Agencies

This is a book that had to be written and needs to be read by those who seek to understand Allen Dulles in greater depth. The author does break new ground and add valuable new detail to the history of Allen Dulles, and his hard work in bringing us this book merits appreciation. Having said that, I confess to three disappointments: 1) the use of years to demarcate the chapters, rather than meaningful titles, is both boring and representative of the book's lack of presentational "zing"; 2) the book obsesses on Allen Dulles as the center of the earth and leaves out the context within which Dulles achieved his successes-casual references to how he operated two additional French networks, for example, without covering the arduous and detailed path that led to the creation and maintenance of those networks, leave one feeling as if Dulles simply waved a magic wand to create networks whole-bodied and in full force; and 3) the conclusion of the book, purportedly a review of what Allen Dulles would see and feel if he examined today's intelligence community, is generally on target but rather terse-nothing that one could take to an incoming President to energize him into revitalizing and enhancing our national intelligence community. There are some gems in this book that reflect the author's dedication and merit notice: Richard Helms reflecting on how America came much too close to losing World War II; Walt Rostow on calming the Kennedy's and preventing a rash counter-attack once the Bay of Pigs was known to be a disaster-this is the stuff of history, and I therefore heartily recommend this book as a valuable contribution to our understanding of Allen Dulles' place in history.

This is a phenomenal book about both Allen Dulles and the intelligence world. If you have any interest at all in the subject, then put your pennies on the counter for a great read. Clearly Srodes has an inside track with the intel community and the reader benefits.

This is a wonderful biography -- lots of drama and dirt, spycraft and sleaziness. Srodes paints a vivid picture of Dulles -- he gets into the pores of the man as well as the young CIA. A great read.

I've read most of the literature on the Balanced Scorecard and the previous books by Norton & Kaplan and Paul Niven himself. Being a Management Consultant of 15 years, I worked with numerous for-profit and not-for-profit organizations and have the usual skepticism towards theory books. This latest book on Balanced Scorecard was easy-to-read with numerous examples from Balanced Scorecard implementations in public sector. I found the step-by-step approach to be practical and quite down-to-earth with numerous take aways for a reader interested in BSC or a performance management practitioner, like myself. The book rightly touches upon the challenges in the scorecard implementations, and offers valuable advice. If you haven't read any previous books on this subject, you can read this book alone for a good idea on what the Balanced Scorecard is all about, and how you go about its implementation.

Niven is one of the best authors on BSC. If this administration and communications tool has been hailed as one the best new concepts in the business world, in nonprofit and government administration it can have even more impact. It is a great general introduction, but even seasoned experts will find enlightenment and a great very updated bibliography. Works very well as a textbook for nonprofit management with HBS cases.

Although the Balanced Scorecard has taken over performance mangagement thinking in business, its linkages and adaptability to public and non-profit organizations has remained extremely challenging. I currently am resposible for leading planning and strategy development for a large social services provider in Canada. Being a strong proponent of Balanced Scorecard theory, I anxiously waited two months for Paul Niven's latest book to hit the shelves in hope that I could adapt the balanced scorecard approach to evaluate our organization's strategy. Long story short >> Balanced Scorecard for Government and Nonprofit Agencies was an incredible investment, and we are now on the way to better measuring and reporting on our organization's progress with the help of this book's advice, tips and proecess design steps.

Paul Niven's writing style provides a clear and informative description of the balanced scorecard approach to performance planning and measurement - and presents easy-to-follow steps for designing and implementing performance systems to monitor and evaluate the impact of nonprofit and public sector programs. I highly recommend this easy-to-read book to anyone interested in understanding how the world's leading approach to performance measurement and management can be successfully incorporated into your organization.

William Blum has without doubt makes a significant contribution to the history of the Cold War. Furthermore, his account
shows that the guiding logic of the CIA is as applicable today as it was in the days of the USSR. Foreign policy, as Kissenger
said, is most definitely not about "missionary work", rather being formulated in the interests of the ruling elite in the USA.

The main point arising from this book is that what a country does, and what it says it does, rarely coincide (in this way states are very similar to normal people). Lifting the veil of successive US governments' benign rhetoric, Blum reveals undercurrents or pure greed and savagery. International Relations can only be truly understood by following the interests of interested players, rather than politicians' vacuous pontifications.

The maxim of "follow the money" can be applied to Blum's methodology - charting the rise of murderous and fascist regimes
against the profitability of US investors.

