<< August 2008 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02
03 04 05 06 07 08 09
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31




Contact Me

If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:

Tuesday, May 20, 2008
THE COMMISSION BY PHILIP SHENON REVIEWED BY HARRY REYNOLDS SCARSDALE NEW YORK

THE COMMISSION      PHILIP SHENON  (2008)

Entitled to a Pulitzer , May 18, 2008

By HAROLD J. REYNOLDS (SCARSDALE, NEW YORK USA)

In the 9/11 World Trade Center attack, 2,750 persons were murdered and, of these, only 292 whole bodies were found. A fierce inquiry into the cause of the horrific slaughter was expected, but the dead had died eight months into the presidency of George W. Bush. Where widows saw lost husbands, Karl Rove saw the loss of Bush's presidency. When the widows and others clamored for an inquiry, Bush, Vice-President Richard Cheney, and Speaker Dennis Hastert, strongly fought to block it, but their supporters in Congress, whose political necks were on the line, could not risk the opposition of the widows. In November, 2002, Public Law 107-306 established, and poorly funded, the 9/11 Commission, five Republicans and five Democrats, to inquire into the causes of the attacks. In July, 2004, the Commission released its report. Philip Shenon of The New York Times covered the Commission's work. His Pulitzer worthy book, The Commission, written in crisp, swift moving prose, is the result. It should be given to high school students in order that they may watch truth struggle with political hypocrisy even on the graves of the 9/11 dead. They might be surprised by what they see.

They will see a report that was based only on facts and opinions unanimously found and held, encouraging trades between Commissioners, which actually occurred, and effectively inhibiting dissents. They will see a report that holds no one personally accountable, in short, a lockstep report shaped by politicians and handed down during an intense presidential pre-election period.

They will see a Commission that compromised its duty to state the evidence that 9/11 was caused by America's identification with Israel. Too controversial, said the Commissioners off stage. (Ernst R. May [noted historian and Senior Adviser to the commission] When Government Writes History, A Memoir of the 9/11 Commission, May 23, 2005, The New Republic 33-34.). Surely, in the absence of a supervening cause, it is the duty of this nation to protect the lives of its people by refraining from its identification with any nation that will cause terrorist attacks on it. Such an issue was before the Commission. It hardly lay in anyone's mouth to claim that because it would generate controversy the issue should not be laid before the people.

An archery award should be given to Shenon for his descriptions, among others, of the mind-boggling failures of President Bush, the incompetent Condoleezza Rice, the CIA and FBI, to track and keep under surveillance the 9/11 hijackers, some of whom were seeking big craft flying lessons in the United States. With an equal eye for telling details, Shenon describes counter terrorism Richard Clarke's now historic memorandum of September 4, 2001 that virtually shouted to Rice that a 9/11 type attack was actually imminent. One reads with fixed attention the Department of Transportation's ignorance of terrorist warnings, the FAA's ignorance that the State Department had a watch list, the FAA's failure to alert our Aerospace Defense Command that a passenger plane had been commandeered, the outright lying of generals concerning military reaction to the hijacked planes, the CIA's 150-foot butcher sheet scroll listing minutely the CIA's antiterrorist efforts against Al-Qaeda prior to 9/11, the CIA's plans to kill Bin Laden in the 1990's, and the neanderthal computer equipment of the FBI, including its lack of an email system on 9/11. Shenon believes that FBI Director Louis Freeh's best gift to the FBI was his leaving it in June, 2001, else, writes Shenon, had Freeh been the Director on 9/11 the Commission might have dismantled it, treating Freeh responsible for the FBI's condition during his tenure in 1993-2001. However, Freeh had a full plate with President Clinton's numerous scandals, to say nothing of the moral revulsion had for Clinton by the intelligence services and the Pentagon.

For dramatic lying, an award to Cheney might be given for denying that on 9/11 he had unlawfully authorized the shooting down of passenger planes that were disobedient to military orders. Necessity, according to Shenon, tempers faulting Cheney. Therefore, for lying long and on a panoramic scale, the lying medal, with a cluster diamond heart pendent, should go to George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, for his world class dysfunction to recall his conversations with Bush and facts such as a written directive to the CIA to kill Bin Laden.

For quick thinking by a patriot, the prize should be extended immediately to Henry Kissinger, first chairman of the commission. He met with the 9/11 widows who, he must have thought, had just come from a soccer game. Instead, they demanded that he make his client list public. When they asked whether he had Saudi clients, or clients named Bin Laden, the frightened Kissinger, Shenon reports, nearly fell to the floor from his couch. Kissinger resigned the next morning, sixteen days after his appointment.

Philip Zelikow, the Commission's executive director, dubbed by the staff the White House mole, was the iron handed ruler, and micro watcher of the work of the investigators who despised him. He had been part of Bush's transition team, author of Bush's paper supporting pre-emptive war, co-author of a book with Condoleezza Rice, and, from the Commission, secret communicator with Rice and Rove. He was a walking hotbed of conflicts of interest, a fact that did not stop the Commission's chair and vice-chair from stating publicly that they did not detect in Zelikow any conflict of interest, an opinion that arched the eyebrows of the Commission's staff. When appointed Secretary of State, Rice appointed the grateful Zelikow her counselor, a job that he had always wanted, presumably even as he sat in the Commission's office.

The granting of the Master Criminal award would unquestionably attract high school students to Sandy Berger as a recognizable class mate. He had been President Clinton's national security adviser and was Clinton's liaison with the Commission. In October, 2003, Berger, tasked by Clinton, went to the National Archives to examine classified national security papers of the Clinton administration copies or notes of which could not be made and taken from the archives. On a prior visit, he was seen walking to the men's room with papers rolled around and sticking out of his socks. On his October visit, however, the archivists, having set a trap, caught him. For his life of archival crime, Burger netted a misdemeanor conviction, a three-year loss of security clearance, and a $50,000 fine.

