Burnett Books

Superb in all ways, writing, research, readability, construction, cohesiveness. Superb. What more is there to say?

it was a good read but it wasn't as disturbing or as interesting as deranged. i would still read it though , it's really well written

I too bought this book after having found out about H.H. Holmes from reading Erik Larson's The Devil In the White City. I read a lot of true crime books and had never heard of him before, so I had to find out more and I think this book did a really great job in describing his crimes without glorifying them.

Harold Schrecter had a way of keeping me interested even during some parts that could have been very tedious with all of the details, but then I think details are important in cases where you are trying to understand how someone could commit such terrible crimes especially over 120 years ago.

A must read for anyone into true crime and anyone who is a fan of Edgar Allen Poe, since the types of crimes this man actually committed belong in one of his tales of fiction.

I read this book a couple years ago, so I can't remember enough about the writing style to comment on it, but as far as I recall it was well written and certainly informative.

What makes me compelled to write a review, is due to the subject matter. Not to downplay such infamous murderers as Ted Bundy or Ed Gein, but Holmes is in a league all his own. This guy had the most elaborate schemes to kill people that I've ever heard of, and he did it in high volume. We're talking potentially (unverified) in the range of 240, or so, people!! He was a true psychopath in every sense of the word, and you really need to read this book, or the other one mentioned, about H.H.Holmes. What you THOUGHT was the worst and most unbelievable horror story you've ever heard, will seem tame in comparison.

Like most people, I had just finished reading "Devil in the White City" and was interested in learning more about the infamous H.H.Holmes. "Depraved" was a good supplement and follow-up to "Devil", and comparing the coverage of the common material was interesting. "Depraved" very often went into more detail, particularly of the post-World'sFair period and Holmes' trial, but I somehow came away feeling like I got a more personal insight into Holmes' personality from "Devil" rather than "Depraved"; I'm not particularly sure why.

"Depraved" is certainly a worthwhile and easy read (if just a tad on the long side), particularly if you're interested in the fascinating H.H.Holmes or crime histories.

Another winner by Jack Du Brul.
Lost quite a bit of sleep as I could not put it down.
The mix of old KGB and present Arab caracter is well though of and
there is never a dull moment in the whole book
The usual addition of romance is also made with good taste and Aggie is
smart enough to help Philip Mercer get out of a very bad situation.
Nice ending too.
Highly recommended

Guy Dombrowski

I'll say this about books - they do have a certain appeal that is more far reaching than movies or television.

With a novel, you can tell a very long story - something that would take an actual mini-series or full blown series for television, and for the most part, certainly wouldn't cut it on the big screen. You just wouldn't be able to tell the entire story in the typical two to three hours time you have for a major motion picture.

And, to top it off, the reader is able to picture the main characters, locations and so forth in his or her mind. They have an idea how things will look.

Quite often, when a book is translated into a different media, such as television or a movie, the reader can sometimes be disappointed by the person chosen for the role of a certain character, or the way a location, piece of technology, etc. happens to appear.

Plus, the biggest advantage of a novel is that it is only limited to the authors, and thus the readers imagination.

A novel can be very complex, have a twisted plot that seems, at first, to be difficult to follow, and many details can seem totally random until they're fully brought into the light.

Movies and television can do this as well, but many times subtle nuances can be missed or entirely lost.

The thing that I really enjoy about the novels written by Jack Du Brul is that they're not limited to a movie or the television. If they were, they'd lose a great deal.

His novels are powerfully written adventures, with far larger than life characters and situations that totally boggle the mind.

And, they're complex... the plots often cover entire decades; take a literal lifetime to come to into play.

Oh, and lets not forget that the ramifications that are introduced will quite literally change the face of the world as we know it.

I have to admit that for many years most of the adventure novels I've read have been pulp - mainly men's adventure.

It wasn't until around the turn of the millennium that I finally discovered that there were more to adventure novels than Mack Bolan, Deathlands, and others of their ilk.

Authors like James Rollins, Preston and Child, Clive Cussler, just to name a handful. These authors helped me learn that there was far more to adventure than generic terrorists, non stop gun battles, fake chest hair and trashy women - you know the kind of things that you typically saw in the long running men's adventure novels.

And I am very glad.

Oh, sure, these elements exist in the works by the authors I mentioned, and let's face it, you kind of need these aspects in order to have a good adventure novel, but they're usually not as exaggerated as one would expect.

Charon's Landing deals with an old plot set up by the soviets during the cold war in order to cripple the American's supply of oil.

I can't give away too much as it would ruin the novel for anyone who wants to read it. In fact, what I just said is a pretty major spoiler in on itself, but not enough to ruin it for anyone. After all, the novel is a hefty four hundred plus pages.

Jack Du Brul's hero, Phillip Mercer, once again gets involved in a global spanning plot. An old enemy, having disappeared a year before, re-surfaces once again to try and enact this old cold war plan and to get revenge on Mercer.

I'll admit, I still find it rather difficult to believe that a geologist can be a hero, one that has skills that would put professional soldiers to shame.

But, then again, who'd have thought that an archaeologist would have gained such fame - and you know very well who I'm talking about.

So, because of this, I can set aside my sceptic views and enjoy the novel.

One thing I have to point out - there are characters that are introduced in the novel that are not what they seem at first. I won't mention any names, but at the beginning of the novel there were two, count them - two characters I thought would turn out to be adversaries going up against Mercer.

I was wrong.

And I love that! The sign of a great writer in my view.

Oh, and if you want location, the novel spans from Washington to Alaska, and even to the Middle East. One of the things I consider integral to a good novel - location, location, location!

Clive Cussler wasn't kidding when he said that Jack Du Brul is a master adventure writer. His books are really worth picking up and reading.

5 out of 5

There is no Amazon rating between 4-star and 5-star, but I would actually give this book a 4.5-star (close to perfect). This is the first book I've read of Jack Du Brul's, but it definitely will not be the last. Just excellently written: Believable and compelling characters written into a complex, multi-threaded story that keeps you turning those pages just as fast as you can digest them. A MASTER THRILLER!!

As others have said, the book is just too long. I enjoyed the arctic setting and the introduction of new characters like the Petroleum Minister of the UAE. I also enjoy the character of Mercer who shows a new side in his interactions with Aggie in this book. Unfortunately, the constant pacing is choppy and this leads to the book being slow. Major disasters are not averted and instead of dealing with the consequences, the characters just jump to the next attack. Even the cover is a letdown as it shows a huge oil rig (which I think would make a cool setting) that only appears in one small part of the book.
If you want to read DuBrul, I recommend The Medusa Stone or Pandora's Curse, unless you have a lot of time to spend on this one.

In a bold move the President of the United States decides to end America's dependance on foriegn oil. He plans to develop renewable energy and develop Alaska's oil reserves. He is going to open up the Artic Wildlife Refuge. America will at last have their own energy supply. Forces
in the Middle East have other plans. An oil minister Hassan bin-Rufti hires a former KGB colonel to implement an old KBG plan valled Charon's
landing. This would destroy the Alaska pipeline. There are other plans for
the KGB colonel(Ivan Kerikov) to implement. Rufti also wants to kill the United Arab Emirates oil minister Prince Khalid Al-Khuddari. Rufti also has a plan to dominate the Middle East. Kerikov joins forces with PEAL(Planetary Enviroment Action League) to do the damage on the Alaska pipeline. It is up to out hero Dr. Philip Mercer to stop this worldwide
conspiracy. Mercer has his hands full. A very entertaining read.

The year was 1969, and New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison was preparing to make history. The often criticized Garrison had arrested local/international businessman Clay Shaw in conspiring to assassinate the President of The United States, John F. Kennedy. Garrison would accuse Shaw of Conspiring primarily with the CIA, to overthrow the Kennedy regime so that the Military/Industrial Complex could invade and overthrow Cuba and start a war in Southeast Asia. A mere three days after President Kennedy had been gunned down, the new President (Lyndon Baines Johnson) signed National Security Action Memo 273, which reversed Kennedy's withdrawl plans from Viet Nam and escalated the conflict, which eventually led to what is now known as the Viet Nam War. This outline is the backdrop for Garrison's book.