Although much of what Blum claims to have happened is unverifiable, being based on secret concordats, gentlemen's
agreements and sometimes hearsay, his collection, corroboration and systematisation of sources does much to counter this.
Blum can lay no claim to the absolute truth (though who can?), but his account of the CIA is closer to the mark than any other
official history.

In effect, Blum is asking his readers to pose a simple question: what motivates organisations such as the CIA? Is it the
wishy-washy benign do-gooder rhetoric of career politicians? Or the cool calculations of material self-interest. Blum's
convincing analysis would have us accept the latter.

Highly recommended.

I bought my copy in 1987 and consider it one of the most important books written. Mainly it shows that the United States is not concerned with the welfare of the world as a whole but only concerned as to how it can control the world so it can theive the world's riches.

Recently, S11, some "Americans" (i.e., United States citizens) asked why the world hated them so. This book will largely explain why -- The citizens of the United States greed and arrogance knows no bounds; in fact it is not a matter for reflection or analysis.

"Americans" are just the most important people on earth and everyone else is there to be their slaves and sychophants. OR ELSE! Or else the ones who don't act like catamites to the "Americans" deserve to be bombed back to the stone age, including former allies like Osema bin Laden, who was an "ally" when it suited the spooks of the CIA. Wounded 8 times in fighting the Russians on behalf of the US, he is not a little "terrorist" nobody, "wanted dead or alive", as that sickening coward George W Bush puts it.

I fought in Korea for 2 and a 1/2 years and never have I witnessed such inept and cowardly troops when it came to hand to hand infantry fighting as the "Americans" (not the Canadians) including the US Marines.

They are cowards. White-collar killers dropping bombs from 40 thousand feet is about all they're capable of when it comes to "war", which of course isn't war but a turky shoot. It is time William Blum's book published by ZED Books so long ago was republished in toto without revision for all this emerges in fairly plain language -- why everyone hates the United States.

William Blum's excellent publication, detailing the American Government's "Coup d`etat" history, is a very important & engrossing study of Capitalism's ever blooming world-wide domination & control. From Costa Rica to Cambodia,Italy to Iraq,Ecuador to Australia,if you can get a Fodor's travel guide on it,chances are the CIA has found it's way there as well. Thanks to Uncle Sam,for decades foreign political leaders have been relieved of their responsibilities(& occasionally the burden of life)through the good ol' merits of U.S policy. This U.S "attitude" was best summarized by quotemeister Henry Kissinger-(explaining why America funded the Iraqi Kurds to destabilize the government of that country through civil war--only to abandon them to Saddam Hussein's genocide when their purpose had been fulfilled)- "Foreign policy",quipped Kissinger,"should not be confused with missionary work." One of the most impressive overthrowings of government was back in 1975 in Australia. A prime minister called Edward Whitlam got sick of CIA hijinks & tried to dismantle U.S intelligence operations in the land down under. He was working on divorcing Australia's intelligence service from the CIA-(at that time the CIA was busy in Australia running spy satellites from Aussie stations & doing more questionable things such as infiltrating labor unions)-but before Whitlam could complete his work he was "fired" from his seat. The sacking came from Sir John Kerr,the queen of England's representative,who had worked for a number of CIA front groups before becoming Australian governor general. The CIA labeled him "our man". Strictly speaking,Kerr's coup d`etat was LEGAL. Whitlam had declined to dissolve parliament after the opposition-controlled senate,in an equally unprecedented move,refused to approve the government's budget. The senate was unabashedly trying to force Whitlam out,but he wouldn't go. The late CIA counter-espionage chief,James Jesus Angelton,had stated that back then the Agency was "deeply concerned" with E.Whitlam,who they considered was "barging in" & "moving in" without U.S approval.

A dazzling volume of exposure ,studies much of history's left-wing-leadership-overthrowings. An important book. With detailed enamor,it kept me glued with each turning page. It was great. Have a go!

Garvin's greatest success in "Everybody had his own Gringo" is that he addresses the contra army neither as a puppet creation of the United States nor as Robin Hood-esque freedom fighters glavanting around in the jungle. Written with mordant wit, dead-on in focus and scope, this is an excellent text on the contras. Those looking for a complete history of the Nicaraguan civil war, however, will probably want to look elsewhere.

Glenn Garvin's book is a wonderful and highly readable account of the peasant army which made up the Contras. The author is sympathetic but clear-eyed, and he provides a fascinating account of the motivations of the Contra soldiers and leaders, as well as describing U.S. involvement with the Contras. "Everybody Had His Own Gringo" (a great title!) is a "must-read" for anyone interested in the history of the Nicaraguan civil war and the Contras.

one of the very few books that don't blindly praise the sandinistas. this book and shirley christian's 'nicaragua: revolution in the family' are essential to understanding the civil war in nicaragua.

