Burr Books

I have been rereading all the Johanna Lindsey books and just recently read 'A Heart So Wild' and then followed it up with this book. It was great to see Chandos and Courtney again and see how they turned out...kids, ranch, etc. So many of Lindsey's sequels are great, but this one was only so-so. Don't get me wrong, this book wasn't awful - it just wasn't terrific. 'A Heart so Wild' was a wonderful love story from start to finish with just great storytelling. 'All I Need is Love' was missing the depth of character and detailed storyline that 'A Heart so Wild' had. It felt very rushed and sloppy, as if Lindsey didn't take the time to really put her heart in it. I say read this book if you want to catch up with the characters from 'A Heart so Wild' but otherwise give it a miss.

This book was not one of JL's best. The characters are likeable, but the book concentrates more on the story line leaving little room for romance. Its about Casey, a seventeen year old girl from Texas that has taken the life of a bounty hunter to prove to her dad that she can do a "man's" job and run the family ranch. Damian is from the east and is on his way to capture his father's killer and this is how they meet. He hires Casey to help him and they fall in love along the way. All in All, its not a waste of time and the book was interesting.

Nice story... nothing breathtaking or amazing about it. I found Casey to be headstrong and spoiled... almost to the point of being a brat. She did improve near the end though and redeem herself a bit.

What can I say about Damian? It took a long time for him to grow on me. Its like his character didn't really develop into much until the middle of the book. He seemed almost weak to me... with not much personality. But as with Casey, he redeemed himself near the end of the story.

Their love story was sweet. They certainly didn't have the chemistry that Casey's parents had. And their developing relationship almost seemed secondary to their search for Damian's father's murderer.

Slow start to the story, picked up in the middle and then slowed down again near the end. There were a couple great scenes, one including some fun in the river, which helped keep my interest. Overall a good book, but certainly not one I would read over and over again.

I love this book. I read it for the first time a while back, and it stayed with me enough to make me buy it. I loved "A Heart So Wild", and I think this was a fitting sequel. People are complaining about how Chandos wouldn't have let her go in the first place, but it seems to escape them that Chandos's daughter would have more than a small idea of what she wanted to do and the abilities to do it. Casey is very strong willed, but that's something most Lindsey readers expect. She can do anything a man can do, and that's something else I've come to expect. I love her stories because I can see myself in a lot of the heroines, and this one doesn't disappoint.

"All I Need Is You" is alright for a Lindsey. It's not awful, but neither it is a page-turner. "All's" story is straightforward enough: Damian hires a bounty hunter to find his father's murderer only to fall for the bounty hunter, a girl named Casey who is determined to succeed at a man's job to prove to her her father that she can run a rannch. What the story lacks is passion. So much time is spent on discussing the murder and chasing the bad guy that the romance part comes up short. I didn't devour this book, like I did it's prequel, the marvelous "A Heart So Wild." I wish Casey & Damian of "All" had half the passion that Chandos & Courtney of "A Heart" had. I also wish the "bad situations" that Casey found herself in really seemed threatening, but both her showdown and kidnapping were predictable and not at all exciting. Big sigh. Worse was the tacked-on ending revolving around Damian's mother. Lindsey seems to love having belated parent-child reunions in her books ("Angel," "So Speaks the Heart," "Defy Not the Heart" to name a few). I'd recommend reading "A Heart So Wild" over reading "All I Need Is You." "A Heart" is a prime example of a REAL steamy, sexy Western romance, while "All" (with it's lack of charisma and excitement) is more a girl-oriented murder-mystery than romance.

Sara Paretsky's tough-as-nails detective Victoria Iphigenia Warshawski (V I to us, and Vic to her friends) has been getting better and better with each entry in this series, and "Total Recall" keeps that ball rolling.

As a previous reviewer has made clear, this is a V I Warshawski novel, but it's really the story of her friend and mentor, Lotty Herschel MD. One of the two main threads of the story deals with Lotty's escape from Nazi Germany before things really went sour, and her life as a young woman in the England of that era. There is something in that past that is somehow related to the sudden appearance in the present day of a man named Paul Radbuka, who claims to have escaped from the Nazis in a manner similar to Lotty, and was supposedly raised by a man who may have been an escaped Nazi war criminal. Now he's searching for his past and for his real family, but it's rather obvious that the man is somewhat nuts, and it doesn't help matters that he's enlisted the help of a Dr Laura clone who makes the real one look normal by comparison.

That part of the story (Rabuka's claims) is never really resolved, but what's important is the memories and emotions they stir up in Lotty, and Vic's attempts to help her friend. Along the way we see just how deep the friendship is between these two women, and that each would do literally anything within the bounds of reason and (most times) the law to help the other.

The other main thread of the story deals with a new client named Isaiah Sommers, who hires Vic to find out how an insurance company paid out a death claim on his aunt years before she actually died. The case and Vic's progression on it progresses slowly and logically, although you won't believe for a minute how the two threads end up twining together - I literally screamed out "plot device!" when I realized what Paretsky was doing.