As is well-known, "On The Trail Of The Assassins" was one of two books credited in creating the motion picture and Academy Award Nominated Movie: JFK (along with Jim Marr's fine book "Crossfire"; please see my review of that book too!). So if you're looking for an exact duplication of the movie, you'll be pleasantly surprised to find that Garrison goes into much more detail and background then even the three-hour movie-thriller could provide. The one drawback and criticism that I have of the movie, the book, and of Garrison himself, was the lack of detailed information surrounding Jack Ruby's connections and associates who may have assisted the CIA in murdering the President. There are very few investigators these days who would rebuke Garrison on suggesting that the intelligence community within the United States orchestrated and carried out the murder of our 35th President. However, without even mentioning Ruby's role, even if it was only in taking orders from our government, Garrison undermines his own investigation and therefore this otherwise excellent book.

In closing, this is an extremely well written book, with lots of behind-the-scenes info that only a very few were privy to. Garrison is an excellent writer, and more importantly, was most likely correct in almost all aspects of the conspiracy. If this book is not in your own personal library, then most likely you're not fully aware of all the nuances of this case. This book is a must read!

Jim Garrison's book "On The Trail Of The Assassins" was one of two books used as the basis for Oliver Stone's movie "JFK" (the other was Kim Marrs' "Crossfire"). On that basis alone, highly recommended (for it led to the JFK Act and the ARRB). That said, this is a very good but not a great book. I would put James DiEugenio's book ON Garrison ahead of this one. Still, a good "read" with some good moments.
Vince Palamara

Now, maybe some people aren't interested in Mr. Garrison's point of view - but I am. And so are many others who repeatedly give On The Trail Of The Assassins a deservedly high mark. He was there in New Orleans and KNEW PERSONALLY most of the major players. How many investigators can say that? His overall conclusion of conspiracy is the same as many, many other independent researchers and the conclusion of 80 percent of the general public (Bugliosi be damned), only he was way ahead of his time. Had he known nothing of the truth surrounding the assassination, the CIA would never have bothered to smear his character or try ruin his investigation of JFK's murder by stealing his files for the trial of Clay Shaw. And yet it is Garrison who is accused of not playing fair. That's right... black is white, and white is black.

This book is one of my favorites in the assassination canon. It is brilliantly written, soulful, human, and full of observations about gov't and how it sometimes changes without the people being invited to the party. He knew of Oswald (murdered by Ruby), Ferrie ("suicide"), Bannister ("heart attack" in 1964) and Shaw (no autopsy ever done) - and had most of them not died under conspicuously strange circumstances, Garrison would never have been placed in the position of being the Lone-Nut scape goat for their lack of honesty and insight into this murder investigation - an investigation that is still continuing, though with little help from some of the people who should have known better after all these years.

Garrison's investigation and the trial of Clay Shaw were the inevitable result of the corrupt Warren Commission cover-up. Had the Warren Commission done its job and followed up leads in the first place, Garrison would never have ended up in the position of being the whipping boy for the Oswald as Lone-nut contingent. It was only through the efforts of Garrison that the Zapruder film ("back... and to the left") was viewed for the first time and the public began to see how dishonest the Warren Commision and the CIA were in lying to the American people about at least one more shooter.

Recent revelations about secret CIA assassinations plots can no longer be denied and now are out in the open in recent news events. It's your country. You might think of the 40-year tailspin the country has been in since our president was killed and the efforts of private citizens who've tried to expose the CIA skullduggery during the Kennedy years and beyond. Garrison took on these covert agencies in the name of justice, and had not Clay Shaw lied his head off under oath during his trial, it's conceivable that Garrison would have won and Shaw end up on a chain-gang where he belonged. In a conversation with Oliver Stone, Judge Haggarty, who presided over the Shaw trial, said that he himself never believed a word Shaw said. (This is discussed on the JFK special features dvd.)

The people of the country know all too well that Oswald didn't act alone - that is, if he shot anyone at all - and they're not about to let this conspiracy investigation end until the Federal gov't comes clean with what it knows. Every year more is being found out about certain participants, such as H. Howard Hunt's involvement, or David Morales, who was quoted as saying he was involved with the assassination of both JFK and RFK. Such revelations further vindicate Garrision's conclusion that the CIA was involved in the murder of Kennedy. Hunt and Morales (a man Hunt mentions) were both CIA. Gee, there seems to be a pattern here unless one has been playing ostrich with these recent CIA revelations.

In the meantime, those who continue to smear Garrison are only making themselves small in comparison. They're not worthy to shine the shoes of this great man - a hero in every sense of the word in this sordid tale of political corruption, murder and media cover-up. Ten stars for On The Trail Of The Assassins and Jim Garrision. ZERO stars for the now documented CIA interference of Garrison's investigation and the perjury on the witness-stand of Clay Shaw. Even certain pro-conspiracy researchers wrongly denegrate Garrison and they should be ashamed of themselves now that Garrison's conclusions are being vindicated. They haven't half the courage of a Garrison, and no one other than he and Mark Lane have ever had the balls to take any of these arrogant, politically criminal jerks to trial (H. Howard Hunt by Lane) for lying about their complicity in the murder and cover-up of Kennedy's assassination. And I'm not the only citizen who feels this way. For more information on the coup d'etat in Dallas, read District Attorney Garrison's revealing book and witness courage under fire.... Grow up, America.

I avoided reading this book when it was first published thinking it was but a mere rehash of Garrison's earlier book "A Heritage of Stone." However, thirty years on, I have pleasantly discovered that I was greatly mistaken. "On the Trail of the Assassins" is not a rehash, but stands quite sufficiently on its own.

More than anything else, it is first a devastating critique of the Warren Commission's Report; perhaps the best there is so far. Second, it is written by a first-class legal mind. And whatever else one might say about Jim Garrison, it is difficult to ignore the fact that he has one of the best legal minds in this nation. Third, it is a summary report of the Garrison investigation, which again, it is difficult to ignore that Garrison, on a shoe string budget, and with a handful of mostly volunteers, did a much better job investigating the JFK assassination than all of the nation's institutional police and intelligence machinery combined. And finally, the book is Garrison's own defense of the case he lost against the only man ever to be charged with JFK's assassination, Clay Shaw.

As a critique, Garrison attacks the slipshod way in which federal and Texas investigations pursued (or failed to pursue) the evidence and suspects -- other than the "carefully prepared patsy" Lee Harvey Oswald. Among these ways is the fact that Oswald was interrogated for more than 30 hours without a transcript; that the three tramps found in the rail car a few feet from the grassy knoll were released without even recording their names; and the general lack of curiosity on the part of the FBI and Dallas police authorities in following leads, protecting evidence, and in interrogating witnesses.

Garrison's legal astuteness is on display in a number of ways in the book: in the way he corralled information from informants; the way he collated and peeled back his evidence to attain maximum courtroom effect; the way he shaped theories based on where the evidence led; and in the way he parried defense moves and the counter-moves against him made generally by the federal authorities, who curiously always viewed him as a threat and hindrance to their limp but "predetermined" investigation.

With only a handful of investigators, researchers and contributors, Garrison fell just short of cracking the crime of the century. One must wonder out loud what would have happened if, instead of trying to derail and undermine his investigation, the government would have supported him?

It seemed clear even to Garrison, that his case against Clay Shaw was a lost cause even before he entered the courtroom. However, if one looks carefully at the theoretical framework Garrison constructed, in which Shaw was just one of a number of important elements, it is clear that Garrison was on the right track; and that Shaw's acquittal was more about the lack of witnesses to confirm Garrison's evidence, than it was about Shaw's guilt or innocence. That is why after forty years, a great deal, if not all of Garrison's theory has been borne out.

.Whether you believe Garrison's theories or not, this book is a report on investigative, legal, and police work of a very high order. Five Stars.

The late Jim Garrison's book "On The Trail Of The Assassins" was in large part the basis for Oliver Stone's 1991 motion picture "JFK", which is a film containing so many lies, half-truths, and misrepresentations of the facts surrounding John F. Kennedy's 1963 assassination, it's literally difficult to keep up with all of them.

