Rating: Summary: Irresponsible Review: Hitchens has again shown why his name is synonomous with "charlatan" and "neurotic" outside of what we might call radical elements of society. The question is not one of balance--obviously we know he is far from balanced--but whether or not there is sufficient evidence to make the claims that he does. I suspect those not enamoured with the more radical elements will not think so.To begin with, the majority of Hitchens's accusations are implausible in and of themselves, even before one investigates all of the available evidence. For example, whether true or not that Kissinger made it clear that he would not intervene in the invasion of East Timor, it hardly follows that he was condoning mass murder and genocide. Two things: First the United States had just ended its involvment in Vietnam and it was in know position to get involved in another conflict. Secondly Kissinger simply did not create the conditions for violence in Indonesia and had not way of determining or even helping to bring about the outcome. Much the same can be said of the Pakistan-India war of 1971 and subsequent events in Bangledesh. Kissinger supported Pakistan for political reasons involved with the Cold War but it hardly follows he was at all responsible for events themselves. Here, as is the case througout much of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, the conflicts are a direct result of European colonialism and the political divisions created by that colonialism. Kissinger was not involved with the partition of any of these colonial territories into poorly functioning states, who were involved in violence before and after he came on the scene. All in all there is simply very little beneath or on the surface of Hitchen's arguments. What comes through clearly is not that Henry Kissinger was a war criminal but rather that Hitchens is consumed with hate and anger and is willing to engage in malicious slander to avail himself of his own psychosomatic hostility.
Rating: Summary: Couldn't put it down... Review: Hitchens serves up his indictment of HK like good Mexican food; hot to the taste, hard on the stomach, but undeniably satisfying. Having seen the author on the talk show circuit, I was always impressed by his loyalty to the pursuit of truth and his "take no prisoners" attitude. In this book, free from the hobbling sound-bite format of television, he leads the reader on a journey that both shocks and saddens. Shocking, because it is a compelling chronicle of brutality, murder, oppression and dispossession, often committed against innocent civilian populations. Dispiriting, because it implicates an American, not merely as a conspirator but, often as chief instigator of these very atrocities. This book is intended as a wakeup call to all Americans. It is a call for truth and reconciliation. And it is served in a wickedly delicious prose that keeps you coming back for more.
Rating: Summary: Lay off Kissinger, its to easy to fault him Review: Hitchens, known for great works like 'Cyprus' and his speech "is Islam the enemy"? has finally corssed the line with this slanderous not worthwhile, unnecesary book. Hitchens claims Kissinger was involved in lots of cold war scullduggery. He claims the Nixon admin convinced the S. Vietnamese to break off peace talks in 68' thus prolonging the war. Well thats cute, the vietnamese couldnt think for themselves??? COulndt south vietnam make a choice. If the south had really wnated peace they could ahve ahd it but they choose to stay with us and keep fighting. Well tthe Nixon admin didnt want to lose the south just yet(it fell in 75'). Then Hitchens says that Kissinger conspired to have Allende thrown out. Well whats wrong with that. Allende stole american property so we supported his enemies. Thats the way realism(and Kissinger was a realist) works. If your neighboor steals from you and a bully comes along and says 'Ill take care of him' then you say sure 'ill look the other way'. Well we looked the other way when allende died fighting in the presidential palace. Hitchens accuses Kissinger of other skullduggery, namely cyprus. Well once again realism triumphed. AMerica needed Turkey to put allow our missles in it to fight the communists and we needed them as a friendly muslim state. Well we didnt need the Greek Cypriots for anything excpet the british liked them. So we let the Turks invade and then kept them at a line dividing the island. So how can we accuse kissinger of doing anything but acting in americas self interest. Yes he was tough, but thats the way the world is.
Rating: Summary: Will shock you or confirm your most depressing suspicions Review: I defy anyone objective not to be convinced by this book. Only someone with an irrational emotional attachment to Kissinger, or the phsychotic conviction that the "national interest" of America is more important than millions of lives, could dismiss it. The newspaper correspondence at the end of the book (in the version I read anyway) shows how weak the refutations are.
As for why Hitchens has singled out Kissinger- I imagine he did it because Kissinger enjoys so much respect in America, and it is important to make America wake up because of its massive power. Anyway, the existence of worse criminals hardly excuses Kissinger's crimes. You might as well say someone who writes a book criticising Mussolini is pursuing a vendetta just because Hitler killed more people.