But that aside, this is still a well-written and excellent entry in a series that has only improved with time. I look forward to my next V I novel.

I have been attempting to read this book for two months. I refused to put it away without finishing it. But, the thought of reading it was torture. It is soooo slow paced and drawn out. I feel like the real story could have been told in half the time. Did I really need to hear about how she juggles her time in the car between time on the cell phone. How about her time at a diner while on the cell phone. I mean really? Why should my time be wasted on this?

I agree with those who didn't much like this book. Paretsky tries to bring together three threads -- a murder mystery around an insurance scam; a mystery as to whether a man who has been subjected to "recovered memory" therapy is who he thinks he is, and the story of a victim of the holocaust. The connections are at best coincidental, and the first teo stories are unconvincing and frequently dull. I did, however, really enjoy the third story (which makes up about 20% of the book) and found it very touching.

One other thing. I didn't read the book but listened to the audio tape. The narrator did a superb job, and I think made the hearing richer than reading would have been.

If I could give this book no stars, I would. There is no Arnold, no Mars and no three-breasted alien women in this book and is totally undeserving of the name Total Recall. Avoid at all costs.

Lotty was in England right after the war. She had started her medical training. She went on an eight months leave, supposedly with tuberculosis. Work for her was salvation, a narcotic. The Germans had placed over the gates of Auschwitz the slogan that work will make you free. She boarded with a family in North London and studied hard to, perhaps, redeem her mother's life.

Shifting to the present, Lotty calls upon our heroine, V.I. Warshawski, to babysit for friend Max's five year old grandchild, Calia. (The relationship of the childless V.I. to the child is a good touch here.) V.I. has to tell a journalist that she doesn't think Lotty wants to talk with him. She has a client with an inquiry to Ajax Insurance Company. Ajax may be subject to claims from Holocaust survivors, too.

Next a television interview covers the subject of the recovered memory syndrome and an alleged Holocaust survivor. Lotty feels guilt at not respecting her Yiddish speaking paternal grandparents from Belarus. In England Lotty stayed with a relative, Minna, who made her feel ugly. When Lotty left Vienna to stay with Minna she didn't realize she wouldn't see her family again. She and her brother Hugo were part of the Kindertransport program.

The therapist V.I. and the others saw on television wants to write a book to show that memories are reliable. It seems an insurance payment was made earlier on V.I.'s client's case prior to the death of the insured through error, deception, or misappropriation. The issue of reparations for African-Americans for slavery and payment to Holocaust survivors intersect in the Ajax case.

It seems an English girl, Claire, befriended Lotty. The recovered memory individual, Paul Radbuka, crashes Max's party under a notion that Max and Lotty are members of his family. Max and another individual at the party, Carl, were part of a group with Lotty of Kindertransport persons connected to each other in England and now, many years later, in Chicago. They had developed a very close bond with each other.

In the end this is a convoluted tale of secrets, secrets about Lotty and others. Books by Sara Paretsky simply get better and better.

When it comes to story plot, driving it and funny characters that are believable, loveable, and down to earth, this is the book to buy. I have read all of her books and never once been let down. Shem creek will sit in your heart forever and you will find yourself re-reading it.

Yes, I agree with other reviewers that this book is sometimes predictable. A divorced mother of two girls chucks the rat race in NJ to return to her roots in Shem Creek, not far from Charleston. Nevertheless, I think that she creates interesting characters and develops them well. So what if happiness waits at the end of the road? It's a light and lovely story.

This was an enjoyable book. The characters were all good. Who wouldn't love to have a group of loving, caring, go out-of-their-way-for-you family and friends always there for you? What a support group!!!!

The move from New Jersey to South Carolina, the new job, new school, new friends, and experiences brought forth in this book all added up to a good read!!! Can't you just imagine being transplanted from NJ to SC? That would be a huge difference in everything! The language differences alone were fun to read! You know -- y'all as oppossed to you guys!!!!

Even though you can pretty much figure out parts of the book; ie, who would end up loving who, where things were headed -- there were plenty of surprises and a good plot to keep your interest.

Ms. Frank never disappoints! Linda's life change at a time when she sorely needed it probably hits home to many a woman! Her relationship with her teenage daughters DID, I am positive, hit home with everyone and anyone who has ever had a teenager living with them under the same roof. Lord help us all!!!

This book was very enjoyable and I would highly recommend it to anyone. Ms. Frank's description of the beaches, weather, smells, and sights makes me want to shuck it all and move to a slower, easier life-style. Thanks Ms. Frank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks -- Pam.

With her trademark casual and conversational style of writing, Dorothea Benton Frank has the magical knack of pulling the reader directly into the setting, making it feel as though the characters are friends and neighbors, and the low country of South Carolina is home. I have a particular fondness for stories that are centered around a restaurant, and the Italian flare added a special touch. As someone in a similar stage of life as Linda, I held a special appreciation for her plight, especially in her relationships with her daughters, which was very realistically portrayed when compared to the interactions of my daughters with myself and with each other. I don't understand the negative comments in other reviews, as I loved this book and thought it provided wonderful and heartwarming reading!