I cannot watch one single scene of Oliver Stone's film without finding some distortion of the evidence in the real JFK or J.D. Tippit murder cases. Some are small things being distorted; and some are great big ones. One example (among dozens) being: Oliver Stone's version of shoe clerk Johnny Brewer's testimony re. Lee Harvey Oswald's manner of dress when Brewer encountered Oswald shortly after Oswald had shot and killed policeman Tippit.

Stone, in his film, has Oswald (Gary Oldman) wearing a jacket as he enters the Texas Theater and is seen by Brewer....and in one of the movie's "Deleted Scenes" (on the DVD version of the film), Kevin Costner (playing Garrison) even does a voice-over (lie) re. Brewer's testimony, with Costner saying "Brewer said the man was wearing a jacket".

Brewer, in reality, said exactly the opposite during his Warren Commission testimony:

Mr. BELIN -- "Will you describe the man you saw?"
Mr. BREWER -- "He was a little man, about 5'9", and weighed about 150 pounds is all. ... And had brown hair. He had a brown sports shirt on. His shirt tail was out."
Mr. BELIN -- "Any jacket?"
Mr. BREWER -- "No."

Another interesting part of the Tippit portion of the movie "JFK" is Oliver Stone's Audio Commentary during this part of the film, which is riddled with inaccuracies. Stone has the audacity to spout the following lie re. the Tippit shooting on the DVD's Commentary soundtrack:

"Not one credible witness has really identified Oswald as a single shooter {of Officer Tippit}. In fact, the only significant testimony applies two to three shooters." -- O. Stone

Therefore, per Mr. Stone (and Garrison said pretty much the same thing years earlier), the "only credible" witness must have been Acquilla Clemmons, who, as far as I am aware, was THE ONLY witness who ever said there was more than one person involved in the Tippit slaying.

Stone, like Jim Garrison before him, would simply rather believe his OWN version of events, rather than the multiple witnesses who never saw more than one shooter (with that one single shooter being positively identified as Oswald by said witnesses).

It's interesting, indeed, that Stone thinks the "only significant testimony" re. the Tippit crime came from Clemmons. Whereas, people like Markham, Tatum, and Scoggins (who were all closer than Clemmons to the scene of the murder) are deemed less "significant", merely, no doubt, because they don't fit into Stone's (or Garrison's) "CT Landscape" surrounding the murder.

I wonder if people realize just how many outright lies are contained in Oliver Stone's 3-hour, 15-minute motion picture? The number is simply staggering. And that number of distortions is increased considerably on the DVD version of the film, when the Audio Commentary Track by Mr. Stone and all of the "Deleted and Extended Scenes" are included as well.

And a great deal of this deliberate misinformation put forth on the movie screen came directly out of this book authored by Jim Garrison.

Another great place to see more of Mr. Garrison's skewed views of the JFK case is to read Garrison's 1967 "Playboy Magazine" interview. Like Stone's movie, that Playboy article will keep you busy as you try to keep up with the inaccurate things Garrison keeps saying in that lengthy piece. The whole interview can be read here:

www.jfklancer.com/Garrison2.html


Selected examples of Mr. Garrison's paranoia and loony-toon conspiracy talk, taken from that Playboy interview, are provided via the quotes below. My own rebuttal arguments follow each quote:


"Though he {Oswald} may not have known why he was instructed to do so, this was undoubtedly why he got the job at the Texas School Book Depository Building. The conspirators knew this would place him on the scene and convince the world that a demented Marxist was the real assassin." -- Jim Garrison; 1967

The above Garrison gem totally distorts (or just flat-out ignores) the true and documented facts about how Oswald got his job at the Depository in mid-October of '63. It was suburban Dallas housewives Linnie Mae Randle and Ruth Paine who were directly responsible for placing Lee Harvey Oswald in the TSBD, by way of ordinary garden-variety happenstance.

Garrison must, therefore, believe that Mrs. Paine, who arranged Oswald's job interview with Depository boss Roy Truly, was one of the main "conspirators" who was setting up Oswald to take the fall for JFK's murder the following month (which would also have to mean that Paine had detailed knowledge of the President's motorcade route more than a month before November 22). Garrison must also think that Roy Truly was a big part of the patsy plot, because it was Mr. Truly who actually hired Oswald (even though nobody was holding a shotgun to Truly's head forcing him to hire Lee).

The commonly-held belief that Lee Oswald was "placed" in the Texas School Book Depository by evil plotters prior to 11/22/63 is a desperate attempt by CTers like Mr. Garrison to attach unprovable and unsupportable conspiratorial "strings" to a random event that involved several individuals...individuals whose collective and synchronized actions could not possibly have been foreseen and controlled by a group of behind-the-scenes conspirators.

---------------

"Anyone who takes the time to read the Warren Report will find that of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza who were able to assess the origin of the shots, almost two-thirds said they came from the grassy-knoll area in front and to the right of the Presidential limousine and not from the Book Depository." -- Jim Garrison; 1967

This is pure nonsense. There were, indeed, several witnesses who said they heard shots coming from in front of JFK's car, but Garrison has severely skewed the stats to support his claim of Knoll shooters. His "almost two-thirds" figure is not even close to being accurate when talking about the number of witnesses who said they heard frontal shots. And even amongst other CTers, virtually no other pro-conspiracy author has ever rigged those stats in such an out-of-whack manner.

The fact is that more than half of all earwitnesses heard shots coming from the direction of the Book Depository, and not from the Knoll. And an even more illuminating statistic reveals that less than 5% of all earwitnesses heard shots from more than just a single general location (front vs. rear). That stat speaks volumes....because even CTers admit to SOME rear shots.

An interesting tabulation of this data can be found below:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots4.jpg

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/earwitnesses.htm

---------------

"The second shot struck the President in the back; the location of this wound can be verified not by consulting the official autopsy report, but by perusing the reports filed by two FBI agents who were present at the President's autopsy. Both stated unequivocally that the bullet in question entered President Kennedy's back and did not continue through his body." -- Jim Garrison; 1967

Therefore, Mr. Garrison is, in essence, saying that he is much more likely to trust the word of FBI agents (who, of course, were not doctors and were not conducting the President's autopsy) rather than take the word of the three physicians who each signed the official autopsy report. After all, why believe the autopsy doctors when you COULD just trust as Gospel the word of a bystander? ~sarcasm alert~

Plus: Why didn't these two FBI agents get the conspirators' memo which, if CTers are right about the success of the Patsy Plot, must have been passed out to nearly everyone in Officialdom on 11/22, a memo that probably said: "Attn. All Agents -- We're framing Oswald tomorrow; so remember to falsify as much evidence as humanly possible to ensure conviction of patsy".

Evidently some people who needed to see it never received that important document.

---------------

"We have also located another man who was not involved in the shooting but created a diversionary action in order to distract people's attention from the snipers. This individual screamed, fell to the ground, and simulated an epileptic fit, drawing people away from the vicinity of the knoll just before the President's motorcade reached the ambush point." -- Jim Garrison; 1967

Yet another outright lie from the lips of District Attorney Garrison. The man who had the so-called "simulated epileptic fit" was fully identified by the FBI on May 26, 1964. His name was Jerry Belknap, a man who had a history of epilepsy since childhood. Belknap also proved to the FBI that he had paid the ambulance bill ($12.50) after he was taken to Parkland Hospital.

---------------

"President Kennedy was killed for one reason: because he was working for a reconciliation with the U.S.S.R. and Castro's Cuba. His assassins were a group of fanatic anti-Communists with a fusion of interests in preventing Kennedy from achieving peaceful relations with the Communist world." -- Jim Garrison; 1967

Any solid, verifiable proof of such accusations, Mr. Garrison? Any physical evidence whatsoever that shows JFK was killed by more than one gun? .... The answers to those two questions are: No and No.

But the lack of physical evidence never stopped a hard-boiled CTer....that's been proven over and over again by a vast assortment of conspiracists who have more theories up their sleeve than a dog has fleas.