Rating: Summary: All Roads Lead to Henry Review: I find that few authors are as fun to read as this one when it comes to non-fiction. Regardless if you agree or disagree with Hitchens, he always provides an interesting book that is sure to stir up your emotions. He is also one of the few authors that can pack a sentence full of so much information you almost feel each is a full paragraph. With all this said I was a little taken about by the authors overwhelming hatred for the subject of the book. I mean most authors when writing something like this do have an agenda, but few put it so front and center. I felt Hitchens lost some objectivity with his mantra of all things bad must have originated with old Henry. As far as the proof of this laundry list of nastiness, well a 135 page book does look a little thin at first glance. After reading the book, even with Hitches very economic use of words, I was still left with a lot of questions. This coupled with the overriding dislike of the subject by the author tended to make me think that maybe Henry was getting the raw end of the stick. My political leanings point me in the general direction to believe anything and everything bad about the Nixon administration, but with the book as it was, I somehow started to think of excuses for Nixon and his henchmen, sorry I mean administration staff. So maybe I was not read for this book, maybe I need to put it back on the shelf and let time age my sense of fair play. I will let you decide the outcome of the book for yourself. It was entertaining.
Rating: Summary: kissinger expose Review: I had not read anything by christopher hitchens before and was pleasantly surprised by the writing style in this book. every fact is presented clearly and the points that are made are very effectively backed up. Correspondence between he and kissinger are very interesting. A must read.
Rating: Summary: Kissinger Review: if you want the evil truth about Dr K and how he undermined the 1968 peace talks, read "No Peace, No Honor: Nixon, Kissinger, and Betrayal in Vietnam" by Larry Berman.
This book explains how Nixon and Kissinger illegally colluded with SVN and Nguyen Van Thieu - he was told by Nixon via Anna Chenault to "hold on, we are going to win" and "you will get a better deal with us". So Thieu says he won't talk peace, Nixon wins, Kissinger openly changes sides after working with the Democrats, and together they crank up the war.
The point is: The War could have ended in 1968 if it were not for this man - Dr Death himself, Henry Adolf Kissinger!
[...]
An interview where HK is asked what would have happened if America had not fought in Vietnam and it was "lost"
He says "it wouldn't have mattered much"!!!!!
So he conspired to continue the war when he thought it was not worth fighting!
Peace Prize? he should receive the "Death Prize"
Rating: Summary: awesome book! Review: If you're into topics like this, then this is by far a must-read! Personally, I always liked Henry Kissinger a lot and think he was a superstar in the foreign policy. To get to know some pieces of the other side of the story was very fascinating. It is not easy reading -true - its politics!
Rating: Summary: Enough evidence for an arraignment... Review: In an ideal democratic society, no one is above the law. Crimes against humanity are a pretty serious business, and the international community are now beginning to take it very seriously, as they should, because without justice, no one is safe. It takes courage to go against individuals of power, and Hitchins has put himself squarely in the face of a man with considerable clout, who has a lot to answer for. What is mind boggling is that there should be enough evidence out there, and enough witnesses, particularly in regards to the secret meetings between Nixon and the South Vietnamese, stalling the peace negotiations, and prolonging that terrible war for another four years, costing thousands of American lives, not to mention a plethora of innocent deaths; add to the illegal bombings of Cambodia and Laos, and the extermination of literally thousands of civilians, instigated without congressional approval, should be enough to at least begin arraignment proceedings, though Kissinger manages to wriggle out of the legal spotlight, because I suspect, opening this particular can of worms would implicate more people, thus bringing shame upon everything good the United States stands for. If anything, Hitchens book presents a compelling case to begin arraignment proceedings against a man who clearly has many things to hide. In this little book, Hitchens outlines several areas on the international stage where Henry Kissinger had influence or direct involvement with terrible crimes, including political assassination, massive genocide, illegal regime change, and war crimes that match, in terms of scope, the Nazi atrocities of WW II. In fact, it has reached a point where Kissinger refuses to enter certain countries for fear of being detained and arrested. As Hitchens points out, it takes a person with an excellent memory and intelligence to have gotten away with murder on a grand scale and for such a long time. What is telling, is that Kissinger will not come clean. Documents are currently hiding in the Library of Congress that would blow the lid off his illegal activities. The man is hiding behind what is termed "National Security". In other words, the contents of these documents, if revealed to the public at large, could present a dangerous security problem for the American people. Rubbish. The contents of these documents present a security problem for Henry Kissinger and his present and past cronies. Where there is crime and the misuse of power, one will always find a money connection. In chapter 10, The Profit Margin, Hitchins touches upon Kissinger's company, Kissinger and Associates, and his corporate clients. It's a 'boy's club' on a world scale. It would be naive to believe that there wouldn't be at least a few financial and political improprieties connecting American corporations with foreign governments - Kissinger has been cashing in for a long time, and it's time someone had the courage to investigate him and bring this man to justice. Hitchens book is not a thorough or by any means a comprehensive account of Kissinger's alleged crimes against humanity, but it is at least enough to start the wheels of justice turning in the right direction.