That about sums it up. I was sooooo looking forward to this one coming out. The cover is beautiful and beckons with such promise. South Carolina - what could be better? Unfortunately, this was probably one of Dottie's most boring novels.

The basic story is intriguing and very gripping, but is it the truth? The book could have been wonderful, but is seriously flawed. Snippets of tales appear haphazardly, making the reading of it less flowing - and on two instances the facts were contrary to basic knowledge of any 6th grade student in history:

1.) Andrew Jackson was not destined to be President in 1820. (He took office in 1829, I recall without looking it up.)

2.) Thomas Jefferson was not the 2nd President. (What ever happened to John Adams?)

When these obvious errors appeared, I thought perhaps the rest of the book was junk too, so why bother reading this.

I claim no special knowldge of Jefferson or General Wilkinson but I do when it comes to Zebulon Montgomery Pike. This book bristles with factual errors concerning this great American. The author apparently never visited Colorado or he would not claim that Pike never even saw the massif that was named for him. Pikes Peak can be seen for a hundred miles or more from the eastern prarie which was Pike's route along the Arkansas River. Pike wrote from South Park that he had continually seen what he called Grand Peak every day (except when he was in the valleys) for the past two months. The author claims that Pike only ascended some foothill when he attempted to climb what would become Pikes Peak, when the truth is he climbned Mt. Rosa, 11,499' which was the first recorded ascent of any mountain in the American West. Moreover, he was the first American, in the United States, to reach the Alpine Zone (11,400' in Colorado). Some foothill.
Pike was made a captain in November of 1806 while the author claims it happened in 1808.
Pike died a hero's death for his country in the Battle of York. The author all but calls him a traitor. He apparently thinks that this young man came to Colorado to start a war with Spain. He asks us to believe that he and his men knew the location of Sante Fe and ignores the fact that Pike did not turn south at Canon City Colorado which would take them there in a few weeks. Instead Pike led his men into the Rocky Mountain Winter to the north-west, away from Sante Fe.
The author insults such noted historians Steven Harding Hart and Archer B. Hulbert, Harvey Carter,Eugene Hollon, and Donald D. Jackson by claiming Pike has 'slipped beneath the notice of professional histonians.' He implies nothing but juvenile historians should deal with him further.
Zebulon Pike is the Viet-Nam Vet of our early explorers. He starved, and froze, and became exhaused for our country as a matter of course. He led his men in the field of battle and won the first victory in the War of 1812. He made a marine type landing in the face of well armed and alerted Brittish Regulars, malitia and pro-Brit Indians. The author says he had an easy victory over a few 'Canadians' who difended Fort York. Authors like Montgomery have given Pike scant credit for his many acompolishments. He even claims Pike was never within 100 miles of the Sante Fe Trail. Pike followed the Arkansas River from Great Bend Kansas to Canon City. The Sante Fe Trail follows the Arkansas River from Great Bend, Kansas all the way to Bent's Fort, near Las Animas, Colorado where it turns south to Raton Pass. Why not give him his due?
Pike's greatest accompolishment was not even mentioned in the book. Pike opened the eyes of America to what was going on in New Spain. Pike told America how the people were slaves to either Cross or Crown. He said their lives were regulated by the peal of the church bell or the rattle of the drum. He told how anxious the people of Mexico (northern New Spain) yearned for freedom and trade with America. Pike predicted the revolution of 1810 and said not one officer in a hundred was loyal to Madrid. Pike was the revealer who lived and died for his country and none of this is even mentioned. So many errors of fact and such a broad conclusion. As far as Pike is concerned much of this book should be in a novel, as it is not non-fiction.

The prinicple narrative thread in Montgomery's "Jefferson and the Gun-Men" is an irreverant account of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Do not expect "Heroic Explorers Contend Against the Wilderness"; rather, it is more like "Laurel and Hardy Go West". Although I would hesitate to take everything Montgomery states at face value -- I cannot but help think he was looking for drama, treachery, and sheer idiocy instead of straight history -- I do find his account useful in one primary regard: he interweaves in a chronologically straightforward manner the activities of not only Lewis and Clark but also of Zebulon Pike (if Lewis and Clark were Laurel and Hardy, then Pike in his view was something of a singlehanded Keystone Kop), Tom Jeffeson, Aaron Burr, and James Wilkinson (commanding general of the US Army and secretly a paid agent of Spain and a conspirator with Aaron Burr to invade Mexico or to set up the western US territories as a separate country or something -- in the end, Wilkinson betrayed Burr and became the chief witness against him in Burr's treason trial). Lewis and Clark's explorations, Pike's wanderings up the Mississippi and in the Southwest, Burr's schemes ... they are all intertwined. So, at a minimum Montgomery's book establishes a common timescale for events usually treated in isolation. But I would urge the reader to go beyond Montgomery's book to read other viewpoints about these men and their activities.