---------------

"In summation, there were at least five or six shots fired at the President from front and rear by at least four gunmen, assisted by several accomplices. At this stage of events, Lee Harvey Oswald was no more than a spectator to the assassination -- perhaps in a very literal sense. James Altgens snapped a picture that shows a man with a remarkable resemblance to Oswald, standing in the doorway of the Depository. The Altgens photograph indicates the very real possibility that at the moment Oswald was supposed to have been shooting Kennedy, he may actually have been standing outside the front door watching the motorcade. .... I don't believe that Oswald shot anybody on November 22nd -- not the President and not Tippit." -- Jim Garrison; 1967

It seems as though these devilishly-clever conspirators forgot one important thing when they were setting up LHO -- they forgot their brains. For, who WITH brains would allow their lone "Patsy" to casually drift outside and be photographed and seen by countless witnesses when the plotters need to have Lee Harvey on the 6th Floor at 12:30? Per Mr. Garrison's account of Oswald possibly being "Doorway Man", evidently the real assassins were indeed brainless and lacked the common sense to keep Oswald where he wouldn't be able to establish a credible alibi for his 12:30 whereabouts.

Just think about these Garrison remarks for a moment longer too -- "At least five or six shots were fired at the President from front and rear ... by at least four gunmen".

Doesn't a "4-Shooter, 6-Shot, 1-Patsy" assassination plot seem a bit unlikely to anyone else but this writer? Would any professional killers actually attempt to "frame" a lone fall guy in that type of overkill fashion? In my opinion, no pro hit men would go about the complicated task of setting up Oswald (or anybody else) in such a needlessly-reckless way.

A single "pro" hit man could have easily killed JFK with one or two shots (probably just one) from Oswald's "nest", without the need to clog the works with needless back-up gunmen hiding all around Dealey Plaza.

There is no possible way the conspirators could have ensured the success of a multi-shooter plot to frame JUST Oswald in the minutes during and after the shooting. No way. There are way too many uncontrollable factors that could block the success of that One-Patsy venture that Jim Garrison placed his faith in.

"Uncontrollable" items such as:

1.) A frontal shooter might very well have been seen by witnesses (and to think that EVERY witness under the sun could be easily "bought", "taken care of", and/or coerced by these plotters is, again, just too much wishful thinking on the conspirators' part, IMO).

2.) A frontal shooter might strike other occupants in the car, or strike somebody else in Dealey Plaza. But even if ONLY Kennedy is hit by a frontal gunman, there are massive problems to be "corrected" by the conspirators....bullets to be hidden and, of course, who knows how many obvious frontal wounds on the victim to be (somehow) eliminated -- and eliminated immediately before any non-conspirators can spill any beans. .... Only a person straight out of the booby hatch could believe that anyone, regardless of "power" or "pull", could get away with such a thing. It's just plain loony.

3.) The one "Patsy" (Oswald) could have easily, by pure accident and happenstance, established a perfect alibi for himself at the time when he was supposed to be on the 6th Floor shooting the President (as Mr. Garrison apparently DID think occurred, with Oswald being seen in a photo taken as the bullets were flying; even though all reasonable researchers know full well that "Doorway Man" was actually Billy Lovelady, and not Oswald; Lovelady even testified to that effect in 1964). ....

Plus -- If Oswald had really been in that doorway at 12:30, WHY ON EARTH DIDN'T HE SAY HE WAS THERE?! If he's got an ironclad alibi like that, why wouldn't he use it? Instead, he says not a word about being outside on the steps at 12:30, and even tells the police a provable lie re. his whereabouts (the lie about "having lunch with Junior {Jarman}" at the time of the shooting). How much sense does that make if Oswald had really been in the Depository doorway? ....

And the very fact that Oswald did NOT have a usable, provable alibi for exactly 12:30 PM is absolutely remarkable IF he had really been wandering around on the lower floors of the Depository (or was outside the building), as many CTers firmly believe; and even the most rabid of conspiracy theorists have got to admit, that from the "CT/Patsy" POV, Oswald's not having a usable/believable/solid alibi is certainly, by far, the biggest piece of LUCK in the whole "Patsy Plot". ....

These amazing Patsy Plotters just lucked out, evidently, in that Oswald was not seen by a single person inside or outside the TSBD at precisely the time of the assassination -- except by Howard Brennan, Ron Fischer, and Robert Edwards, of course, who saw Oswald or a nicely-arranged Oswald "imposter" in the Sniper's Nest at 12:30 or just seconds before 12:30.

4.) And the likelihood that all of the non-TSBD bullets are going to somehow get swept under the rug is extremely remote, especially in a Bob Groden-like scenario. Mr. Groden (per his book "The Killing Of A President"), incredibly, has ZERO of the shots coming from the Oswald window, and a total of up to TEN shots being fired...and ALL OF THEM coming from rifles other than the one rifle these idiot plotters are going to attempt to frame Oswald with! Could Groden's scenario BE any more reckless and preposterous?! I doubt it.

5.) And a biggie, that most CTers evidently don't think could have ever happened before 12:30 on November 22nd -- The one Patsy (Mr. LHO) could "get wise" to the plot that is brewing all around him and take measures to guarantee he could never be blamed for the actual assassination of John Kennedy.

When thinking about any "Frame Lee Oswald As The One Patsy" plan, I just cannot visualize any professional assassins (even for a minute) contemplating the use of multiple shooters; let alone some gunmen firing from the Grassy Knoll, i.e., the exact opposite direction from where their single dupe is supposed to be located.

---------------------

As the previously-mentioned quotes from the mouth of Mr. Garrison amply demonstate, if anyone has a desire to set out "On The Trail Of A Lunatic Conspiracy Theorist" -- look no further than Earling Carothers (Jim) Garrison.

All My Children meets The Exorcist.

The world famous mentor with a dirty childhood secret. The extraordinarily handsome, conflicted Jesuit with a troublesome libido. The gorgeous upscale girlfriend and her feisty teenage daughter. The beautiful reporter with an oddball first name who discovers she wants to be hurt in bed by the rugged bad boy, even though she thought she loved his sensitive but deceased brother. Plus half a dozen stock throwaways whose sole function is to advance the plot.

The only original character in the entire book is Jesus in Bluejeans, and he's pretty darn good looking too.

Although I am obsessed with Stephen King's books and only happened to read this book by chance a few years ago, I absolutely loved it. It drew me in, it was interesting and thrilling and let you know the characters. I have read it maybe 3 times since then and I it still effects me the same way. Since it has been a while since I read it I can't go into tons of detail, but it seemed very true to life, how people think and feel about others, how they feel about themselves, how you cannot plan you life a certain way and expect it to be that way, and how unexpected things can occur to change you whole world, like demon possessions.

I first came across this book at a used book sale in my town library. There were at least 5 copies of it in the stacks, which is rare for a library book sale...anyhow, I was somewhat intrigued by the book-jacket description of a "gothic" tale, and, not being able to find anything else, I bought it. I had no idea when I picked this book up that I would be delving into a riveting, supernatural tale of spiritual warfare (which, amazingly, was the type of book I had been looking for to begin with!). The story involves a demonic evil that has plagued a southern family for generations, and of the two remaining members' fight to defeat it once and for all. To minorly plagarize the tag line for "Signs", what one man believes could be the key to saving his own life. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is questioning his or her personal theological beliefs; this book raises many questions about human lives in relationship to God, but (wisely) does not seek to answer them all (while still answering enough within the context of the story to satisfy the reader).
***Minor Spoilers Ahead!***
I personally agree with the reader who disliked the ending: the response that the priest gives IS rather lame and (I think) somewhat anti-climactic in a story of such intense spiritual warfare, but...oh well. I would add as well that, after September 11th, the barrage of disasterous images presented by the demon would need to be updated a bit....also, keep in mind that the basis of this story is FICTION! In reality, there are no Satanic cults that sacrifice human beings (trust me--I've read quite a bit on this subject). Oh, and another thing: read the Acknowledgments at the end of the book. They give the story a LOT more personal meaning on the author's behalf. :O)

As Dark Debts opens, Jesuit priest Michael Kinney sits on the witness stand, testifying in the trial of Danny Ingram, a young man who stands accused of murdering his parents and brother. Danny's attorneys mount a unique defense, claiming their client was possessed by a demon. The prosecutor and press ridicule the notion, but Father Kinney knows it is the truth--he was one of two priests who attempted to exorcise the demon shortly before the murder spree. Kinney testifies despite the Church's wishes, and pays a price--he is transferred from his cushy New York position to a rural parish in Georgia. Kinney, enervated by his battle with the demon, and depressed by the transfer, doesn't realize that his problems are only beginning.