The author presents the reader with an inside view of a law enforcement agency that has many unheralded successes and a few well publicized imperfections. The ATF is well respected by members of law enforcement and despised by many anti-gun control advocates and is often the subject of curiosity by those not directly alinged with either position

What has not been known until Vizzard authored this book, even by many of it's own employees is the influences of not only other government agencies but the anti-gun control organizations as well as party politics in the development of polices and missions by the leaders in this Bureau.

I spent nearly a quarter of a century as an agent with ATF and it's predecessor organization. I arrived on the scene (1959) as the heyday of liquor enforcement was fading. I was assigned to Bureau headquarters during the years when the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the Explosives Control Act of 1970, were enacted into law. I served in various managment positions in Washington, DC and later spent time on the firing line in two district offices (Detroit and Louisville) as the Assistant and finally as the Special Agent in Charge. My last two years with ATF before my retirement in 1983, were spent working on the streets and I received first hand knowledge of what it meant to be a "street agent" operating under the rules established as the result of the influence of internal and external politics.

The author has managed to capture the nuances of the pressures involved in enforcing laws that are not popular with segments of our society that have political clout. Politics are not limited to outside the agency and Mr. Vizzard has analyzed these as well. This book should be required reading for all special agents now on the job, former agents will be surprised to learn just how little they really knew about what was happening behind the scenes while working for ATF, all persons interested in government operations and even those persons who take umbrage of the law! s enforced by this battered but still proud agency will be impressed with the contents of "In The Cross Fire."

I was an ATF Agent and manager from April 1972 until Jan. 1997. Based upon my knowledge and experience, I am convinced this will be the best book ever written about ATF's history and development thru 1997. It is MUST reading for anyone who has ever been an ATF Agent, or anyone who is seriously interested in understanding ATF and how it got to be the way it is.

Among other things, it provides the most concise, thorough, accurate and comprehensive account of the tragedy at Waco that most readers will ever review. For this alone it is worth reading (and this opinion includes my own study of (1) the Treasury Dept.'s own report on The Investigation of Vernon Wayne Howell, AKA David Koresh, which is for sale by the U.S. Gov't Printing Office, and is well worth reading in its own right; and (2) hours before the TV in 1995 watching the House Congressional subcommittee hearing on Waco, which was completely inadequate, confusing, misleading and an absolute failure at discovering the truth - proof once again that politicians fail to get almost anything right). So if you really want to build your understanding of the events at Waco, read this book.

And the book is about much more than just Waco. It tells the real source of ATF's strengths (its agents, not its management), and why, because of these agents, with their "determination to perform in spite of inadequate resources, training, policy, leadership, and political support", ATF has been able (at least in the past, but probably not now or in the near future) to successfully compete with the FBI, an agency that was/is "far larger, better known, more prestigious, and infinitely better funded". And if you read carefully, you might even learn why this superior performance is doomed not to continue.

If you are an ATF Agent, with the typical love/hate relationship that most agents have with ATF, this book will speed you again through all of the conflicting emotions you have felt. And if you are one of ATF's critics, you will learn many things you did not know or even consider knowing before reading this book, and hopefully will begin to understand that in many instances you have criticized things that do not deserve criticism, and have failed to criticize the things that do. If you care at all about ATF, pro or con, READ THIS BOOK!

I was in ATF agent from April 1972 until I retired in January 1997, serving as both a field agent and a manager. Because of this experience and knowledge, I am convinced that this will be the best book ever written about the history of ATF. It is MUST reading for anyone who is or ever has been an ATF agent. It is also must reading for anyone who is seriously interested in understanding why ATF is as it is, and how it got that way. Among other things, it provides the most concise, thorough, accurate, and comprehensive overall account of the tragedy at Waco that I have ever read or heard. For this alone, it is worth reading. And this opinion includes my own complete study of (1) the Treasury Dept.'s own report on Waco, to wit, the Investigation of Vernon Wayne Howell, aka David Koresh, which is for sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, and (2) hours before the television listening to the complete live Congressional house subcommittee hearings on Waco (incidentally, completely confusing and misleading, and an absolute failure at discovering facts - proof once again of Congress' repeated failure to get almost anything right). So read the Treasury Dept.'s report if you want (it is actually worthwhile), or waste your time watching Congress, but if you really want to know, read Vizzard's book. But the book is about much more than just Waco. Read it and learn the real source of ATF's strength (it's agents, not its management), and why, because of these agents, with their "determination to perform in spite of inadequate resources, training, policy, leadership, and political support", ATF has been (at least in the past, but probably not now or in the future) been able to successfully compete with the FBI, an agency that was "far larger, better known, more prestigious, and infinitely better funded". And learn (if you read carefully) why this superior performance is doomed not to continue in the future. If you are an ATF Agent, with the traditional love/hate relationship that most agents have with the agency, this book will speed you again through all of the conflicting emotions you have experienced on the job. And even if you are one of ATF's most severe critics, you will learn many things you did not know or even consider knowing before reading this book, and hopefully you will even begin to understand that in many instances you have been criticizing things that do not deserve criticism, and failing to criticize things that do. If you care at all about ATF, pro or con, READ THIS BOOK!