In November, 2004, Bush was re-elected with the help of the Commission's report, for it made the nation mindful of the threat of another 9/11 attack and, in connection with that attack, no fault was found by the Commission in Bush. And so Rove had his presidency, and the widows were left with no one held accountable.

Posted at 05:51 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Thursday, July 26, 2007
Hillary Clinton's Discretion with Deceit

Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton

Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr. Little, Brown and Company New York 2007 $29.00

Reviewed by Harold Reynolds

Jeff Garth and Don Van Natta have labored hard to produce Her Way, their portrait of a cold, severe, dominating, power-obsessed Hillary Clinton. In a note posted at the beginning of the book, they complain that Hillary is reachable only through her loyal intermediaries who are fearful of retribution by her should they speak to the authors. The authors apparently believe that, had Hillary been deranged enough to speak to them, they would have laid even more before us. Nevertheless, those self-flaggelants who read Her Way from beginning to end, however small their number, will be grateful to the authors for their 483 pages of plain, reportorial prose, untouched by literary merit, colorless like the Hillary they repeatedly describe, the text as lively as a baggage receipt. To all others, take caution: do not read the book while seated in a rocking chair before an open fire. After a hundred or so pages you may reach the tipping point and end up as an index number in the Surrogate's Court.

Hillary is born in 1947 on page 14 and in 8 pages enters Wellesley where, as if genetically programmed, she becomes a whirlwind of political activity, president of the student government and, as senior student speaker at her 1969 commencement, gains national attention by turning, without forewarning, upon the invited speaker, hapless U.S. Senator Edward Brooke, calling him to account for his failure to speak on Vietnam and civil rights.

Yale Law School follows in 1969. Hillary develops an all consuming interest in children's rights, falls in love with fellow student Bill Clinton in 1970, and lives with him in 1971. Graduating in 1973, she becomes at 26 one of 43 staffers of the House Nixon impeachment inquiry. She joins Bill in Arkansas in 1974 where, in their mid-twenties, they enter, say the authors, into "a secret pact of ambition to capture the presidency for Bill" and "to do whatever it took to win election and defeat their opponents. Bill would be the project's public face, of course. And Hillary would serve as the enterprise's behind the scenes manager and enforcer". They are married in October, 1974, by a Reverend Nixon, proof, perhaps, of God's dark sense of humor.

Reaching into the trash basket of history, the authors call on stage names mercifully now only cardboard pop-ups in memory: Jim McDougal, White River, Madison Guaranty, Rose Law Firm, righteous Kenneth Starr, smiling Monica Lewinsky and her historically famous semen-stained dress, Hillary's billing records, Paula Jones, the tragic suicide of Vincent Foster, the masked right wing conspiracy, humble Bill and his White House fly act, and, most of all, those justice loving people who, if it meant only their holding of a spike in place, were enfevered to bring the judgment of God down upon the Clintons. Looking back, few can recall the why of it all. Many, indeed, today may wonder in a free moment over their lack of compassion for the Clintons as they were tracked, trapped, and tormented.

Transfixed by the Clinton's 1974 "secret pact" to gain the presidency, the authors excitedly report that in 1993 the Clintons planned two terms for Bill and, later, two for Hillary. For proof they offer purported statements of Leon Panetta and Taylor Branch. Panetta, Bill's former presidential chief of staff, has issued no statement in support , while Branch, a much respected historian and author, denounced their story as "preposterous". (Michael Tomasky, Can We Know Her?, NY Rev. Books, July 19, 2007, pp. 14, 15) Rare the reader who does not laugh at the authors' boasting of their alleged "discovery" of a "secret pact" the rumors of which had long travelled the rounds of Washington. (Jennifer Senior, NY Times Book Rev., July 15, 2007, 8, 9)

Following the book's publication, Van Natta said "...we don't make any judgment that it's a bad thing or a good thing. We simply report this. This is news." (MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, June 12, 2007 edition) Their "news", however, is that Bonnie and Clyde have been planning a long time to come to town and strong arm anyone barring their way into the White House.

Her Way accelerates with details of Kenneth Starr's unyielding pursuit, Hillary's incredible power over national policy issues, her disastrous handling of her health care plan, Bill's outrageous pretense of ignorance of the Rwanda genocide (erroneously measured by the authors as "a few weeks" instead of three months), and the Clinton's low bred fund raising activities (Want a White House cup of coffee for big bucks, or do you have bigger bucks for a sleep over in Lincoln's bedroom?). Particularly revealing is Hillary's back stage maneuvering for a New York Senate seat while a simple, good hearted America saw her only as the icon of a grieving, loyal wife, defending a repentant husband caught in his adulteries and perjuries, to say nothing of his wholesale, bold face lying to the entire nation. There is mordant humor to be found in the failed impeachment proceedings, the Starr Report's overly detailed descriptions of Bill's sexual conduct, that must have made the Clintons run for cover, followed surprisingly by the public's warm hearted support of Bill and the public's acknowledgment that Hillary, after all, actually had human feelings. Still, Bill hardly looked attractive leaving office after dealing with the substantial risk of a federal indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice, to say nothing of his issuance of 140 scandal tainted pardons as he fleet footed it down the White House steps.