The first thing that grabs you about Montgomery's tome is his style -- his passages are witty, bordering on glib, and he is not burdened by a reverence for his subject matter that makes so many other histories rather dull. He has an obvious affection for some of his characters (such as Clark and Sacagawea), to be sure, but he also sees them as real people rather than demigods. Montgomery's savaging of other characters is a particular delight. This style is a plus, and makes for fun reading.

But the book is fraught with errors, as other reviewers have observed. I'll content myself with only one, which should have also been caught by Montgomery's editor -- on more than one occasion, Montgomery refers to the duel between Burr and Madison, incorrectly substituting Madison for Hamilton. While this mistake is so obvious that nobody is mis-led by it, it says little for the care that went into the writing and editing of the book and undermines its credibility.

Is the book entertaining? Sure. But it's got the same historical value as "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure," and that's sad, because it could have been so much more.

Quite frankly I wish I had read the many other reviews before I invested in this book. The author makes much of correcting Clark's spelling errors, but his own errors reveal he did not go much beyond the spelling. Especially egregious is the one where he tells us that we cannot know from the jouurnals how many canoes were made by Lewis and Clark at the top of Great Falls. The number is given explicitly in the journal entries for three days: July 9, 10, and 14. Because of this I will try to find other books about Burr, wilkinson and Pike.

For me this was not just the stories of the people directly affected by the attack on the World Trade Center. Rather it is a journey into and through the depths of grief. The people highlighted in this book, widows, siblings, survivors, witnesses, rescue-workers, take on the horror of 9/11 in different ways. Their recovery too must be as unique as they themselves. This is a hope-filled story, illuminating the fact that as much as a group may share a tragic event, their internalizing and their movement to recovery is theirs alone. Others may help by walking near us, but only we can heal ourselves.

I really wanted to like this book after having read several biographical accounts of people affected by September 11. Unfortunately, the people portrayed in this book are not at all sympathetic. The fault for this lies with the author who went out of her way to caricaturize the residents of Middletown as second-class provincial citizens. Examples of this are her repeated generalizations that the residents went to non-Ivy League colleges, came from blue collar backgrounds, and were not interested in anything cultured. Equally annoying was her trading on hackneyed cliches (police officers as salt of the earth types, stockbrokers as back-slapping jocks etc.) I'm not American, so I have no personal axe to grind with the author in how she depicted the residents of Middletown. Nevertheless, I feel that Middletown deserves more than the thinly-veiled contempt and back-handed compliments found in this hatchet job. I was left with the conclusion that the author either intended to convey ambivalence towards her subjects, or she truly was ignorant about her condescension.

I was attracted to this book because the author describes it as a book about hope in the prologue. From the opening pages, Sheehy pulls you into the lives of these people who suffered tremendous loss on 9/11. It is a very inspirational and compelling story, not only about the people of Middletown, but also rescue workers, psychologists, policemen and firemen who were deeply effected. Sheehy weaves the many characters in the book and their personal stories with the great research and insights found in all of her books. A dramatic true story that reads with the pace of a novel. Great book.

Gail Sheehy conducted 900 interviews in order to provide a snapshot of this community and its passage through the trauma of 9/11 and the days, weeks and months that followed. There is a bit of redundancy in the text, which reduces my rating from five stars to four, but the focus on how different families reacted to their losses and worked their way through the healing process.

I was astounded by the tireless efforts of the "four moms" who fought for fairness and full disclosure in the ridiculous number of mistakes that came together in the weeks before 9/11 and on the actual day. The obfuscation and prevarication among government officials was almost as infuriating to read about as it must have been to experience. While not at all surprising, it still angers. I also appreciated that when she refers to a 9/11 victim, she indicates that the person was "murdered," for that, in actuality, is what happened, though few wish to use the word. Three thousand people - travelers, brokers, secretaries, restaurant workers, first responders - were murdered, pure and simple.

I am glad that Ms. Sheehy was able to spend an extended period of time with these individuals in order to follow their progress, so that I could get some idea that they were actually healing (as much as anyone can) after this horrific event. This was a satisfying read, and I was grateful to get to know these people in some small way.

I've lived here all my life, and it is disappointing how Sheehy characterizes the area. I'm not talking about getting names and places wrong (which she does often), but getting the feel of the town wrong. She makes it seem like Middletown is filled with 2 types of people: low-class lifelong residents or high-class NYC transplants. To say that the town was "disconnected" before 9/11 and then "joined" after is not the case. Sheehy also continually links Middletown to the neighboring town of Rumson, and I am not sure why.

The book is also much too long. Half the pages could have been sufficient.

Michael Seth Starr has given us an engrossing read about a complex and endearing television icon. Raymond Burr's sexuality may have been "hiding in plain sight" but his generous, caring, and charming self was in the open for all to see. It is easy to forgive his fabricated story of a wife and son when you read about the number of foster children Burr cared for. Or his fictionalized military service when you discover his numerous trips to entertain the troops on the frontliines. These stories were an unforunate necessity in 1950's Hollywood. As a person with a disability working in television I truly appreciated Raymond Burr taking up the cause of disability rights during his Ironside series. This is a true sign of a caring, generous television professional. I learned a great deal from Michael Seth Starr's latest biography.For me Raymond Burr is no longer hiding in plain sight.