Rating: Summary: A devastating portrait of Henry Kissinger at his worst Review: In The Trial of Henry Kissinger, Christopher Hitchens presents evidence that he believes could be used to prosecute the former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State for war crimes. The book describes a series of sordid episodes where Kissinger's foreign policy initiatives and other actions directly caused mass murder, assassination, and genocide, with Kissinger's full knowledge that these things would occur. In keeping with the pretence that the book could be used as "the basis of a legal prosecution" (ix), Hitchens states at the outset that he will only include "identifiable crimes that can and should be placed on a proper bill of indictment" (x). In other words, he claims to omit many things that could help paint a negative portrait of Henry Kissinger if these things do not fit accepted definitions of "war crimes." Even with this self-imposed limitation, Hitchens has no trouble finding plenty of accusations, usually supported by U.S. government documents and memoirs of other U.S. policymakers of the time. Hitchens makes no secret of his wish to see Henry Kissinger hauled in front of a real war crimes tribunal, but this is not likely to happen anytime soon, especially now that Kissinger has been named to lead the investigation into the 9/11 attacks. Still, Hitchens shows that in theory, it could probably be done, by the same standards used to prosecute dictators such as Augusto Pinochet and Slobodan Milosevic. Among the specific accusations made by Hitchens makes are: - That Kissinger cooperated in an effort by Presidential candidate Richard Nixon in 1968 to sabotage the Paris peace talks on Vietnam in order to help Nixon get elected. Nixon's first appointment after winning the election was Henry Kissinger as National Security Advisor. America's bloody involvement in the Vietnam War dragged on for years and was concluded on almost the exactly the same terms that could have been achieved in 1968. - That Kissinger is responsible for various bloody campaigns in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia between 1968 and 1972 that killed countless civilians. Among these campaigns were several heavy bombing raids on densely populated areas. - That he allowed the Pakistani government to murder hundreds of thousands of Bengali civilians, knowing in advance that the murders would happen and insisting that the U.S. do nothing to prevent them. - That he funded an assassination in Chile that eventually led to the overthrow of a democratic government and the installation of Augusto Pinochet with U.S. support. - That he was involved in a plot to murder President Makarios of Cyprus. The murder ultimately did not take place, but Makarios was removed from power. - That he supported Indonesia's takeover of the former Portuguese colony of East Timor and the subsequent mass murders carried out by the Indonesian government with U.S. weapons. - That he was involved in a plot to murder a Greek journalist living in Washington, D.C. who opposed the Greek regime that Kissinger supported. Obviously, this is not a biography of Kissinger, or even an account of his full career in the White House, and it makes no attempt to be "balanced." Hitchens despises Kissinger and makes no attempt to hide this fact throughout the book. He presents various possible "defenses" of his actions that Kissinger could use, in order to show how inadequate they are. Hitchens includes several statements that Kissinger has made in the past in his defense, including an extended transcript of a question-and-answer session during which Kissinger was confronted about East Timor, and a letter co-authored by Kissinger that addresses the charges about the sabotage of the 1968 Paris peace accords. Each time Hitchens lets Kissinger speak for himself, he shows how his words are inconsistent with government documents and other evidence, including in some cases comments that Kissinger had made on other occasions. Perhaps if Kissinger were allowed to present a full rebuttal, he could refute some of Hitchens' charges, but it is doubtful that he could do enough to erase the "war criminal" designation. Hitchens presents enough evidence from reliable sources to ensure that at least some of the charges would stick, if Kissinger's "trial" ever occurred. The Trial of Henry Kissinger is a quick read, at only 150 smaller-than-average pages including appendices and acknowledgements. Hitchens' writing style is generally lively, even if it does get bogged down at times by the many pieces of evidence that he presents. If you want to learn why in some social circles, the name "Henry Kissinger" is considered to be synonymous with "war criminal" (or "butcher", "barbarian", "murderer", etc.), this is probably your best resource. It may not be "balanced," but it shows that the prosecution has a strong case.
|