It was a good point in Her Way to turn the camera on Hillary in the Senate where she has sat supported by both her staff and her unequalled personal political organization, oiled and fired 24/7 to win her the presidency. Here are areas of interest to the uninformed reader, areas that disclose fault lines in Hillary's character. The authors succeed in revealing her dead-pan skill for marketing her history of major mistakes with a certain fondness for tempering discretion with deceit. For example, they zero in on her reckless failure to read the entire National Intelligence Estimate that made war against Iraq less lawful than Bush claimed. They point to her adoption of Bush's false claim of an Al Quaeda-Iraq relationship and its tie to 9/11. She was so anxious to show her capacity for military leadership that she didn't do the due diligence required for dealing with the one decision that she considered the most important in her life.

She appeared before the Council of Foreign Relations mouthing Bush-like statements but, as the war turned about, and the prospect of the presidency began to whet her appetite, she mischaracterized the intelligence available to her in the National Intelligence Estimate and, the authors argue, twisted the meaing of the war resolution in order to blame Bush for having misled her to support the war he planned. Howevermuch Her Way fails as a biographical work of literature, it hits its target here, for

a weakness to dodge truth instead of admitting major error is fatal to any candidate for the presidency. It leads people to live daily in the light of false dawns, a curse no nation deserves.

 

Posted at 02:30 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Friday, February 16, 2007
GIULIANI THE QUICK CHANGE ARTIST

                           Reviewed by Harry Reynolds

                                 Grand Illusion

              The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11

 

By Wayne Barrett and Dan Collins HarperCollins New York, N.Y. 390 pages $25.95

              Why is that fireman with helmet of thorn

               Tapping on Giuliani's window since 9/11 morn?

 

Rudolph Giuliani was sworn mayor in 1994 within a minute's walk of the World Trade Center bombed in 1993. Reviewing Giuliani's mayoralty in 2000, Wayne Barrett, one of America's great investigative journalists, saw Giuliani as a cruel, unstable, destructive hypocrite, a man judged by the press to be barely human and inwardly empty. Rudy! An Investigative Biography of Rudolph Giuliani (2000)

In September, 2001, the arc of Giuliani's political life was in the descendant; his second marriage had crashed publicly and his senatorial plans had been aborted by prostate cancer. With an eye on the approaching end of his mayoralty, he had begun planning a consulting business, a natural refuge for unskilled, former office holders.

On September 11th, Giuliani was at breakfast in a midtown hotel when two planes that had just flown overhead made him speed downtown to a Hell where he would see men and women, not long from their breakfasts, holding hands and jumping to their deaths from the flames of the110-story towers of the World Trade Center. There 2,150 would be killed in the Twin Towers alone. Three hundred forty-three firemen would die. We, transfixed by our television screens, stunned by what it all portended, would be calmed by Giuliani's words, credit for which, few know and let history note, belongs to Michael Cohen, a psychologist expert in handling crisis communications who was summoned the night of 9/11 and early the next morning carefully instructed Giuliani on what to say and not to say to the public, after which Giuliani appeared before the media and spoke to us.

And so it was that Giuliani, for a brief moment in our extremity, became us, and we, him. Thus out of 9/11 arose the myth of Giuliani, a myth exhaustively challenged in Grand Illusion, by Wayne Barrett and Dan Collins, who by daunting proof show that the myth of Giuliani arose out of a Hell in the creation of which he himself had had a hand, a myth from which he now profits, for he travels the nation, self-declared expert on terrorism, redemptor of New York City, receiving tens of millions in his expanding consulting business, eagerly seeking the Presidency with a genuinely commercial smile. If the facts in Grand Illusion are true, a beguiled public may see that their mythical Giuliani is a quick change artist given to the practice of an economy of truth.

Though Giuliani claims to have been obsessed with terrorism almost eight years prior to 9/11, and to have held many meetings concerning it, we know of no one with whom he shared his obsession and no one who recalls having met with him about it, though it was their business to do so. Giuliani had acted during those years as if the 1993 bombing had never happened. As John Miller, an acute City Hall observer of Giuliani, said of Giuliani's claims, "Hello, history. Give me rewrite."

When Giuliani claims that the police and fire departments had been prepared prior to 9/11 to act in coordination in a terror attack, we wonder first over his memory, and then over his integrity, for the operational chiefs of those departments do not recall it, to say nothing of the 9/11 Commission's finding that as of 9/11 those departments "were not prepared to comprehensively coordinate their efforts in responding to a major incident." As Giuliani must recall, the city did not even have a formalized Incident Command System. Bizarre as it sounds, the city on his watch actually suffered from mutually antagonistic fire and police departments, an ongoing scandal in itself . If the police and fire departments had had a joint post, the fire chiefs would have received the police helicopter warnings of the imminent collapse of the South Tower and many lives would have been saved in those nine minutes.

On 9/11, there was no central command position to control our reaction to the attack, for, mysteriously, Giuliani, against all advice and in a highly questionable exercise of judgment, had insisted that the Office of Emergency Management be located within walking distance of City Hall in the predictably targeted 47-story 7World Trade Center, 23 floors over a Con Ed substation and its 106,000 gallon fuel tank, the world's first bunker in the sky that was instantly evacuated on 9/11 and that collapsed, leaving the city without any command center and, as the 9/11 Commission noted, without any "backup site". Picture the mayor stumbling through a choking, blinding chaos looking for his police commissioner, the learned Bernard Kerick, who in the police department had never been higher than a third grade detective, thereafter chauffeur and bodyguard to Giuliani, later to be unforgettably recommended by Giuliani to President Bush as the head of Homeland Security and overseer of its billions of dollars, such is the nature of chance and opportunity in our wonderful democracy. Giuliani looked too, for his politically selected fire commissioner, Tom Von Essen, once head of the firefighters union who had never achieved any rank above that of a uniformed fireman but had thoughtfully delivered firefighters as political campaign workers for Giulianni in 1993. As fire commissioner, Von Essen failed to create a substantial plan for the handling of high-rise fires. These intellectual stars wound up in Giuliani's post-9/11 consulting business.

