assassination. I’m really not going there.’

And, then, while re-writing the next book, I found myself doing that [laughs]. I felt so guilty. I thought, this guy is going to think I was lying to him. It’s just that the more I sort of slid southward towards New Orleans and found out more about the [Louisiana crime boss Carlos] Marcello stuff, the more I just couldn’t resist it.

On how much he blends fact and fiction in his depiction of November 1963:

In a general way, I would say that the basic thesis of what I’m putting forth is, if Oswald did not act alone, then I would say there’s a 95% chance that a conspiracy of the size and type that I laid out in this book is the most likely thing to have happened. The fact is that none of these grand conspiracy theories are really even possible.

If you really boil away all the sensationalism and you say what really could have happened and who truly had a motive to kill him, you’re left with a pretty small group of people.

I don’t want to get too much into saying things about the Marcellos or people like that, but I think the points in the book are very well taken, which is we tend to look at the killing of a president as this massive thing of epic proportion. Whereas the guys who had that kind of power and especially at that time, when the kind of scrutiny that exists now did not exist, I think guys like that would not at all have been intimidated taking that kind of action.

Especially since they were embedded in the process to try to assassinate [Cuban dictator Fidel] Castro [before Kennedy was killed]. I think all those things facilitated toward making the killing of a president a mundane thing. I guess what I’m saying is I think [a conspiracy like the one detailed in “The Bone Tree”] could’ve happened. I’m not saying it did happen, but it surely could have, and it’s far more plausible than most of the things [people have suggested].

On why he decided to write a trilogy:

The real sort of Paul-on-the-road-to-Damascus moment with this trilogy came four years ago when I was almost killed on Highway 61 and was in a coma and everything. It happened at a point where I had realized the book had grown beyond the bounds of a single book and that the first book, there was no way it could stand alone, nor could the second stand alone and I was about to have to break all the rules of mainstream fiction.

My publisher was trying to adapt that, they weren’t real happy with it. And that was the process I was in when I got hit by a truck and nearly died. So when I came out of that, I just really no longer gave a damn what the rules were, what the publisher thought or whether it sold. At that point, I said, you know, I’m writing about Mississippi and Louisiana, I’m writing about my family, I’m writing about race and the South and America. When you’re going to do that for real, you can’t worry who gets mad or who doesn’t think it fits in a box. So I just threw away the rule book.

On writers he admires:

I’m one of the main speakers at [a festival] in New York in July. I’ve never met a guy who I always idolized [when I was] a young writer in my career and that’s Nelson DeMille. DeMille’s early work especially. [Now] I’m actually going to get to meet him.

[A few weeks ago] I got to meet Pat Conroy and that was just one of those bucket-list moments. We just talked and we just bonded instantly and we talked on the phone subsequently. Those are some of the little joys you find.

On his main character:

A lot of people have always asked, is Penn Cage me? And I say no. There’s an early character in an earlier novel, “Mortal Fear,” that’s closer to me. Penn sort of began as a Grisham-esque character. He’s an attorney and kind of a noble guy and almost too good to be true. I never set out to write a series at all, but about every seven years, he would come back to me. Before I knew it, there were three [Penn Cage] books and “Natchez Burning’ turned into [a trilogy]. Penn tends to be an observer more than an action hero, but I think in “Natchez Burning,” even though he starts that way, because of the destruction of the image of his father makes him question everything, I think now we’re dealing with a Penn who no longer has his feet on the ground. That’s an exciting thing for the reader.

On “The Bone Tree”:

As the middle book, it had always been sort of a more conventional thriller and made more concessions to genre. I went back and thought, I really don’t want to do that. Because the third book, the conclusion, is better than “Natchez Burning,” that’s how good it is. And the second book I felt like, OK, it’s a good book, but it’s a more conventional thriller and “Natchez Burning” deserves more than that. So that’s why it took a while: I went back and really re-wrote that book.

A lot of the stuff in these books are very close to reality. This isn’t just made-up stuff. [A former New Orleans and Natchez police officer Iles knew] had either a copy or office notes of the entire Jim Garrison Kennedy investigation in his possession over in Ferriday, Louisiana. There are a lot of weird things that went on.

The Bone Tree (Penn Cage Series #5)