книжные новинки

[Моргенштерн]

Покупать, наверное, стоит только большим любителям разведки Третьего Райха и в основном из-за фотографий. 200 страниц - чистой воды "мурзилка".

[Моргенштерн]

Лучше бы перевели "Шпионов Гитлера" Дэвида Кана.

[Дмитрий Сергеевич]

"разделы про деятельность в Скандинавии там довольно интересные."

Про это есть кое-что интересное в книге "В сетях шпионажа" Сверре Хартман ер . с- норв . М., 1965. Хоть и старая, а интересная.

[Моргенштерн]

А про украинцев гере Йоргенсен такого накалякал. Коновалець стал у него Коновалеком, Тарас Чупринка (Шухевич) в оригинале значится как Сконпринка (швед, что ли?)
Мурзилка, одним словом.

[Дмитрий Сергеевич]

Ну, я вроде "любитель разведки Третьего Райха", но брать расхотелось...

А вот кое-что интересное

http://www.kpole.ru/ru/?module=catalog& ... iew&id=549

Может, это наконец полное издание. А то я читал, что то, что вышло в "Европе" (издательстве" урезано на 2/3 и выкинуто самое интересное.

http://www.kpole.ru/ru/?module=catalog& ... iew&id=548

А это что-то новенькое

[Моргенштерн]

Оно только для совьет юнион новенькое. Все это выходило на Западе в 2002-2004 годах.

Оригиналы:
http://www.amazon.com/Drugs-Oil-War-Afg ... 184&sr=1-6

http://www.amazon.com/NATOs-Secret-Armi ... 210&sr=1-1


Оценки авторов с Интеллита:

Scott, Peter Dale. Air America: Flying the U.S. into Laos. Boston: 1970.

[CIA/Laos]

Scott, Peter Dale. The CIA, the Mafia, and the Dallas-Watergate Connection. Palo Alto, CA: Ramparts, 1980.

Wilcox: "Fantasy in numerous conspiracy theories."

[CIA/Accusations]

Scott, Peter Dale. Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1993.

To Frank, WPNWE, 15-21 Nov. 1993, Scott "has an irresistible impulse to connect almost everything." But, in this book, he becomes "increasingly bizarre" and ultimately "appears to go around the bend.... This is the sort of thing that gives skepticism a bad name."

[CIA/Accusations]

Scott, Peter Dale. Drugs, Oil and War: The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Indochina. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. [Marlatt]

[CIA/Accusations]

Scott, Peter Dale. "The United States and the Overthrow of Sukarno, 1965-1967." Pacific Affairs 58 (Summer 1985): 239-264. [http://www.pir.org/scott.html]

"This article argues ... that, by inducing, or at a minimum helping to induce, the Gestapu 'coup,' the right in the Indonesian Army eliminated its rivals at the army's center, thus paving the way to a long-planned elimination of the civilian left, and eventually to the establishment of a military dictatorship. Gestapu, in other words, was only the first phase of a three-phase right-wing coup -- one which had been both publicly encouraged and secretly assisted by U.S. spokesmen and officials." (footnotes omitted)

[CA/Indonesia]

Scott, Peter Dale. The War Conspiracy: The Secret Road to the Second Indochina War. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1972.

Covert operations are seen as part of a conspiracy to engage the United States in Indochina. This was very difficult to take seriously even then.

[Vietnam/Gen]

Scott, Peter Dale, and Jonathan Marshall. Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. 1992. [pb]

According to Ramsey, MI 19.1, the "villainy theory" on which this book is based "collapses when one reviews the entire story that was known, through unclassified sources, when the book was published." This is a "churlish cannon shot in a political gutter war." See also, Ramsey's review in Parameters, Autumn 1995. Surveillant 2.4 says the authors "conclude that America's war on drugs possibly has been a sham.... Many of the findings are based on the 1989 Kerry Report and hearings."

[CIA/Accusations/Drugs; LA/Gen]

Ganser, Daniele. "The British Secret Service in Neutral Switzerland: An Unfinished Debate on NATO's Cold War Stay-behind Armies." Intelligence and National Security 20, no. 4 (Dec. 2005): 553-580.