As for the hundreds of our dead firemen, they and their wives and children must haunt Giuliani, for he knew that they were equipped by his administration with notoriously ineffective"walkie-talkies" condemned as dangerous to firemen and public as early as 1990. They caused the deaths of those firemen and many others in the towers. The departmental brass did not know that civilians below the fires were told to stay in place after the chiefs had ordered full evacuations. One cannot but think that there was a glacial silence when Giuliani before the 9/11 Commission said that the command and control breakdown on 9/11 "was not a major problem", a breakdown in which fire chiefs relied on runners for messages. He even suggested before the Commission that it was "unpatriotic" to discuss mistakes. This from the mayor whose heroic firemen were sent to their deaths to extinguish fires that their superiors knew were uncontrollable. This mayor in his uniquely hidden eight-year obsession with terrorism never had room for a plan for handling mega fires in one of the largest citys on earth, no plan for aircraft striking the towers, no holding of even one multi-agency coordinated drill for a mega high attack, no systematic approach for the rescue of the 200 people trapped in elevators where they died. This the mayor who, as his myth widened, thoughtfully wrote a book entitled "Leadership", the leader who failed to inform workers at Ground Zero, and the public, of the hazardous toxicity of the air proved by the city's own test results.

         Grand Illusion marks the point at which Giuliani's political life should be over, when the piano player stops, the lights are turned out, and the fat lady sings.

 

Posted at 07:24 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Friday, June 16, 2006
BUSH THE LET ME LOOK IN YOUR EYE PRESIDENT

     

                                       BUSH THE MYSTIC

By: Harry Reynolds

President Bush thinks nothing of claiming a power ordinarily found in mystics. He flew to Baghdad this week, he claims, in order to look into Iraq's prime minister's eyes and divine the poor man's true self. Bush used his power of divination in 2001when for the first time he met Vladimir Putin. On that occasion, he said, "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul."

In 2002, after Bush got a sense of Putin's soul, Putin, the former KGB head, without fanfare ordered postage stamps issued commemorating "The 80th Anniversary of Soviet Counterintelligence".

The KGB, Russia's secret police, is a lineal descendent of the notorious Cheka, GPU, OGPU, NKVD, and NKGB. In one stamp, Putin happily commemorated the face of Vsevolod Balitsky, the GPU butcher who in the 1930s participated in the deaths of 10 million Ukrainians in Russia's creation of the greatest man-made famine in history, imposed to break the backs of the Ukrainian peasants many of whom were driven to the madness of cannibalism. A second stamp celebrates Vladimir Styrne, slaughterer in the 1920s of thousands of Uzbeks, a third salutes Artur Artuzov, the dreaded OGPU leader who oversaw the savage political slaughter of the early 1920s, and a fourth exults the murderer Sergei Puzitsky who killed a half million Cossacks in 1931.

There is something eerie in Mr Bush trudging through life speaking English as a second language, claiming that God has willed him to be our president, and stopping every now and then to perform his divination trick.

                               

Posted at 04:11 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Sunday, April 02, 2006
The Brother

                                        The Brother

                                        Reviewed by Harry Reynolds

Sam Roberts      The Brother      Random House     2001      543 pp.    $35

   The untold story of atomic spy David Greenglass and how he sent his

                   sister, Ethel Rosenberg, to the electric chair.

 

Fifty years ago, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, after a trial by jury, were convicted of espionage and sentenced to death. The verdict was based essentially upon the evidence of Ethel's younger brother, David Greenglass, and his wife Ruth.

In June, 1953, Julius and Ethel were slain - it's the only honest word for it - by Joseph Francel, an upstate journeyman electrician who pocketed $150 for each death. Each had refused to disclose information to officials who were standing ready to stop the killings if the Rosenbergs would speak. Two days later, their hearses passed thousands of spectators many of whom had compassion for them as innocent victims of the Cold War, for McCarthyism was then our temporary aberration that led many on the left to discount, in favour of the Soviet Union, any accusation of treason. Many others, however, despised the Rosenbergs as traitors. Years of protest and vilification of the government for slaying the innocent Rosenbergs followed. Among the onlookers as the Rosenberg hearses drove by was six-year old Sam Roberts, now a New York Times editor and host of New York Close-Up, the Times's nightly public affairs program on NY 1, and formerly city editor of the New York DailyNews.

At hand is Roberts's book, The Brother: The Untold Story of Atomic Spy David Greenglass and How He Sent His Sister, Ethel Rosenberg, to the Electric Chair. He writes that their deaths "would define the legacy... of an unrelated six-year old boy [Roberts] who ... bore silent witness as a cortege bearing history silently, but indelibly, rolled by". Their deaths became his "lifelong obsession". His obsession explains why in midlife he worked over a 13-year period to inquire into the Rosenbergs' guilt, notwithstanding that their guilt as members of a major Soviet espionage operation was put beyond question on July 12, 1995 with the disclosure by the United States of the once top secret Venona project documents, the brilliant breaking by our government of the Soviet Union's coded documents, a project begun in 1943 and kept secret throughout the Rosenberg case.