Reporter Randa Phillips, another New Yorker, also has problems. Randa's friend (and ex-lover), Cameron Landry, has unexpectedly committed suicide, an act totally out of character for the confident, vibrant young writer. Even more out of character, the peaceful Cam robbed a liquor store, killing a clerk shortly before leaping to his death. Randa knows that Cam comes from a family with a violent past--one brother was murdered and another was executed for mass murder--but has trouble accepting Cam's assertion that the family is cursed. After speaking to Cam's Uncle Ryland (who we later discover has been dead for three years) she heeds his plea and decides to travel to Georgia to find Cam's brother Jack.

In Georgia, Jack Landry is suffering from symptoms similar to those his brother Tannen developed shortly before committing mass murder--he's becoming increasingly violent, and is starting to have blackouts. He and Randa meet, and immediately fall in love. Randa and Jack try to deal with Jack's destructive behavior, but only Father Kinney knows how to save him. The three eventually join to do battle with the evil force which haunts all their lives, a battle for Jack's very soul.

Dark Debts is a very slick, very entertaining horror story, a perfect beach book (I can vouch for this, since I actually read it on the beach). The horror is low key, but the book is worth reading for its fast pace and snappy, often hilarious, dialogue. Hall carefully develops parallel story lines which eventually converge, leading to a powerful, moving climax. The only portion of the novel that didn't ring true to me was Hall's resolution of Father Kinney's crisis of faith--given the events of the novel, and the profound religious experience Kinney has at book's end, I expected him to make a totally different decision regarding the priesthood. I can overlook this flaw, however, because the rest of the novel holds up. If you're looking for a quick, entertaining read, you can't go wrong with this.

I just finished the novel. I feel cheated in wasting my time reading it. The demon story was fascinating, and it kept me wanting to get to the end. HOWEVER:

The author writes about a priest who is in "love" with a woman and has sex with her, over a long period of time. As if that is love! When we read what his mind is thinking, it is only LUSTful thoughts! That is not what we are taught by the Church to know LOVE is! Love isn't passion and sex. It is doing what is best for the beloved, not using her.

Then, the author goes into a tirade about Humanae Vitae (of course a priest who can't control himself would have trouble with married couples controlling themselves!) See page 234. There are also places throughout the novel where her opinion on women's ordination and role in the Church and priestly celebacy are not in line with the Church. It seems that to justify his own sin, he has to redefine what sin is and therefore all authority to define right and wrong is invalid.

I kept waiting on the novel to come to the point that the trouble the priest has in fighting the demon is because he is weak with his own sin -- his lust, his heterodoxy, his denial, his pride. It came close with one poinient quote after the demon tells him his past sins, and he is ashamed: "How wierd, Michael suddenly thought. The Devil doesn't need any special powers, other than clairvoyance. After that, he can destroy you with your own stuff."

And to top it all off, it ends with a sappy, New Age, B.S. response the priest gives in answer to a question from his "lover's" daughter about what Christ would say to her. It goes, "He'd say .... 'I tell you what. Do the best you can. Treat other people decently. And the next time you see a pretty sunset, take a moment to look at it. Count the colors. Wonder where it came from. Say 'Wow' out loud. And I'll hear you. And I'll consider it a prayer.'" PAAAAHHLLEEEESE! That's what God created us for and what Christ came to reveal and die for? Our appreciation of sunsets??????

If you aren't Catholic, please don't think you've learned anything about the Church from this novel. If you are Catholic, please be on guard against heresy and hererodoxy.

I know very few books that have managed to capture the drudgery, hopelessness and dreams of modern Russia as Donald James did in the excellent MONSTRUM. It is simultaneously a love story, police procedural and political drama.

It is 2015, post civil war Russia in which the Nationalists - Democrats finally defeated the Anarchists - Communists in a war that nearly destroyed the country. Although a democrat becomes president, real power rests with a Nationalist general. The story concerns 3 people from Murmansk, childhood friends and their lives. Julia became a leader in an all-women's Anarchist brigade, Roy joined the military wing of the Nationalist party, Constantin became a policeman, married Julia and split over politics.

In Moscow a depraved killer known as the Monstrum is slicing open young girls. Constantin must play roles - he is ordered to Moscow where he will play a police chief in charge of the case. His real job is portraying the General (he is a double). Torn between his former wife (Julia), a ravishing American woman newly arrived and Natalya, a police doctor, he discovers betrayal from two of them. The story is almost perfect in that each of the themes - serial killer, romance and political intrigue - blend almost effortlessly, none outweighing the others. The ending is very satisfying if bitter sweet - a good read.

I bought this book together with Russell Andrews' "Gideon". I still rue the day.

Constantin Vadim is the sort of cardboard decective who would be unable to find his own nose even equipped with a map and a flashlight. For this he is promoted and sent to Moscow, to work on the case of a serial killer (the "Monstrum" of the title) so well-connected that the only way to keep everybody happy is to assign a moron to the case.

Vadim has a drinking problem, a women problem and a general thinking problem (as in, he doesn't think at all). The man is so utterly brainwashed that I found it very hard to relate to him - which hampered the reading experience, as the novel is narrated in first person singular, from Vadim's viewpoint. His life is a perfect example of Henry Rollins' jibe on the genders: "All women are evil. All men are stupid", none stupider than Vadim, either.

One reviewer mentioned a set of improbable coincidences required to set the plot rolling. In addition, Vadim has about as much initiative as the ball in a pinball machine - events hurl him into other events and people. Actions he undertakes of his own volition are limited to getting drunk, that's about it.

The other personae appearing in this book are either sketchy or cliched, so that there's no relief for the pummelled reader - not much fun even in supposedly humoristic situations (the groan-inducing office cat storyline, for instance). The people in the book live supposedly in 2015, and the adults' historical awareness reaches back at most to 2010 (somebody did a mass mindwipe on the poor Russian people... again...). Sad beyond words.

The C for effort is for the "Russianization" of certain sentences - Vadim's hungover ruminations and some dialogues sound really good. That's what made me give an extra star.

It is the year 2015, and a post-civil war Russia attempts to build a new democracy and discard centuries of Totalitarianism. Constantin Vadim, a militiaman from Murmansk, is assigned to Moscow as the chief homicide inspector of a destitute and war-torn district of Moscow to take charge of a brutal string of murders of young women by a fiend dubbed the "monstrum". For sure, an unusual and ambitious setting for a serial murder mystery, which historian Donald James tackles in "Monstrum". It is this ambition, however, that fatally flaws what could have been an intriguing novel; there are simply too many plots set in motion and too many messages that James is trying to deliver. Told by Vadim in first person, the all-too-frequent addresses to the reader as "my brothers" becomes tedious. While in the end most of these threads come together, payoff feels contrived, wholly implausible, and ultimately disappointing.

Donald James has written a strange novel that I enjoyed, but only in a limited fashion. In it the stage is set in 2015, in Russia. Constantin Vadim has been transferred from Murmansk to Moscow to run a homicide squad, for which he has no experience and little talent. This, however, is a cover, as he in reality is to act as a double impersonating the Vice President of the new country, Leonid Koba, who is really the power behind the throne.

No sooner does Vadim arrive in Moscow than it develops that his assignment as homicide investigator is going to be a real problem for him. For one thing, though his staff is large, most of them only engage in private enterprise for one of his superiors, and he can't complain about this. As a result, his squad of investigators is very small. In addition, there's a particularly nasty serial killer on the loose, nicknamed Monstrum because of the gruesome mutilations he inflicts on his female prostitute victims.

Then there are Vadim's personal problems. He's divorced from an ideologue who joined the losing side in the just-concluded Civil War, an anarchist with a seemingly endless ability to prevaricate and justify her actions, though they are less and less moral as time goes on. Vadim also has an affair with an American official who's helping with the Amnesty program locally in Russia, and a flirtation with the medical examiner. There's a dead son by the ex-wife, who figures in the plot, and various other characters.