Michael Seth Starr's bio of Raymond Burr offers nothing new. Starr recounts well-known and better-told episodes from Burr's life with an almost snarling tone. Starr mercilessly criticizes Burr's weight, his perfectionism, his closeted life, and his oft-repeated stories used to cover his homosexuality. Not only are Starr's parenthetical asides and editorializing in bad taste, they ensure that his mediocre account will turn off any reader with the slightest fondness for his subject.

One of the all time worst book I have ever read. Nothing about him as a person. I did not get to know Raymond Burr. All it was about was his work, movies and t.v.

This is a good basic biography, and I really should've given it 3 1/2 stars. That is, the author did do quite a bit of research--and all the important invents in Raymond Burr's life are listed (I certainly learned a lot). In short, it does give a good basic chronological outline of Raymond Burr's life.

In addition, call me naive, but I was unaware that Raymond Burr was gay. And the friends & relatives who I talked to were also unaware that he was gay. Indeed, that was quite surprising to me--and it was only after reading this book that I am now starting to realize that he was indeed gay (so this author's book was definitely needed here).

Also, the same applies to the "obesity" issue. Here again, I was unaware as to the size of the problem (no pun intended). Indeed, I am 6--4"--and I weigh 260 lbs--which is way overweight (and I notice it on a daily basis). However, Raymond Burr was 6'-2" and weighed over 300 lbs at times during his life--and so that is indeed "gargantuan." This must've caused HUGE problems for him--both in his personal & professional lives.

Therefore, re the above items, I DO NOT feel that the author overemphasized those two points. Those are both HUGE issues. Indeed, I feel the author did not do enough to fully detail those issues--and to also explain how Raymond Burr overcame those daunting obstacles to success.

Also, it seems that the author did not interview anyone who was really close to Raymond Burr. That is, it seemed that most of the testimonials, descriptions, and opinions were from "3rd party" sources--e.g., people who were of some "distance" from Mr. Burr. This author's book would've been much better had he obtained information and/or descriptions of incidents from a close friend of Mr. Burr--or at least someone who was in Mr. Burr's "inner circle." Certainly, someone from his inner circle could've provided more accurate--as well as more interesting--information.

Also, the book was relatively thin--only 219 pages--with the pages being small & the print somewhat large (and also some blank pages were counted as pages). So, although the author did do a lot of work--and a lot of research--it is nonetheless clear that much more could've been done, if one was truly interested in detailing Mr. Burr's life.

Finally, the author's book does expose some of Raymond Burr's faults. I had always viewed him as a "larger than life" figure, but it is now becoming apparent to me that EVERYONE has faults--even the great ones. I was particularly concerned about the amount of lying that Mr. Burr engaged in. Some of the lies were rather harmless--such as pretending that he stayed in China, as well as falsified university attendances. And some lies were intended to cover up his gayness (e.g., making up non-existent marriages), so that was perhaps understandable as well. However, the lie about the non-existent child & tragic death of that child due to a horrible disease was simply inexcusable. Any parent who has lost a child will tell you that there is absolutely nothing funny about that. And so, trivializing a tragedy like that simply because you want to falsify your past is simply inexcusable. And, the same goes for his non-existent war record & non-existent injuries from that war. WWII was a very serious war--and many people (across the world) lost their lives due to that terrible war. Indeed, I had an uncle who died due to injuires sustained in WWII. So again, fighting for your country in WWII & getting injured because of it is something that should NOT be trivialized. I can only assume here that Mr. Burr thought that this lie would "draw the reporters off his scent" and/or improve his popularity with the public.

To conclude, as the book points out, it is somewhat strange that Raymond Burr played Perry Mason--a lawyer dedicated to extracting the truth from all situations--yet Mr. Burr was such an accomplished liar on the witness stand of his own life. So, if nothing else, I have to give this book credit for introducing REALITY into my view of Raymond Burr.

This is a workman-like account of Burr's life and career. Unfortunately, author Michael Starr relies almost exclusively on second-hand sources for his text-- newspapers, magazines, and other print material. There are few first-hand sources which could relate all-important private aspects of the celebrity's life and career. Thus what emerges is largely a portrait of the public man-- the beloved figure of television melodrama-- instead of the carefully guarded private one.

There is, however, one highly significant exception to this public account. Starr makes no bones about Burr's secret life as a gay man during the homophobic decades in which he became a revered public figure. Nor does Starr soft-peddle the many cover stories Burr concocted to hide his sexual orientation. This is the book's main virtue and should lay to rest the many stories and confusions about this controversial phase of the actor's personal life.

However, as a result of Starr's reliance on secondary sources, we can only guess at Burr's private emotions during the key Perry Mason period. For better or worse, his character came to stand for the American criminal justice system to much of the public. Yet the man himself could have been arrested in many parts of the country as a "deviate". The anxiety must have been difficult at times. Too bad author Starr could not give us an inside glimpse of a period when great success also meant great apprehension. Perhaps, by Ironside's more tolerant era, Burr could have "outed" himself without too great of a career risk. But likely the cover story of dead wives and child had become too embedded to undercut. Anyway, these fictitious stories continued to define the private man in the public's eye right up to the end.