Having used and enjoyed a Let's Go guidebook in the past, I decided to buy this edition for my trip to England and Wales. Let's Go Britain and Ireland provides on-target reviews and solid travel advice. What's more, it's written in such an engaging and witty style that I frequently found myself reading sections aloud to my traveling companions. Unfortunately, many of the maps leave something to be desired. While driving through Bath and other small cities, they were practically useless. Overall, however, I would definitely recommend this book to anyone planning a trip to Britain.

I went to the UK for 5 weeks to study abroad, and since I had the time to travel extensively, I needed a good guide book. I bought Let's Go and a few others. Let's Go was by far the best--especially for a budget traveler. I was able to see the best (and cheapest) sites, and the hotels recommended were not only inexpensive, but extremely nice. This goes for the restaurant recommedations too. Thanks to this book (which I referred to as my "bible") I was able to save a ton of money and have to best possible experience of Wales, Scotland, Ireland, and England! I recommend this book to all budget travelers.

I used this guidebook, among others, on a recent vacation. This one, by far, was the most helpful.

The book should have included more interviews with RPCVs, viz., those that served in Zabol, Aliabad, or Farah. Apart from this dearth, it is; in the main, well documented.

In the 1960s many Americans attempted to redefine their nation's identity both at home and abroad. No institution reflected this attitude better than the Peace Corps. In All You Need is Love Elizabeth Cobbs-Hoffman explores the history of the corps, and reveals, that by tracing its development in the last forty years, one can gain a better understanding on how it became the quintessential institution of social reform in the 1960s. Cobbs-Hoffman begins her narrative by exploring the background of American idealism. She asserts that the United States, since its founding, has perceived itself as a crusading nation whose mission has been to promote the spread of its form of "benevolent" democracy. This idealism, however, has often clashed with the reality that states, like individuals, sometimes act for selfish reasons, and not for the good of others. This contradiction has often made Americans uncomfortable with their role in the world of power-politics, and as a consequence Cobbs-Hoffman asserts that, "Paradoxically when the United States has been at its most expansionist, it has been most subject to idealism. The late 1950's and early 1960's was one such a period. The country, in the twenty years after World War II, experienced an era of unprecedented economic growth, and increased military and political might. This preeminence, however, created conflicting emotions for many Americans, whose pride in this strength, was matched by their historical perception that power corrupted Americans' virtue. Revolted by the consequence of extreme nationalism and racism in Nazi Germany, numerous Americans took to the concept of universalism, and its belief that all humans deserved the same rights, regardless of nationality. McCarthyism, and the overt racism of the 1950's, made Americans grapple with their vision of what kind of country they lived in. Were they becoming just another fascist state; a place where the individual had no power over the vast machinery of an unfeeling state? With the election of the John F. Kennedy in 1960, Cobbs-Hoffman shows how these feelings of unease were coalesced into the foundation of the Peace Corps, a movement that attempted to show the world the altruistic side of U.S. power. Cobbs-Hoffman's history shows that Americans and historians have tendency to divide the world into good and evil, and that the political right and the left have a tedency to percieve each other as diametrically opposed. Cobbs-Hoffman would argue that both are inexorably linked. She calls the Vietnam war the Peace Corps evil twin, and in many ways this is true. Both were initiated with a spirit of naivete and the belief that they could show others American superiority. Each had their view of the world altered by the cultures and realities which they encountered, and often for both it was a humbling experience. In the end, the left's and the right's disdain for the spirit of the sixties reveal that the Peace Corps attained its objective in creating better understanding among Americans and the rest of the world.