Whatever Roberts's reason for writing The Brother, his book is without equal in the vast literature about the Rosenbergs. Its uniqueness lies not in the fact that The Brother is the most current and comprehensive book about the Rosenbergs, or because Roberts successfully traced and dogged David Greenglass after his prison release and interviewed him at length. It is because Roberts's book stands by itself as an extraordinary literary achievement. He has given us a magnificently readable, intellectually rich work. It is a book that talks. One is tempted to say that it has a certain Russian literary quality about it. It reads as if Roberts were next to you, reading the book aloud, quietly laughing at his allusive and occasionally witty asides and wry judgments. All of this in a prose style that has a tensile strength of just the right degree to keep the reader turning one page after another. His Nabokovian description of virtually every fact - down to the Greenglass family's huge kitchen "bathtub that squatted on cast-iron legs and came with a versatile enamel cover", a cover found on that bathtub in the kitchen of every Lower East Side Old Law Tenement - is like watching the exfoliation of things out of the words that evoke them. Like Proust's madeleine, Roberts's casual reference to Ethel's mother's weekly "supply of clear, blue, and green glass seltzer bottles" will stir up in the minds of many memories of long ago. Roberts's mastery of fact reportage, his sense of just the right sequences of scenes, gives one a sense of reading a perfect cinematic script. What kind of wood was used to make the electric chair to which the Rosenbergs were strapped? Look at page 16. What were the exact movements of 20-year old Ruth Greenglass after she arrived in Albuquerque on 26 November, 1944? Read page 89; it reads like a Hollywood movie camera man's shooting list. The Greenglass family at 64 Sheriff Street right off Delancey? Read Roberts' book. You can almost see them, as if transfixed, standing in the daunting August air of the cluttered rooms in which they slept. In short, one reads with a sense of living in the real time of Roberts's narrative, the ultimate art for a non-fiction work that deserves consideration for a Pulitzer Prize.

As for the trial, Roberts lays it out in its almost startling simplicity, for the issue of conspiracy to commit espionage was, in the Rosenberg case, an issue only of credibility - no fingerprints, no papers, no recordings, no witnesses, only the actors, the verdict, and the exit. David Greenglass testified that in 1944 and 1945 he gave information to Julius Rosenberg about Los Alamos and the atom bomb. Ruth Greenglass and Harry Gold, a Soviet courier, corroborated David Greenglass's evidence insofar as it related to them. Proof was given that, after Gold's arrest, the Rosenbergs prepared to flee. In defence, the Rosenbergs denied everything in the Greenglass's story that concerned espionage. It took very little to persuade the jury that the Rosenbergs were liars.

As for the death sentences for which Judge Irving Kaufman and the government were long vilified, the Rosenbergs were traitors who supported a system in which Lenin's ideas of violence, dictatorship and terror were integral, a system in which Stalin used the weapons of the Cheka, erected the forced labour camps of the gulag, maintained the mono-ideological one-party state, extinguished the idea of free, popular elections, legalized administrative arbitrariness, repressed the press and religion, harried intellectuals into the secret hand to hand world of the samzidat, and subjugated Russia to the dread, sadistic Great Terror, to say nothing of the unutterably barbaric genocide of six million peasants in the first state-created famine in history, a famine calculated to break the backs and will of the peasant class. It was on the door of this madhouse of the 20th century that the Rosenbergs, arrogant in their political ignorance, knocked and offered atomic and other military secrets usable against us, a free society. For many the unquestionable legality of the sentences forecloses further inquiry. For others, as it is for this reviewer, though revenge may please, there is the innate feeling of something insuperably abnormal about the death penalty, something like a forbidden reversal by man of the act of creation.

Last, a temptation for the intellectually curious. If Ethel was slain principally because she had typed an alleged description of atomic bomb information supplied by David, what lie, one seemingly so casual and minor, did David tell the jury, a lie that Roberts learned in his interview of David, a lie that might well have led to Joseph Francel's $150 flipping of the switch on Ethel? Read Chapter 36, The Final Confession. It's only 12 pages.

Posted at 05:53 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Monday, February 27, 2006
Beyond Glory: Joe Louis v. Max Schmeling

                    Reviewed by Harry Reynolds

Beyond Glory: Joe Louis vs. Max Schmeling, and a World on the Brink

By David Margolick, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, N.Y. 423 pages, $26.95

In his Pulitzer worthy Beyond Glory, David Margolick harrows the era of the Louis-Schmeling championship fights and, as on a grand screen, recreates it. No one will ever revisit it with something new. His transfixing story of two boxers in an America spiralling towards unprecedented war is written with a photogenic eye for the graphic detail and an ear with a precision that makes speech rise out of the page. Dickens would have loved this book.

In 1935, Jews dominated every aspect of boxing in America. Joe Louis, born in Alabama, a poor sharecropper’s child, entered that boxing world at 21 after the cigar chomping, meanspirited, buckdriven Mike Jacobs, who controlled boxing in New York, signed him. The press would eventually write of Louis that he was an illiterate, emotionless, good natured, stupid animal. In 1935, he mercilessly beat Primo Carnera and nearly killed Max Baer. In 1936, he dispatched Charley Retzlaff in 85 seconds but in June Louis was severely beaten by Nazi Germany’s Max Schmeling. In August, Louis whacked out Jack Sharkey and in September and October he took Al Ettore in 5 and Jorge Brescia in 3. In 1937, with an eye on champion Jim Braddock, the "Cinderella Man", Louis beat Bob Pastor and Natie Brown, and barnstormed through six states. In June, at 23 and the 12 to 5 favorite, he became world champion when he thrashed Braddock who, Damon Runyon wrote, was left on the canvas like "a frozen haddock". And then, in June, 1938, Louis wiped out Schmeling. Had he not done so, Beyond Glory would not have been written.

Now you have the names and dates, but here is how it all happened and how it all ended.

America in the thirties was anti-black, anti-Semitic, and deep in the Depression. Lynching blacks was not news, nor was their unutterable poverty. Segregation was the rule. Hitler was in power, terrifying Jews in Germany and in the United States, to say nothing of his view of blacks as subhumans. Into that mix, Max Schmeling stepped in New York and was soon cast by the Nazis as their global hero. For a time, his boxing manager was five foot two, Hells Kitchen bred Joe Jacobs who could say kaddish for his mother while eating a ham sandwich.