Also, the book doesn't provide much of a handle on the actor's behind-the-scenes personality. We do get glimpses, but mainly we have to read between the lines to get anything like a life-size portrait. Perhaps, his friends and co-workers were unavailable for the kind of interview that would provide revealing anecdotes. Whatever the reason, there's a noticeable absence of detail. Starr's style is easy and readable, but he's also not above padding the text with synopses of key films in the actor's career. Just what the significance of these to the man himself escapes me. I wish the author had discussed his sources more forthrightly in a Foreward, which could have shed some light on important aspects of the narrative that follows. The absence of an informative Foreward, standard to this kind of biographical work, amounts to another significant defect. Thus, aside from tackling the most controversial aspect of the revered actor's life, the book stands as a considerable disappointment.

This is a little different from the other Alex Kava books I've read & enjoyed. It's almost a little too close to the truth at times, rather than straight fiction!!

It's a little slow going, getting really absorbed in the story, but once you remember that this is a new set of characters, the story itself takes hold and Alex Kava has done it again!!!

I have enjoyed Alex Kava's other books and this one was a bargain - but after two CD's I realized not only didn't I get what was going on, I just didn't care. Too many characters, too much "set up", no action, nothing tied anything together. I couldn't figure out what the point was. I gave up.

I only gave this four stars because it was a quick read, the author does have a way with making you want to keep reading. The story line was a little out there, and I thought a lot of it got confusing at the end. If you need something to read while on vacation or traveling this is a good option.

This is the first Alex Kava book that I have read. After finishing it, I really feel no need to read another. The story was decent, though it never really got on its feet and started rolling.

The story itself was mainly about Sabrina Galloway. Sabrina is a scientist working at a plant that created fuel out of waste matter. In the opening chapter, the head scientist get knocked off and the story takes off from there. I grew a little frustrated due to the fact that around half of the book, Sabrina tries to find out what happened to her boss. This is always tough for an author to pull off. When the reader knows what happened and the main character is searching for clues we know about before hand. I think that this took a lot of the tension away from the story.

Other aspects that dragged this story down a little in my opinion were the half dozen first person accounts (it was pointed out to me that this book contains no first person accounts... I am sorry, I meant only to say that the story jumps around from one character to another in a difficult to follow fashion). Every time Kava did this, jump from one character to the next, it took away from Sabrina and her search.

I could go on, three stars might be a little generous for WhiteWash. If I were you, I'd skip this one.

I couldn't make head or tail out of this book. I guess it tried to be a political thriller, corporate conspiracy & terrorist thriller all in one & ended up being a muddled mess around a trivial storyline with vapid characters.

How can I rate a book that you won't let me see nor buy. It must be good if they ban it (as well as great reviews by those who have read it), and thus my five stars. Obviously freedom of speech is no longer functioning in Britain, nor the USA which allows the Saudis to get away with this. This is one of the most blatant examples of a double standard by the radical left and the Islamic wealthy who can say and do anything from thier elistist position while keeping people ignorant of reality. I hope an American publisher will pick up the torch allow freedom of speech to again emerge from such a dismal display of arrogance. Shame, Cambridge U Press!

Burr and Collins wrote an excellent book that shows how some Islamic charities have simply funneled money to rather violent and counterproductive terrorist organizations. These charities have become high profile, and the money they handle may well exceed those handled by legitimate Islamic charities. Money that unsuspecting donors may think is going to provide food, clothing, or shelter to the needy instead goes for weapons, terrorist training, propaganda, and, um, bonuses for terrorist leaders.

Burr and Collins acknowledge contributions from the works of Olivier Roy, Steven Emerson, and Rita Katz. I recommend looking at their works as well: they look at the same problem from somewhat different viewpoints, and their warnings ought to have been taken more seriously.

This book is no longer available in many stores: it has been withdrawn in response to a lawsuit. Unsold copies have presumably been pulped. Of course, that's a blow to freedom of the press.

In my review of this book, I gave a reason for deducting one star from my rating for this otherwise fine work. The description of the 1948 Arab-Israeli fighting in it is misleading. It implies that Arab terror, right or wrong, is probably one of the results of this war, rather than one of the causes of the war. And it implies that it is implausible for the very existence of a liberated Jewish community in the Levant to be a cause of anti-Israeli terror. It further implies that the terror we're discussing is provoked by events that might at least justify lesser responses. I feel it is a serious mistake to give us readers that impression, as it distorts the nature of terrorist goals.