The list of annoyances and not-quite-rights in this article is long. For instance, Maj. Gen. Sir Colin Gubbins is introduced as "a small, wiry Scotsman with a moustache." Which of these elements are needed prior to quoting him on the role of SOE in World War II? Then, there are such statements as "no documents supporting such a claim have been found so far." Is the "so far" really necessary? In other words, too much of this article does not rise above speculation. Nevertheless, the article "suggests that Switzerland ... was integrated into the international stay-behind network of NATO covering Western Europe during the Cold War." Maybe, but not proven here.

[GenPostwar/CW; UK/Postwar/Gen]

Ganser, Daniele. "The CIA in Western Europe and the Abuse of Human Rights." Intelligence and National Security 21, no. 5 (Oct. 2006): 760-781.

Links the Italian elections of 1948 to "black" prisons in 2005 to postwar stay-behind networks. If the author truly believes that the name of the U.S. President is George Bush Junior, we need to start over with our research.

[CA/Eur/PostCW; CIA/00s/Gen]

Ganser, Daniele. NATO's Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe. London and New York: Frank Cass, 2005.

Riste, I&NS 20.3 (Sep. 2005), finds little good to say about this book. He comments that in the author's hands, the "stay behind" preparations initiated in several European countries as a hedge against Soviet occupation "becomes a story of a nefarious conspiratorial network." Ganser also inflates their significance by terming them "armies," a term that he seems to believe "covers units of less than 100 men." In addition, the author accepts "many unfounded allegations ... as historical findings." Peake, Studies 49.3 (2005), puts the issue succinctly: "proof is a problem for Ganser."

For Hansen, IJI&C 19.1 (Spring 2006), this is "a journalistic work with a big spoonful of conspiracy theories." The thesis of the work "is unsubstantiated by the content"; in fact, the author "fails to present any proof ... of the claimed conspiracy.... [T]he big U.S.-UK conspiracy theory does not hold water." Hansen, JIH 5.1 (Summer 2005), notes that "[o]ne of the important documents that Ganser bases his claim of the big conspiracy on is an American field manual.... In Denmark this field manual popped up on several occasions.... It was first presented in the late 1960's during the situation in Greece and also several times during the 1970's.... According to an analysis made by the Danish Defense Intelligence Service (DDIS) in 1976, this field manual was part of a KGB disinformation campaign."

[GenPostwar/CW]

Ganser, Daniele. "Terrorism in Western Europe: An Approach to NATO's Secret Stay-Behind Armies." Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations 6, no. 1 (Winter/Spring 2005): 69-95.

The author argues that "secret armies" existed in Western Europe during the Cold War. They were coordinated by NATO, and run by the European military secret services in close cooperation with the CIA and MI6. "The clandestine international network covered the European NATO membership, including Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Turkey, as well as the neutral European countries of Austria, Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland."

[GenPostwar/CW]

[Моргенштерн]

http://invissin.ru/news/invissin_and_ku ... ing_house/

Вот что это за серия. Товарищ Леонтьев и мадам Крашенинникова ее инициировали.

Из упомянутых четырех, можно было бы взять разве что Блума, но и он, судя по оценкам, жутко тенденциозен. Умнее было бы переводить того же Уайнера.

[Моргенштерн]

Я не исключаю, что и Сондерс неплоха, но все-же это уж совсем не моя тема.
Впрочем, Интеллит весьма скептичен:

Saunders, Frances Stonor. Who Paid the Piper? The CIA and the Cultural Cold War. London: Granta, 1999. The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters. New York: New Press, 2000.

Clark comment: It is interesting that even when she admits that she cannot document overt censorship by the CIA with regard to Encounter, Saunders can find what she calls "a kind of censorship by omission" because some authors did not get their material published. Saunders' skills as a researcher have not provided her the material findings to justify an attitude that basically says "if the CIA was involved, it had to have been bad." And references to the CIA's "grubby hands" do not advance our understanding of the subject under discussion.

According to Harkin, The Independent, 8 Jul. 1999, this work "is painstakingly researched ... and jauntily written, alive to the ironies of a campaign for cultural freedom whose boundaries were circumscribed by its shady sponsors.... Stonor Saunders introduces her work as a 'secret history' but her research shows that it was not, in practice, as secret as all that." In a lengthy review that clearly exhibits a lack of understanding of the motivations of the anticommunist left, Sharlet, Chronicle of Higher Education, 31 Mar. 2000, seems too entranced by the horror of it all -- the CIA sponsored literature and art! -- to apply any context to his comments.