One of the problems with this story is the way it's structured. I recently read a Mickey Spillane novel where the author managed to hold the final surprise of the book to the last sentence: there's no pretence of that here, instead the mystery concludes 40 pages from the end of the book, and the author then has to wind up the various plots. It's a bit anti-climactic...

I will say, though, that I did enjoy this book, and would recommend it.

I just finished Monstrum, and I thought it was excellent! It was one of those situations where I couldn't put the book down, even though there were other things I should have been doing that day.

The book wasn't perfect, but the characters were real, the writing strong, the history compelling, and the mood chilling. Granted, some of the science is pretty shaky toward the end--but that didn't detract at all from an exciting read. Read the first 50 pages and judge for yourself. The last several chapters have very believable plot twists and turn your assumptions upside down. Great read!

This is the fifth and currently (August 08) most recent book in the series which began with "Ghost" and continued with "Kildar." I have seen the series described by the names of both those books and also "Paladin of Shadows." In this book Mike Harmon and his team return to the USA at the request of the President to try to stop a terrorist attempt to attack various soft targets such as Disneyworld with lethal nerve gas.

All the books in this series feature either counter-terror operations or actual pitched battles against Islamic extremists, and have most of the characters vocally expressing very right wing views. All five of the books have villains who enjoy inflicting sexual violence against women, up to and including rape and murder, and the central character also has sexual tastes which range from the kinky to the completely out of order, so none of the books are suitable for anyone squeamish. "A deeper blue" has rather less in the way of sex than the first few books in the series, but the central character appears to like shocking people, for example by openly referring to another character as his "harem manager."

(The reader who has not read the previous books will be thinking "What! Does that mean what I think it does?" The answer is yes.)

"A Deeper Blue", like the second, third and fourth books in the series, is less outrageous, and a bit better written, than "Ghost" but still pushes the envelope hard in several places. It also, for the first time in the series, presents one of the Muslims caught up in the activities of the terrorists as a decent human being who tries to limit the harm caused by his co-religionists. Nevertheless, as a rough litmus test, if you were strongly against the Iraq war, vote Democrat (especially if you like Bill and Hillary Clinton), are very pro-feminist, or are even slightly prudish, do your blood pressure a favour and refrain from touching this entire series with a ten foot barge-pole.


Former SEAL Mike Harmon, codename Ghost, after fighting and defeating a number of terrorist plots, has settled down in a remote valley in the country of Georgia where he bought the local castle.

The area concerned does not actually exist, but if it did, Russian tanks would have been rampaging through it while I was reading this book. I couldn't help thinking "Typical - as soon as Mike and his troops are off in the states Putin invades!"

It turns out that the castle and associated farmland which Mike bought came with some feudal retainers, the Keldara, who accept him as their liege lord or "Kildar" - and if that sounds wierd and anachronistic at the start of the 21st century you ain't read nothing yet.

Since Chechen terrorists are a major nuisance in the area on both sides of the Georgian/Russian frontier, Mike Harmon has trained some of his Keldara as an anti-terrorist militia with the knowledge and support of the Georgian, Russian, and US governments. (This was written at a time when relations between Russia and Georgia were merely bad, which is reflected in the book, but before they deteriorated into war and invasion.)


During the previous book, an anti-terorist operation in search of stolen WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) led that militia into a pitched battle with a brigade of 4,000 Chechens which resulted in heavy casualties on both sides. The Keldara won, but at the start of the book Mike has locked himself away, grieving because a girl he was in love with was one of those killed.

Mike and the Keldara had previously smashed a criminal conspiracy in which senior figures in the governments of most of the world's most powerful governments were implicated. The guilty individuals concerned have been quietly removed from power, but now Mike Harmon has both friends and enemies in all those governments. The pricipal effect of this in "A deeper blue" is that John Ringo can fantasise about his characters being able to say exactly what they think to assorted idiots, stuffed shirts, liberals and left-wingers (I am not associating these concepts, but the book does) and any appeal to higher authority on the part of those outraged at such comments hits a brick wall.

Initially Mike Harmon does not want to respond to the request to go back to the USA and hunt for nerve gas, as he is too busy grieving. But he allows some of his people to go, and when two of them walk into a trap meant for Mike, anger snaps him back to himself: the terrorists soon won't know what hit them.

One or two of Mike's old friends from "Ghost" also make an appearence in this book.

The full "Paladin of Shadows" series currently consists of

Ghost
Kildar
Choosers of the Slain
Into the Breach
A Deeper Blue

John Ringo normally writes military SF and most of his offerings in that genre are extremely good. This series is about a freelance war on terror. In places, and especially in the first book, Ringo seems to be in grave danger of crossing the line between challenging the reader and going out of your way to see how many people you can offend. That goes even for his existing fans among military SF readers, who are probably neither the most prudish or left/liberal of audiences.

In fact the funniest part of "A Deeper Blue" and all the other books in the series from "Kildar" onwards is not part of the main text - it is the disclaimer at the start of the books which at least demonstrates that Ringo understands and has a sense of humour about the controversy "Ghost" stirred up. That disclaimer is worth quoting in full, it reads as follows:


"This is a work of fiction. All the characters and events portrayed in this book are fictional, and any resemblance to real people or incidents is purely coincidental. This book and series has no connection to reality. Any attempt by the reader to replicate any scene in this series is to be taken at the reader's own risk. For that matter, most of the actions of the main character are illegal under US and international law as well as most of the stricter religions in the world.

"There is no Valley of the Keldara. Heck, there is no Kildar. And the idea of some Scots and Vikings getting together to raid the Byzantine Empire is beyond ludicrous.

"The islands described in a previous book do not exist. Entire regions described in these books do not exist. Any attempt to learn anything from these books is disrecommended by the author, the publisher and the author's mother who wishes to state that he was a very nice boy and she doesn't know what went wrong."


Incidentally, that line about "any resemblance to real people or incidents is purely coincidental" is a classic example of a blatantly false statement which escapes being a lie only because both author and reader know that it's a legal fiction which he has to write and makes no attempt to fool anyone. Osama Bin Laden and Vladimir Putin appear in these books under their real names, certain other characters will instantly be recognised by any politically aware reader as corresponding to real world US politicians.

As mentioned, all five books in the series contain a great deal of violence, strongly expressed and very right-wing political views, and references to sex which are always utterly politically incorrect and sometimes fairly explicit. My copies of these books are stored where my children can't get at them and will be until they are adults.

Provided you are not offended by the sex, violence and non-PC attitudes, these books can be quite exciting and entertaining in places. But I would advise feminists, left-wingers, and anyone even slightly prudish to save your money for something else.

If you're looking for bunnies to kiss and trees to hug, this book and the series as a whole most definitely ain't gonna meet your warm and fuzzy needs. I've read some complaints that this book is too 'right wing'. Well, heck, that's what many of us are looking for ... 'right wing' writing. The entire series is action packed, gritty, dark and, yes, conservative in slant. As a former Marine, it's tough sometimes to find books that really speak to the way I think politically and these do it. Not to mention that Ringo writes spot on, kick butt and take names military action sequences that are hard to find elsewhere. Bottom line, if you want hardcore action with no holds barred, this series is tough to beat! I recommend it wholeheartedly!

Kildar comes back and the book has top notch action with decent character development. Not a top Ringo effort but close and much better this deep into a series than he usually does.
Some details. Kildar is boozing it up in grief when the President calls needing help with terrs smuggling in WMD - VX gas. With Kildar drinking himself into oblivion, his advisors take the mission and are rather amateurishly trapped with his advisors/friends wounded. Kildar hears this and springs back into action. The ambush of his buddies was poorly conceived in my opinion. I do not think an ex-SEAL Chief would be so foolish and easily sucked in. Just does not ring true to type in the real world.
Anyway, Kildar to the rescue. Ringo does a pretty good job in character portrayal with Kildar. He does a better job showing the concern of the Kildara for their Kildar. The author resurrects Bambi as a USSOCOM INTEL analyst but treats her character rather woodenly.
Character development was not up to Ringo standards but good.
Side note - author does a good job of making some pretty common sense points on how we are conducting GWOT in this book. That will anger liberals. Given how the author handles the President (well in my opinion), I would like to see how he handles a liberal President working with the Kildar. That could be interesting.
Back to the book.
But the actions scenes.... And the use of varied toys made up for the lower than usual character work. The action scenes are superb. These make the book more than another failing effort to continue a series that Ringo usually produces by this time. This is definitely his best effort this late into a series to date.
It is well worth the read and I hope Ringo can keep the quality level up. If this is not the end of the series and there are some indications that it may be. We shall see.