I probably ought to have added that Burr and Collins went a little overboard when they said that the reason the Arabs rejected the UN partition of the British Mandate was "primarily because the United Nations proposal allotted 55 percent" of the Mandate "to the new Jewish state, when Jewish ownership did not exceed 7 percent." That's pretty unreasonable of them. Do they really think that if the Negev had been awarded to the Arabs, the Arabs would have accepted the partition? And shouldn't we be talking about population, not ownership, anyway, which is how plebiscites tend to be conducted? The Jews were indeed the majority in the Jewish partition, in spite of the many efforts made to restrict their population over the years, decades, and centuries. Finally, Burr and Collins are implying that since Jews owned around 6 percent of the Mandate land as private property, the Arabs owned the other 94%. And that's totally wrong: the majority of the land was State Land. The Arabs did not own all that much of it as private property either.

We readers deserve a chance to see the actual book, not just Clinton Bennett's review of it. And I hope that some publisher will give us the chance to do just that.

If you move quickly it's easy to believe that you can buy the banned book for $10 in e-book format. You can't.

This is just a 500 word essay about the book.

Amazon should be ashamed to charge $10 for this. Sure, paying the writer 2 cents a word is cheap, but paying 2 cents per word per reader is just ridiculous.

Fortunately, your local library probably snapped one up before these were banned, and you can borrow it, free.

I purchased the electronic version of this book when I first heard the story. Like other reviewers have mentioned, the $10 only buys a 500 word review, NOT the book. I complained via e-mail, and I recieved refund. No problems about that. But why can't we get the electronic book in the USA??
I heard about the book 'alms for jihad' and read exactly how it was 'banned'. Libel laws in England are completely different from the USA's. There is a presumption of guilt on the publisher-fortunently, I believe there has been a court case that keeps the judgement from migrating from England to the USA (thank God) In other words, the court case found that it was violating the authors rights in the USA (when the author is a US citizen) when they (the one who starts the libel suit) use the English laws (which have COMPLETELY different presumption of innocence) to muzzle the book. That's the reason other people have called the people who file complaints in England "tourists", because of different laws there. They wouldn't win a similar case here. Except for that US court case, the judgement would've migrated here (because of legal treaties) although in this case, it seems to have had the same effect-'banning' the book.
My big question-why hasn't another publisher published this book? My guess is because they figure it isn't worth it, moneywise. The mainstream media isn't interested in this case (it would have made a differnce, publicity), they're interested in FISA cases where NSA has recorded calls started or recieved in US, not 'minor' stuff like first amendment rights (sarcasm) If the news dosen't fit (main stream media's) the templete, it's ignored in most cases

Buyer beware! This is not the book you're looking for, and shame on Amazon for running something that appears shady. C'mon, $10.00 for a digitized review? I've heard, inevitably publishers of sterner stuff than Cambridge Pub., will reprint the book, but this is not it, merely a review of the book. The Brits caved into the wealthy Sheikh who funds the terrorists and threatens lawsuits by pulling their edition. Note, most libraries have this book available, but only on reserve, for fear that the remaining editions will be absconded.

I found "Fatal Friendship" to be an original, engaging and well-written account of a fascinating and still largely unresolved incident in American history. The book was also refreshingly free of the typical "anti-Burr" bias that has been the norm from the 1800's through Fawn Brodie. Rogow did an excellent job of discussing the protagonists' differing characters in the proper historical context. History of this sort cannot be neatly tied up with simple black-and-white explanations (despite what the grammatically-challenged reviewers from Oklahoma and Kansas below would seem to prefer). Rogow deserves credit for tackling an interesting subject from a new perspective. Two very recent books, Kennedy's "Burr, Hamilton and Jefferson" and Fleming's "Duel," follow Rogow's lead in examining this period and these two Founding Fathers from a new angle, and also are higly recommended.

I originally purchased this book as a source for a term paper on the subject, and actually planned to only spot-read the book. Yet, after reading Rogow's introduction, I found his argument so intriguing that I felt I just had to read the whole thing. Imagine, Hamilton having "playground" issues with Burr's wealth. Its such an odd little interpretation of history, and its presented so well, that it not only makes for an interesting read, but actually does its job in convincing you of the argument. If you have a penchant for early American History, this is a must read.

Although a mildly useful work, the author seems content to conclude that a simpleton argument is the underlying reason for the two men's duel and fails to disclose perhaps the most revealing, yet little-known fact of all surrounding this most famous event -- that in 1804 Alexander Hamilton had exposed political moves by Vice President Burr, Jr. and Burr's cousin, Theodore Dwight, among others, ultimately designed to return the United States back to British rule. Like so many others here, I rate this book in the category of "mostly fiction".

Arnold Rogow's "A Fatal Friendship" does not set out to villify Aaron Burr, nor does it exhalt Alexander Hamilton unduly.
Instead, it accurately gauges parallel events of their unique relationship, as befits a historian. Readers should remember Rogow is a psychologist, first and foremost, and thus he is permitted to speculate as to Burr and Hamilton's motivations. Rogow consistently qualifies any statements he makes, without overstatements or hyperbole. Therefore, any reader who wants a simple parable of good and evil will be greatly disappointed.