Lapham, Los Angeles Times, 9 Apr. 2000, sees The Cultural Cold War as a "troubling and perceptive book." Although "[t]he story is not an easy one to tell," the author "doesn't pretend to knowledge that she cannot reliably document or reasonably infer," "writes with a sense of humor and an appreciation of the historical circumstances," "avoids polemic[,] and fits the fragments of elusive fact into a coherent and persuasive narrative."

A reviewer for Publisher's Weekly, 21 Feb. 2000, calls this "a captivating, authoritative history of the CIA's secret campaign to turn American art into anti-Soviet cultural propaganda.... The only flaw in this thoroughly documented book ... is that the story is so richly convoluted that occasionally the larger drama gets lost in its overwhelming details."

Laqueur, The National Interest 58 (Winter 1999-2000), finds little good to say about The Cultural Cold War, beyond acknowledging the author's diligent archival research. Laqueur places Saunders among the group of post-Cold War commentators who are "evidently unwilling to forgive [the Congress for Cultural Freedom] for having been prematurely right." On matters of substance, the author "proves to be less than a reliable guide," with "only a vague idea as to the identity and the views of ... dramatis personae" other than George Kennan. Her research in the archives and her interviews are "more than offset by political bias and primitive moralizing, unencumbered by knowledge of and interest in the historico-political context of the organization."

West, IJI&C 13.1, falls on the same side of the debate as Laqueur, finding that the author "continues to peddle a grotesquely distorted perspective of the Cold War." For Puddington, American Spectator, Jun. 2000, "Saunders has made good use of archival material unavailable until recently.... Unfortunately, The Cultural Cold War is equal parts scholarship and political bias.... Saunders adopts an arch, condescending tone toward the men who made the struggle against Communism their life's cause."

Troy, CIRA Newsletter 26.2/3 and Studies 46.1, concludes his detailed review with the following: "I do not share Frances Saunders' opinion about the 'morality' of CIA's activities and do not accept her notion that CIA undermined 'intellectual freedom' in Western Europe. I highly enjoyed and strongly recommend her book, however. Consider it to be similar to your favorite commercial TV broadcast: enjoy the program and ignore the commercials."

See W. Scott Lucas, "Revealing the Parameters of Opinion: An Interview with Frances Stonor Saunders," Intelligence and National Security 18, no. 2 (Summer 2003): 15-40, for an interview with Saunders from January 2002.

[CA/Eur & Gen/90s; CIA/60s/Subsidies]

Кстати, я ее спутал сначала с другой англичанкой - профессором Фрэнсис Сондерс, руководительницей лаборатории в Портон-Дауне. Нет, совсем разные люди.

[Моргенштерн]

Вот в качестве примера ее творчества

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 78808.html

[Дмитрий Сергеевич]

http://www.kpole.ru/ru/?module=catalog& ... iew&id=551

Как Вы думаете, книга хорошая?

[Моргенштерн]

Эта книга издавалась уже пару раз в Украине и в России. Я ее никогда не брал, потому что она была ужасно дорогой и судя по тому, что я заметил, листая ее, никак не касалась разведки. А внутренняя деятельность ГБ меня никогда не интересовала.

[Дмитрий Сергеевич]

Я тут зашел на сайт эксмо, где есть их план на июнь... (Экселевский файл). Ужас! По сабжу ничего напрочь, кроме переиздания Шебаршина и Северовского Смерша, а названия стали и вовсе такими, словно низкобюджетный ужастик рекламируют.

[Моргенштерн]

И это хорошо. Можно накопить на МакИнтайра.

[Дмитрий Сергеевич]

Кстати. Я вот прочел рецензии (тут, на Амазоне, в ряде блогов) на книгу Гансера, ту, что недавно вышла. Что ж, получается, зря ее хвалили--конспирология одна и "притягивание за уши"? Выходит, так? Или все же нет?

[Моргенштерн]

не конспирология. Факт имел место быть. Но, на мой взгляд, чувак в некоторой мере раздул из мухи слона. А главное, он экстраполировал те проблемы, которые были с ГЛАДИО у итальянцев (и только у них) - и на другие страны тоже.
Это такое мое впечатление от рецензий, книгу пока не читал. Ну и опять же - конечно "секретные АРМИИ НАТО" звучит круче, чем секретные РОТЫ, хотя в реальности численность этих структур и крутилась на уровне звена "рота-батальон".