In 1935, the nation’s black communities exploded with joy when Louis at Yankee Stadium beat the Italian giant, Carnera. When shortly thereafter Louis almost killed Max Baer at the stadium, the 85,000 spectators went mad with excitement. Margolick’s description of Harlem going wild is only one of the book’s many displays of his literary skill, exercised repeatedly throughout the book by integrating with it the culled work of sharp tongued sportswriters who poured out copy like evangelists at tent meetings, in all giving the effect not of reportage but of voices naturalling speaking along with Margolick as he wrote.

In Louis’s 1936 fight with Schmeling, ninety per cent of black America favored Louis. as did boxing’s top fighters, Jack Dempsey, Gene Tunney, Baer and Braddock. When, however, Schmeling severely beat Louis , the nation was shocked. Nothing can equal Margolick’s description of that dismay, nothing coud be more compassionate than his detailed report of the broken heart of the crushed black community. Germany, of course, was unrestrained in its pleasure. Schmeling’s popularity there, now at its height, was in the service of the murderous Nazis who had politicized boxing.

A chastened Louis turned about and toppled a line of fighters. Jews boycotted Schmeling. Nazis violently attacked Jews in America’s boxing world. Blacks refused to support the Jewish boycott because , they said, Jews had not supported blacks domestically. In the end, money called the shots and led to a Louis-Schmeling rematch after Louis devastated Jim Braddock and thus gained the world title, an event that triggered joy and violence in black America.

On June 22, 1938, with tens of thousands looking on in Yankee Stadium and the whole world listening to their radios, Louis nearly killed Schmeling in 2 minutes, 4 seconds, and would have done so had Schmeling’s trainer not rushed into the ring and stopped the fight. Margolick’s telling of that beating, blow by blow by blow, must be read to experience the force of his literary skill. I began to read it sitting and ended it standing. Cries of horror had rung out at that beating. A blow to the left kidney caused Schmeling to let out such a high pitched scream, heard through out the stadium, that someone said he sounded "like a stuck pig". The ensuing beating literally frightened spectators near the ring . In the end, it left Schmeling sitting in his corner, openly weeping. For almost 2 years, Louis, the presss’s "stupid animal", Louis, the South’s "nigger", Louis, the North’s "illiterate", Louis, whose boxing flaw Schmeling had bragged of discovering by watching movies of Louis boxing, that Louis had patiently hunted for Schmeling, at one point watching over and over movies of Schmeling boxing. As Louis in his soft, gentle drawl said, "Either me or him will drop early. They ain’t gonna be no decision. All the judges can stay home that night".

In 1942, Louis enlisted in our segregated army. He donated large sums from title defenses to army and navy relief funds for the taxes on which the IRS would hound him into mental illness. He lost his money in gambling, high living, and money schemes. He suffered humiliating boxing defeats, and wound up refereeing wrestling matches. With medication, he worked as a "greeter" at Caesar’s Palace. Left paralyzed by a stroke in 1977, he died in1981 at the age of sixty-six.

As for Schmeling, he served Hitler as a propaganda idol and as a paratrooper. He died seven months short of his hundredth birthday in 2005, having received in 1954 from James Farley, onetime New York boxing commissioner and Democratic Party chairman, the offer of a Coca Cola distributorship in Germany by means of which Schmeling became a multimillionaire, a member of the West German establishment, and a philanthropist. Coke, according to Margolick, "never wanted anything to do with Joe Louis, even in his prime." Schmeling claimed to have paid for Louis’s funeral.

And so the moral of this story is that there isn’t any moral, but there sure was a hell of a lot of action in Yankee Stadium the night of June 22, 1938, and a bagful of memories for everyone who waited for and watched that fight, and then went out on the town for the night of their lives.

 

 

Posted at 10:42 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Monday, February 13, 2006
Harry Reynolds Made Kikuyu Tribe Member

September 11, 2005

HARRY REYNOLDS OF SCARSDALE, NEW YORK, MADE MEMBER OF KENYA'S KIKUYU TRIBE AND GIVEN THE NAME "KAMAU"

On Sunday, September 11th, 2005, I met at a New York City hotel with several Kenyans - my good friend, the aged Kimani Ng'a Ng'a Maruge, brought here to attend at the Summit at the United Nations, Kimani's Kenyan grammar school teacher, Jane Obinchu, a Kenyan representative of Aidinternatinal, the NGO that arranged for Kimani's trip to New York, and an onlooking official of Kenya's ministry of education. In a hilarious meeting, during which a Kikuyu translation was made of my extended conversation with Kimani concerning our families, for I have known him and his family, Kimani made me a member of the Kikuyu tribe in recognition of the fact, he said, that I am his brother. As we all stood in the quietude of the lobby, Kimani blessed me from head to foot, and latterly, left and right, with swift flourishings of a tribal whisk which he then gave to me. I was given the Kikuyu name "Kamau", birth name of Kenyatta who was the first president of Kenya. I had taken an interest in Kimani's welfare, and provide money for him, because, among other things, he had been tortured by English soldiers in the 1950's when tens of thousands of Kenyans in the Mau Mau movement were rounded up like animals, imprisoned, hanged or by other means killed by the British government in concentration camps.On entering the hotel I did not expect to leave it as a Kikuyu. So one can see that benefactions can come out of nowhere unexpectedly.