I've read most of Ringo's work and was looking forward to this book but the heavy handed way he treats democrats in general and President Clinton in particular is too much to take. Ringo goes so far as to actually say on page 85 of the paperback edition, "God damn the Clinton administration." I guess he thinks that gas, a depressed economy and endless war in the Middle East are preferable to peace and prosperity.

Beyond his upfront far right opinions expressed throughout the book and his palpable hatred of Arabs that just jumps off the pages, this book has a real lack of depth of character development and lots of stilted dialogue.

I really liked Ghost, the first book, it was well written and loaded with sex and violence! And Mr. Ringo did a great job placing me, the reader in the heads of his characters. It was a very stimulating and impressive read. The books leading up to and including "A Deeper Blue", were less engaging. The way it was written gave me facts and details of events with very little conection to the thoughts and feelings of the books characters. I wanted more....

This was a great read! It reminded me of a Tom Clancy novel, but with more action, less techno-babble and fewer political ramblings. Hagberg keeps the narrative moving along at a nice clip, allowing few dull moments to slow down the story. I'd say Hagberg took over the title of "king of the techno-thrillers" with this novel, just as Clancy started to go steeply downhill.

"Joshua's Hammer" is a very realistic and detailed account of a plot by Osama bin Laden to employ a suitcase nuclear device in a mega-terrorist attack on American soil. The story takes us from Washington D.C. to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan to California as the CIA tries to stop al Qaeda. Hagberg's insight into the mindset and methods of al-Qaeda terrorists and CIA operatives alike is very impressive, and often gives you the sense that you are reading non-fiction. The book seems almost prophetic when you consider that it was written well before 9/11. The protagonist Kirk McGarvey is a bit larger than life, somewhere between Jack Ryan and James Bond, but that just makes the novel all the more entertaining. I agree with the other reviewers who called Hagberg a cross between Tom Clancy and Ian Fleming--the technical realism of Clancy combined with the superspy heroics of Fleming's Bond. What more could a thriller fan ask for? An outstanding novel by a top shelf, yet under-appreciated writer.

I had purchased the latest Hagberg novel in a bookstore. He wasn't an autor I had read before, but looked interesting. I really enjoyed the book and decided to get a few more. This was the best route and the service was great.

This is one of those books that once you start reading, you cannot put it down. Superb thriller about Bin Laden trying to blow up the famous San Francisco bridge as revenge for his daughter's death. The characters are excellent, story just flows chapter after chapter. Writing is excellent, as always by David Hagberg. One of his best and worth the money.

4 and 1/2 stars - Although written before September 11th, the storyline for Joshua's Hammer takes on new meaning in the wake of the horrific events of that day. The story itself takes Kirk McGarvey, former CIA assassin and currently among the top men in the CIA, back out into the field to negotiate with Osama bin Laden. Events quickly spin out of control and McGarvey finds himself fighting for the safety of his family, the President's family and millions of Americans. At the same time, McGarvey must thwart bin Laden's plan to set off a tactical nuclear device in San Francisco. McGarvey portrays a cool, confident, cerebral agent, yet also displays emotion sufficient to indicate that more than ice water runs through his veins. The story moved along at a fast pace, with a plethora of action and suspense. This was the second of Hagberg's book that I have read. I will clearly be going back for more.

Joshua was a Hebrew who led the assault on Jericho per God's instructions. He and his limited number of men circled the wall of Jericho, playing trumpets. Played perhaps is an ambitious term--more like blew stridently. They did this for so many nights, always during dark hours, causing strange, discordant sounds to crash through the night. At last the walls of Jericho came tumbling down. It is said in hushed tones that Joshua also had a war hammer and with this hammer found the weak spot and smashed a blow that excited the walls down.

Thus Osama bin Laden has a "war hammer"--a one-ton demolitions bomb. He asks for a meeting with someone important in American military matters. Instead, Allen Trumble, a career diplomat in Saudi Arabia meets with him. Bin Laden is insulted, stops the meeting, but not before informing Trumble that he has a bomb. For his safety, the government returns the diplomat back to the States, where, during a deserved vacation at Disney World, he and his family are gunned down by Arab terrorists, suspected men of Bin Laden.

Kirk McGarvey, head of military ops of the CIA, then arranges to meet with bin Laden in his hideout in Afghanistan. The assassination of Trumble is not taken lightly. It is McGarvey's plan to take out the Arab leader if possible. Bin Laden has a nineteen-year-old daughter, his pride and joy because she is more a leader than his son. She is the one to escort McGarvey from the lower area of the mountain to the secret headquarters hidden by labyrinthine paths. All of this: planning and preparations for the meeting, the geography, the people, dialog with Bin Laden himself and Sarah, McGarvey's constant mental calculations--all make thrilling reading.

The previous two paragraphs constitute two-thirds of the novel, providing interesting, edge-of-your-seat reading. Then comes McGarvey's return to the United States, where the story bogs down. It is certainly still a thriller, but that keen intensity is lost. The story almost becomes procedural at this point. Nevertheless, McGarvey must find the bomb and prevent its explosion, or Joshua's hammer which will cause the walls of the United States to crumble.

This is definitely a recommended read, just to be "present" at the fictional meeting with Bin Laden and his daughter.

The good & bad of the plot have been discussed by other reviewers. I found that the single most annoying part of the book was the way the author had characters interact. "John, I think you're right." "Thank you, Ben". "And John, we should plan ahead" "You're right too, Ben". Think about talking with another person, the two of you don't include each other's name in EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE. This is just an example of the type of juvenile wordsmithing that Mr. Galdorisi uses.

An insider's look at terror networks. I don't know who the author is, though he evidently served in the navy. I couldn't believe this book was written BEFORE the attack on the USS Cole and the September 11 attacks. I won't give what happens away - you'll have to read it yourself, but you will BELIEVE that someone was trying to warn us!

This was one of several books in my pile of 'books to read.' I grabbed it just before I went on a two-week cruise to Hawaii mainly because of what has been in the news for the past several months and the picture of the aircraft carrier on the cover. I couldn't put it down and it all-but-predicted the terrorist attacks in September. I gave it only four stars because it was pretty long (500+ pages) but I was riveted for the ride. This one has it all!

This is a book that foreshadowed events like the Cole tragedy and shows how vulnerable the U.S. is to terrorism...plus it is a good high-seas adventure that puts you in the middle of high-paced life on an aircraft carrier...a real page turner.

This was an awesome book...I gave it four stars because the author gave me a lot of background I didn't think I wanted -- until I got to the end -- and then it mattered a lot. The action on the carrier was as real as anything I've read -- reminded me a lot of Flash Point by Huston - this book has a terrifying theme about terrorism that everyone should think about

So, I haven't reviewed a book for nearly a year. And what's the first genre I review after a year's break from Amazon? Yes, it's a military book. Storming Heaven is a tale of how one very evil mastermind, the Belgian Henri Cazaux, abused as a child, and with overwhelming hatred for fellow humans, invests every breath in his body into finishing the USA's infrastructure with sheer firepower. In fact, the ex-B52 navigator Brown goes into such explicit detail of the savageness of Cazaux's attacks that I will, for once, let the reader find out what happens. Of course, the retired military chief Ian Hardcastle, being the typically macho hero Brown describes him as, tries to go in all fires-blazing, with helicopters and weapons of small-scale mass destruction, with the aim of finishing Cazaux once and for all. As is natural in such shocking, though entertaining novels, the military soon enough falls out with the security services, thinks that they have killed Cazaux when he actually is planning his worst atrocity yet...