I thought this book was amazing and the author was simply wonderful. Thank you Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman for this gift.

Written from a typical partisan perspective, i.e. republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives. No mention of participants' connections to Elite groups, i.e. Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergs. A good documentary, none the less.

There have been so many books on this subject which have attempted to present one or another political party's point of view in a convincing manner that it is truly refreshing to read an author who gets her facts straight and lets the reader come to his or her own conclusions. Olmsted looks carefully at these investigations, and presents them honestly and with understanding. Good job!

If anyone still believes the mainstream press protects the interests of the average citizen, this book will disabuse you of that notion very quickly. Olmstead delivers a fascinating and lively expose of how the Washington press corps -- faced with a real opportunity in the 1970s to bring light and accountability into one of the darkest corners of our government -- turned tail and ran. Her book goes a long way towards explaining why media coverage of the so-called "intelligence community" is so lame and subservient, even to this day. Well-written, thoroughly enjoyable, and damned infuriating.

As another reviewer remarks, English prose style is not the colonel's strong suit. If ever a book called for the firm hand of a skilled editor, this is such a book. It abounds with inconsequential asides ("I met him years later in Korea"), terse sentences and a wealth of exclamation marks. Nevertheless, this does give the reader an idea of the author's authentic voice and persona - that of an end of empire action man.

The exploits of Colonel Bailey show that the kind of military man that we read of in Rider Haggard and John Buchan's novels really did exist. He would not have been out of place joining an Indiana Jones expedition. He really was an Edwardian action man writ large - bold, resourceful, uncomplaining and considerate of those endangered by his presence.

He is almost a caricature of the quintessentially British officer muddling through to triumph. He comes across as a talented amateur jack-of-all-trades - no James Bond he! He was a fair linguist but, as luck would have it, only had a smattering or no knowledge of the languages of the nationals he pretended to be: Serbs, Austrians, Romanians etc.

He certainly comes across as fearless. On one occasion he nonchalently reads a copy of The Times that he has "borrowed" from a Bolshevik officer in the room next door who had been sent to hunt for him. English sang froid is much in evidence as he casually mentions the executions of numerous people with whom he had been in close association. This guy had more lives than a dozen cats.

The book very much brings alive the chaos and casual brutality of the early days of the Bolshevik revolution in Turkestan. Somehow Bailey slips through it all, constantly striving to get intelligence out to Britain. Miraculously he never seems to want for money - we never do learn where it came from or where he kept it.

Bailey was a first class eccentric officer - as evidence of this I offer the fact that, whilst detailing his adventures in a world gone mad, he thinks it sufficiently important and interesting to his readers to catalog the various species of butterfly that he captured and preserved on his travels. He even presents us with a complete list of those taken between the Pamirs, Kashgar and on the road to Russian Turkestan complete with Latin names, and the place, altitude and date they were collected.

Mad dogs and Englishmen indeed!

Let's get the bad bit out the way first, F.M. Bailey was not a great writer. This is reflected in Mission to Tashkent, where the style of the writer does not follow what you would normally consider a gripping read. For example, there are one or two occasions where a character in the book is not mentioned for long enough, for you to have to go back several pages to find out who they are. I would have given it five stars had it not been for this.

What Mission to Tashkent is, is a factual account of the Russian Revolution, as played out in Central Asia, where the Bolshevik Russian minority based mainly in Tashkent (now in the independant sate of Uzbekistan) had to overcome White Russian, Moslem and British forces to establish the revolution on Central Asia (the British eventually withdrew, not wanting to become too involved).

In this book, F.M. Bailey, whose previous adventures had involved accompanying Francis E. Younghusband to Tibet in 1904 (on account of the fact he could speak Tibetan), details his journey from India via Kashgar to Tashkent. Once in Tashkent, the book covers the writer's life there, under constant fear of arrest or execution at the hands of the local Bolshevik Provisional Government. His official purpose was as a diplomatic representative for the British in Central Asia, which created much danger for himself, due to the presence of British forces at Ashgabad in Turkmenistan. He also gathered information for the British as to what exactly was happening there, due to concerns that the large number of German and Austrian prisoners of war held in Central Asia could be used to attack British India, if organised into a fighting force by German agents known to operate in Iran and Afghanistan - it was 1917/1918 and Britian was still fighting Germany. He also acted on the British behalf, believing that the British were about to advance on Tashkent and unseat the Bolsheviks in Central Asia, but in the end, this never happened with the aforementioned British withdrawal. The book finishes with his eventual flight to Iran, ending in his escape after a skirmish with Bolshevik troops on the Iranian border.