Kamau (Harry) Reynolds

Posted at 01:03 am by chekhov
Make a comment

Sunday, December 18, 2005
LOUIS FREEH: MY FBI

My FBI:

Bringing Down the Mafia, Investigating Bill Clinton,

and Fighting the War on Terror

By Louis J. Freeh St. Martin's Press New York, N.Y. 336 pages $ 29.95

A thread runs through all memoirs. In Louis Freeh's memoir, My FBI, the thread is an avowedly devout Catholicism, a faith in which Freeh was raised a "straight laced Catholic", a faith that "moved me toward the FBI", that "taught him to respect authority", that made the FBI "like a calling". His book's language is unadorned and is honest as a handshake, high spirited, decent, compassionate, and handsomely generous. If your name is in this book and Freeh has not called you "a great guy", "remarkable", "an inspiration", you are probably wanted in Nebraska for an axe slaying.

Early on in My FBI, Freeh tells of a winter night in 1968, when he, an 18 year old Rutgers sophomore bound for his rented room above a store after having worked that night on a beer truck, finds an old vagrant, reeking of "booze", lying in the hallway. Rather than prudently calling the police to have the man taken to a shelter, Freeh carries the stranger to his room, puts him on a sofa, and covers him. After morning coffee, the man states that he is "Flaherty", one of three brothers who had joined the Abraham Lincoln Brigade and went to Spain in 1937 to fight Franco. Upon returning home, he was persecutued by the FBI as a Communist. He could not find a job, and so, thirty-one years later, he was on skid row. Freeh gave him "a few bucks". Flaherty left, never to be seen by Freeh again. Admitting that he did not know how true Flaherty's story was, Freeh calls their conversation "one of my richest undergraduate experiences" for he saw how the FBI had set out to ruin Flaherty "without lifting an official finger against him". The story is a movingly genuine one of Freeh's compassion.

On the other hand, by startling coincidences I know that the man in the hallway was Frank Flaherty who in October, 1969, was buried in an unmarked grave in Olean, New York. I knew the political commissar of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, Steve Nelson, and I knew that the three young Flaherty brothers from south Boston were famed for heroism in battle. I read Flaherty's 260 page FBI file provided upon his relative's FOIA request. It discloses, among other things, Flaherty's primary work as a seaman on coast line ships. The FBI's checking of him, such as it was, ended in 1953. The thread in Flaherty's ruin lay curled with him at the bottom of whatever bottle he was holding. He had sunk so low - his nickname was "Sunky" - that the FBI's last interest in him arose out of complaints that in at least three states and the District of Columbia he scammed parents of servicemen by calling them, posing as their son's college friend in sore need of money to reach his ship, and conning the parents to wire him money. Ironically, Freeh might have been scammed by Flaherty who might have known that the other tenants in Freeh's building were college students.

With a Phi Beta Kappa degree from Rutgers college in 1971, and a law degree from its law school in 1975, Freeh went to work at 25 as an FBI agent. He begins work in the small crimes world of "the street". There he doesn't "rat out" anyone, collars "nobodies", and works "to get enough goods" to put the deserving into the "slammer". In 1981, he is appointed an Assistant U. S. Attorney in the Southern District where he attracts national attention during 1985 as the fighting prosecutor in the 17 month Pizza Connection case involving 300 witnesses, 15,000 exhibits, a 41,000 page transcript, a defendant shot during his attorney's summation, while another, unhappy with his attorney's summation, "put out a hit contract on him". In 1989, Freeh tediously tracks and brings to conviction the bomber Walter Moody who killed U.S. District Judge Robert Vance and NAACP leader Robert Robinson. At 43, Freeh is appointed a U.S. District Judge. His two years as a district judge are quickly glossed over in My FBI, though he does stop to refer to Learned Hand as a "Supreme Court justice".

In 1993, President Clinton appoints Freeh Director of the FBI. Freeh

confesses in retrospect that he "wasn't ready" for the political pressure that position would attract. He describes the constant FBI budget problems, the failure to keep abreast of communication technologies, and the daunting great need for additional agents. Notable convictions are recalled - the Birmingham church bombing, the conviction of the former governor of Louisiana, and the usual suspects, corrupt police officers. He points to China and the foreign intelligence services of our closest allies engaged in intellectual property thefts. Health care fraud, anti-trust, bank fraud, and theft by computers, are but a handful of the many matters that made him work "like a dog".

In 1995 he dealt with the apprehension of the Unabomber, Kaczynski, and in 1996 he oversaw the Murrah Federal Building bombing investigation in Oklahoma. And then there was the mindboggling nightmare of the Russian mole, FBI agent Robert Hanssen, caught in 2001 having compromised intelligence operations since the 1970's. Hanssen lived in Scarsdale close to my home and prayed in our parish Catholic church. As yet undiscovered, he was then transferred to Washington where he lived near Freeh and prayed in Freeh's church.

Freeh's book was published more than four years after he resigned in 2001 and entered corporate life. He so despised Clinton, and so loved the FBI, that he delayed his resignation until Clinton had resigned, thus allowing President Bush to appoint his successor. Freeh had spent most of his time as director "investigating the man who had appointed me". Clinton's moral compass, said Freeh, pointed in the wrong direction. The closets "were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out." In eight years, "Clinton ran through six White House counsels, a telling index of just how troubled his tenure was."

Freeh points to FBI evidence of illicit fund-raising during the 1996 presidential campaign, particularly Republic of China soft money in Clinton-Gore coffers. With a fine touch of solemn comedy, Freeh describes the FBI's overseeing in the White House of the procurement from Clinton himself of his DNA for comparative use with the historic semen stains found on Monica Lewinsky's dress. The odor of decay is recalled by Freeh in Clinton's end term rain of controversial pardons, especially that of Marc Rich. For "the most devastating moment of my entire tenure as director", Freeh points to Clinton's 1999 citation by U.S. District Judge Wright for contempt for the giving of intentionally false information in Paula Jones v. Clinton. In January, 2001, the Arkansas Supreme Court suspended Clinton for five years for having knowingly given evasive and misleading discovery responses in that matter.