If you really aren't into bloodthirsty military novels, I sincerely recommend you to stay away from Storming Heaven. I've read and reviewed many books in my time on Amazon, and this is easily the most dark and deadly novel yet.

Mr Brown, have three stars, on the basis that you lay off from the violence and gore you have shocked me with!

When it comes to the real thriller rather than aero techno thriller, Another Brown's perspective took the side inner country where the enemy have been there planning what we were not expecting. The Most Thrilling Action Story. Brilliant!

Reading this now five years on from 9/11, I can see why a reviewer might have thought Bin Laden had read this book, and it's also worth checking out Dale's blogs on airbattleforce.com, as a writer myself I know all too well the responsibility an author has to society - in my first book, published a year before the 7/7 London attacks, a terrorist takes a rucksack bomb on to a London tube train and is stopped at - wait for it King's Cross! Scary.

But fictional events coming true - its happened this weekend in Marmaris, turkey, as well - is part of being an author, one of the risks you take. Dale Brown is one of the best at his game and I think with all his knowledge of military and geopolitical affairs he should run for President, he would do a better job than, say, Bill Clinton, whose administration he rips into in STORMING HEAVEN. Hilary, named only as the Steel Magnolia in his narrative, however, he always portrays very well as strong-willed and full of guts. Way to go! I'd vote for her.

In the story, set in 1995, American airport and border security is under threat when a Belgian terrorist Henri Cazaux, out for blood after he was abused by American soldiers as a child, gets assistance from ex-SAS commando Gregory Townsend to launch a bloody attack on America's airlines by crashing planes laden with fuel and explosives into air terminals. First, he strikes Oakland International at San Francisco and causes massive loss of life. Then Cazaux goes for Memphis International in Tennessee, wiping out a cargo terminal. Panic sets in all across the States and reaches the White House.

Action is taken by Rear Admiral Ian Hardcastle, who first appeared in HAMMERHEADS - read this, this book is ahead of its time - Patriot missile launchers at airports, talk of chaff (defensive countermeasures to distract surface to air missiles) on airliner wings, unauthorised flights shot down by F-16s or ordered to land, which has happened recently, and then terror hits Washington as Cazaux decides to attack the White House . . . Dale Brown did reuse this scenario well for ACT OF WAR too recently though the strategy was a bit different. The ending as well is not what you think - paved the way for character continuation in THE TIN MAN, which is also well worth a read.

Brown surpasses himself here - this book now was not speculation, it seems like a prediction of events to come. With recent security scare threatening air travel and the tourism industry in general, it all seems like essential reading now. I would love to see this book made into a movie, but I think it might be too shcoking for the nanny state we are forced to live in. But overall, this is a MUST READ. Especially if you are an aspiring author and/or historian! If you are new to this author, then this is a great place to start.

I was glued to my chair by this book. I thought it moved well and I liked the military technology and jargon. However, I was turned off my Mr. Brown's thinly veiled dislike of the Clinton administration. Mr. Brown should keep his politics out of his books.

Review of "Storming Heaven" by Dale Brown.

It seems almost impossible to buy a well-written action novel. They all seem to be written by people who haven't learned how to write a book with characters, real characters who stand up off the page. "Storming Heaven" is, regrettably, no exception.

"Storming Heaven" is yet another of those books written by men who like to have their photos taken standing on military vehicles wearing baseball caps. This book is written in 'head hopping' mode, which is usually reseved for romance novels. The writer hops about from character to character. After a few pages the unfortunate reader feels quite dizzy.

One might hope that the publisher could advise this writer on learning how to write in a focussed viewpoint. This would be a slim hope as the book seems to have been published from its first draft and without benefit of an editor. An example of the nonsense:

(The viewpoint for the moment is supposed to be with Vincenti, a fighter pilot)
The stress in the controller's voice was painfully obvious and Vincenti knew why. As soon as he heard a break, Cazaux interjected . . .

In the above, it should be 'Vincenti interjected' not Cazaux, who is fleeing from the fighter. Evidently the writer can't remember which viewpoint he's in, so there's not much hope for the reader.

The text is chock full of acronyms, all of which are lovingly explained - not once, but over and over. 'The Air-Force E3 Sentry AWACS (Airborne Warning And Communications System)' . . . 'The WAO, or Weapons Assignment Officer, was the overall supervisor of the section of the command center that controlled the fighters from takeoff to landing and monitored the entire intercept." . . . (yawn) and if I see one more time, 'The HUD (Head Up Display) I shall scream. Boring, boring, boring. If the author really needs to soak in acronmys then let him include a glossary of terms. Better still let him write nonfiction. He should have had plenty of practice since this book is written like a stuffy nonfiction weapons manual.

Apart from the above, the writing style is extremely dull. When Brown introduces a character he stops the story dead, with large passages of exposition concerning who this is, where they went to school, and so on, instead of gradually releasing such information a little at a time while keeping the story alive. E.G:
' Hardcastle was tall and lean, with gray hair, a bit longer than he wore it in his Coast Guard days, swept gracefully back from his forehead. "Character lines" were deeply etched around his narrow blue eyes, giving him a hawklike image to match his politics. He wore lightly tinted glasses now . . "
- and on and on and on, nearly two pages of this boring tripe. This description begins on page five. You'd think that Hardcastle, from his two solid pages of yawn-making, 'was', and 'were', and 'what he was wearing' must be a crucial character, but Hardcastle then disappears as a character and still hasn't reappeared by page 105, which is the point I was unable to continue reading this pulp and consigned it to the trash. Which is where it belongs. 'Nuff said.

This review is directed predominately at the audio performance. Other reviewers have accurately portrayed the quality of the book in some detail. On its own, I'd give it no more than two stars. The plot is pedestrian and predictable. The rating diminishes to one star with the audio performance, which is truly execrable. The reader, Dennis Boutsikaris, appears capable of running the gamut of emotion from only A to B. Much of the book takes place in France, and his attempt at delivering English with a French accent is so bad it's laughable. The only thing worse is his pronunciation of French itself. For anyone here who remembers seeing any of The Bowery Boys movies on TV as a kid, this statement will have meaning: I'd sooner hear the accent (French OR English) of Leo Gorcey and his pals than this clown. He also narrated another audio book I had the misfortune to buy: Jeffery Deaver's The Twelfth Card, where he took a much better book than The Traitor and made it a laughingstock. As of this writing, Amazon sellers are offering it for as little as 20 cents. Enough said? Note to producers of audio books: If you can't find any performers better than this, scrap the project!

I was excited to see The Traitor available for the Kindle and jumped at the first opportunity to read another book by Coonts. Having read Liberty and Liars & Thieves, I thought another Coonts book would be fantastic. Unfortunately it seems the bar has been lowered.

Without giving away any of the story, it felt that Coonts didn't know where he wanted to go with the plot. Not much even happens until the last couple of chapters and a lot goes on that really isn't explained. Perhaps my previous Coonts novels set my expectations high and a newcomer would love this book, but I suggest Liars & Thieves over The Traitor.

I don't think The Traitor is up to stephen coonts usual excellent story lines. I found this book a disappointment.

Typical cookie cutter international thriller. The author places the hero in the Special Collection Service, a little known but important element of the intel community. However he then gives Tommy duties that have nothing to do with the SCS. Nice try. Late in the book after doing a brief search the hero and his boss find multiple explosive devices at a G8 meeting site that the entire French security establishment had missed. I bow to no one in my low esteem for the frogs but that is a bit much even for me. Two main characters and one secondary character are jailbirds. Think about it, if you wanted people who are reliable, able to think through the consequences of their actions and who can keep a secret would you go to a jail to find them? Don't think so. Anyway this is barely, barely a book you might want to buy for a vacation or business trip. I started it in Tunis on a business trip and got 3/4 of the way through before I came home. It has taken me almost two weeks to finish the other 1/4. That about sums up the book.

Amazed by the positive reviews and I suppose I am asking to be shot down here, but......
I have really enjoyed much of the author's works, but of late the standard has slipped., perhaps because he is hanging onto characters past their sell by date. This balanced with a rather average story does not a great thriller make, this had little pace and tension and nothing to make me keep turning the pages.
Sorry, but I thought it was a very weak effort.