While a history undergrad, I purchased this book simultaneously with Thomas Fleming's own interpretation, "Duel." I was pleased with both books, but I must say Rogow's writing satisfied more because of his more objective stance. Fleming seems to always nurture a slight, though forgivable, bias against Aaron Burr. It is refreshing to see a just assessment of that unprincipled, infuriating, but somehow likeable rogue. As for Hamilton, Rogow ably commends his great political contributions, but also reminds us of our "flawed giant"'s scandalous affair with Maria Reynolds and scurrilous smear campaigns against Federalist president John Adams. Finally, Rogow portrays Hamilton as the true instigator of the vendetta leading to Burr's final challenge and the duel of 1804.

Aaron Burr was no saint, but neither was Hamilton an angelic martyr for the Republic. Two complex historical figures with a tangled common thread. Rogow's study has helped us unravel a Gordian knot of American history. A pity "A Fatal Friendship" is now out of print.

Author Rogow presents a well crafted dual biography of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, trying to piece together the events that culiminated in the duel which left Hamilton dead and Burr an outcast. More emphasis is laid on Hamilton and his life, with Aaron Burr becoming more of a cipher. Burr seems to never have committed his thoughts to paper so his stand on various political issues isn't clear. Hamilton on the other hand, wrote volumes about all facets of his political life. The two came from a very different background yet both ended up as successful attorneys in New York City. Hamilton never stopped trying to sabotage the political rise of Burr and the reasons never seemed very clear. Many political figures of the time commented on questionable ethics and morals of Burr yet Hamilton himself was immersed in one of the first major political sex scandals.

Rogow tries to analyze both men and provide various ideas about what could have led to the duel. It is interesting to note that Hamilton seemed to possess a "death wish" in the final years of his life, after his eldest son Philip had been killed in a duel. This seems to be the only context in which the duel makes any sense. Hamilton could not end his own life but dying a noble death and making Burr an outcast too boot was simply to enticing.

The book was very well done and I especially liked the fact that the author didn't seem predispose to agree or disagree with either man. The men were shown with all their faults and yet their contributions to the founding of the country is richly demonstrated.

Ok if I didn't read Aaron's other book I wouldn't have read another one after reading this. First his over drama with the heorine gets one to the point of thinking "Is this woman nuts?"
It makes the British SIS seem like a bunch of goofballs and it's a miracle then did anything. It would have been nice to have read the book without hearing how every male wanted to sleep with Mrs. Pack or how she wanted to vice-versa. If I didn't know better I would think she's a nympho.

SPOILER WARNING:
She has affairs left and right and meanwhile it gives her husbanda stroke. He writes about a German Lt. who angsts over his assignment and then kills him (but of course he's got to think how beautiful the heorine is). The use of Churchill was a waste and sterotypical.

"Crossing by Night" is David Aaron's best book. It tells the sotry of Elizabeth Pack, codenamed "Cynthia" by the British Secret Service. She becomes the American wife of a career-minded diplomat, and then she becomes a spy for her husband's country. Elizabeth makes some bad choices along the way, but eventually finds herself with a Polish count who could be the key to stopping the Germans. Soon, Elizabeht and the Count risk their lives to help crack the Enigma, while they become close in a forbidden love affair. Our heroine triumphs in the end, as she is honored by King George VI. The thrills don't stop once they start at page 50 or so.

This was not the blockbuster action book I was looking for. It is just another in the crowed field of World War Two historical fiction. With so many books out there this one just does not rise to the top of the class. I do questions some of the proposed facts, that they may be closer to the author's imagination. Don't get me wrong; the story was ok and different from the normal in the class. The writing was good and the author does keep the book moving for the most part. It just did not grab the reader.

I'll tell you the saving grace of this book, and it is simply this: when you're finished with the book, you will find yourself thinking about Elizabeth Pack days afterward. The book isn't incredibly great, and you can tell that it's written by a man, but reading about bravery is always a great thing. I thought it was quite hilarious that the author insistently speaks about Elizabeth's "scent," if you know what I mean...I mean, I started to think the girl must be incredibly smelly. I also don't care much at all about history, and therefore got the names and titles of many of the officers and soldiers mixed up throughout the book, but luckily there was always enough love story going on throughout the book to keep me going. Hey, I finished it, and learned a bit in the process. I'd recommend it as a quirk read.

I enjoyed reading this book but kept expecting more from it. And I kept wondering where the title came from. There didn't seem to be any "Crossing by Night" that I found (unless it's the final train ride out of Poland?). I had never heard the story of Elizabeth Pack and did not know what to expect. The jacket descrption lead me to expect more that what was delivered. While there were some great scenes toward the end (smuggling the Bombe out of Poland) I had to wonder, like some of the other reviewers, how much was real and how much was fiction. Some of it seemed hard to believe that a women could or would do in the late 1930's. And running around the rail yard in Germany in a cocktail dress and heals just seemed down right fiction! Maybe she really did do that, but you can't tell because the author takes a lot of liberty with the facts.

It was a fun book to read and I would recommend it if you're not looking for historical facts. As others have pointed out, there are a few mistakes that do not make or break the story, but it makes you wonder how well the non-fiction portion of the story line was researched by the author. I'm glad I got the book from the library and didn't actually buy it.