I found the book to be a thoroughly engrossing read, bar the aforementioned problems with the book's style and would thoroughly recommend it to anyone interested in Turkestan / Uzbekistan and Central Asian history. With it being a factual account, it also makes for a useful insight into what was happening in outlying Tashkent at a time, when everyone else's eyes were focused on what was happening in revolutionary Moscow and St. Petersburg and how the Germans were going to react after the withdrawal of the Russians from the Great War. Highly recommended.

So much of what has happened in Persia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan in the last 150 years is due to what has been called "The Great Game." Russia has always been a superpower that lacked a salt-water seaport free of ice all year round. (The Black Sea doesn't count because Turkey controls access to it through the easily defensible Bosphorus and Dardanelles.) Consequently, it has always sought to destabilize South Asia in the hopes of being able to get a port on the Indian Ocean.

One of the highest ranking pieces in the Great Game was the British intelligent agent Lieut-Col Frederick M. Bailey, who wrote this fascinating book. So if you're a great intelligence agent, why is it so difficult to write a good book? Simple: A good intelligence agent keeps too much unsaid. Information is his stock in trade, so he is very sparing of all the interesting details.

Picture present-day Uzbekistan in the first year of the Bolshevik takeover (1918). No one in Europe had any idea of what to expect from the Bolsheviks. Would they become more moderate in time? Would the Muslim population accept them? Would the White Russians defeat them in battle and restore the Czar?

In the midst of all these swirling theories strode the skinny and extremely canny Colonel Bailey. He set himself up in Tashkent as the official representative of His Majesty's Government but immediately ran into roadblocks. Without informing Bailey, Britain had in the meantime engaged the Bolsheviks in battle near Murmansk and near the Caucasus. That quickly made Bailey persona non grata (which meant ripe for execution in those times).

But how does one arrest a wizard? Bailey immediately went underground and assumed the identity of a Romanian, Czech, Austrian, Albanian, or other POW, of which Tashkent had many from those WW 1 days. He rarely stayed in one place for more than a day or two, though he did manage to develop some loyal contacts, including the US consul Tredwell. For over a year, Bailey eluded capture. During the whole of that time, there was no effective contact with his government; and during most of that time, he was actively sought by the Cheka, or secret police.

The escape from Tashkent was ingenious and dramatic. Bailey got himself hired as a Bolshevik agent under an assumed identity and assigned to Bokhara, which was not yet under Bolshevik control at that time. There, he reached into his inexhaustible supply of money and bought horses, men and influence to allow him to escape south to Meshed in Persia, where there was a British presence.

I wish I knew at every point how the magician pulled a particular rabbit out of his hat, but I'll just have to take that as a given. Today, Bailey is regarded by the British as one of their greatest spies. In Central Asia, he is regarded as an arch-villain who threatened the development of Communism in Central Asia.

MISSION TO TASHKENT is not an easy read, but it is absolutely vital in understanding the forces, many of which still operate in this pivotal area of the globe.

"Mole" was on the reading list for CIA applicants,* so i found it in the library & was hooked from page one. It is the account of the first Soviet agent to be turned by the CIA. It is the tale of a man in a perpetual state of fear & panic.

But if that's not satisfactory, there's the digressive account of the original model for James Bond: a Yugoslav by birth, assigned to spy on the Abwehr by the Soviets. In 1941, he arrives in America. His connection with Pearl Harbor & J. Edgar Hoover may leave you, like me, baffled forever: "How could they not know?

A book that unusual for the fact that it wasn't written to capitalize on current events. A very good account of the early post-WWII days in the espionage game.

*I didn't get the job.

Much has been written about spies, spy-craft and espionage. Little has been written by those actively engaged in the business. William Hood, the nom de plume of a retired CIA officer, gives his story of the first Soviet agent recruited by American intelligence during the Cold War. It is a fascinating, true-life tale. I would recommend this book exclusively on this point, yet there is more to the book than this. It is also a detailed and highly personal account of how spycraft is practiced, the mental and psychological toll this takes, and the risks involved (for both agent and controller). Because of this, I highly recommend this book. I have never read anything like it.

I would add that Hood provides a wealth of books of a similar vein (ie. accounts from intelligence field officers) that may also be of interest. It is without doubt an engrossing and intriguing read.

Felt like I was in on the spy case. Very interesting and will undoubtably be a standard reference for those interested in the world's second oldest profession for years to come.