For the public however, Freeh's claim that Clinton attempted to obtain money from the Saudis in connection with the Khobar Towers bombing is by far the gravest charge made by Freeh against Clinton. In June, 1996, Iran's exclusive terrorist agent, Hezbollah, bombed the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 Americans and wounding 372. The FBI could not question suspects in Saudi Arabia unless Clinton obtained King Fahd's consent. Freeh determinedly pressed Clinton to persuade the Saudis to allow FBI agents to enter Saudi Arabia for hard evidence of Iran's complicity. In 1998, when Crown Prince Abdullah met with Clinton in Washington, Freeh expected Clinton to persuade the Saudis to cooperate. Instead, Clinton, wrote Freeh, "raised the subject only to tell the crown prince that he certainly understood the Saudi's reluctance to cooperate [because of Iran]. Then...he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the still-to-be-built Clinton library".

For his accusation against Clinton, one that directly challenges Clinton's integrity in a grave matter, Freeh offers "usually reliable sources". Freeh, an attorney, must know that his accusation of Clinton, still an attorney though suspended, made without stating its grounds, denies Clinton the means of challenging the truth of the accusation. On the other hand, Freeh's claim of misconduct by Clinton is relevant to whether the Committee on Professional Conduct of the Arkansas Supreme Court should recommend his reinstatement in January, 2006. Freeh would then have an opportunity to identify his "usually reliable sources".

 

 

 

 

Posted at 12:29 am by chekhov
Make a comment

Monday, October 10, 2005
THE RIGHT REVEREND RICHARD CHENEY

                                                    THE RIGHT REVEREND RICHARD CHENEY

Rare is the person who has never been deceived, conned, tricked, or flipped.

Are you the exception? Try this for size:

It’s February, 1992. Bush the Father had led us into the "Gulf Conflict" to "protect the sovereignty of Kuwait" by protecting our oil under Kuwait. Richard Cheney, Halliburton oil and gas hustler and our Secretary of Defense, appears on BBC to explain why we had not pressed on to Baghdad. Listen to con man Cheney ["The Gulf Conflict 1990-1991" by Freedman and Karsh, p. 413]:

"If we’d gone to Baghdad and got rid of Saddam Hussein - assuming we could have found him - we'd have had to put a lot of forces in and run him to ground some place. He would not have been easy to capture. Then you've got to put a new government in his place and then you're faced with the question of what kind of government are you going to establish in Iraq? Is it going to be a Kurdish government or a Shia government or a Sunni government? How many forces are you going to have to leave there to keep it propped up, how many
casualties are you going to take through the course of this operation?"

Thirteen years later and betcha’ don’t know how many of your sons and daughters, or those of your neighbors, are going to be decapitated by mortars, have their body parts zipped up in those black bags, and sent home in those neat, white coffins that the nosey press are barred from photographing.

Betcha’ don’t know how many of those youngsters are going to die defending a dummy government propped up by Bush the Idiot Son "to establish democracy" while protecting our oil under Iraq "against the terrrorist Islamist global conspiracy" because, Mr Mumbles will tell you, "There’s...uh.... nobody.....uh...anywhere.... can ...uh, establish a Kooditch...uh... or Sheeta...uh or Sunny....uh, government for Iraq. Why, Dick Cheney said that in uh...1992..... ‘Member that?.....Right, Dick?"

                                       Harry Reynolds

                                       Scarsdale, NY

Posted at 12:06 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Saturday, August 06, 2005
CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST, THE CLERK

                                                            Rehnquist, the Clerk

When Chief Justice Rehnquist leaves the Court, it will be with a smile that he was not entitled to be there in the first place.

Rehnquist obtained his confirmation as associate justice in 1971, and later as chief justice in 1986, by making false statements before the Senate Judiciary Committee concerning his writing in 1952, when he was clerk to Justice Robert Jackson, of a legal memorandum in support of segregation when Brown v. Board of Education was before the court. Jackson had died in 1954.

In 1971, when Rehnquist, a Nixon nominee, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was confronted with his 1952 memo. He stated that his 1952 memo was written, at Jackson’s request, for use at a conference of the justices in Brown as a statement of Jackson's views concerning the constitutionality of segregation. Rehnquist restated his claim before the committee in 1986 when nominated for the chief justiceship. In doing so, he committed the despicable act of putting into the mouth of the dead Jackson a racist position that Jackson would have denounced from his grave, if that had been possible.

 After Rehnquist's confirmation as chief justice in 1986, an examination of the papers of Justice Jackson at the Library of Congress disclosed Jackson's draft of his unissued concurrence in Brown, a document unequivocally declaring segregation unconstitutional, and wholly "inconsistent with Rehnquist's assertion that his memo was intended to state Jackson's rather than Rehnquist's view on the constitutionality of segregation." This the pointed judgment of Bernard Schwartz, one of the greatest scholars of our constitutional law. Schwartz, "A History of the Supreme Court" , p. 290 (1993); see Richard Kluger's monumental work, "Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality", p. 609 (1975).

Had Jackson's draft of his unissued concurrence in Brown been known to the Senate when it voted on Rehnquist's nomination in 1971, it undoubtedly would have deprived Rehnquist of a seat on the Supreme Court, to say nothing of the chief justiceship in 1986. Chief Justice Warren, however, persuaded the court in Brown to speak in one, unanimous opinion. Had Justice Jackson issued his concurring opinion in Brown, Rehnquist would not have been on the Court today and Bush might not have been our president.

                                                                           Harold Reynolds

Posted at 10:31 pm by chekhov
Make a comment

Next Page