3 comments about Mad Genius: Odyssey, Pursuit & Capture of the Unabomber Suspect.

1. Have yet to find a really thoughtful, well organized book on the Unabomber. I read a fair number of true-crime books; generally I rate Robert Graysmith, who has written excellent books about the Zodiac killer and the Trailside Killer. Those books were well written, full of fascinating facts and research. But Graysmith's Unabomber book "A Desire to Kill" was obviously rushed into print, trying to beat the competition -- an effort to have a title before the public before the trial, while interest in the case was high.

   Much the same can be said of Mad Genius. It was also published before the trial. It isn't quite as confusing as Graysmith's book, but then it doesn't strive to be more than a quick summary of what the investigation was like and who the victims were. To make up for lack of depth and/or detail, there is an extremely long list of the evidence seized at the Montana cabin -- with no explanation for what the coded notations the FBI used stand for. And then there's the complete manifesto, appended at the end. My favorite part was the photocopy of the Kazynski's hand-written note about seeds at the very end. At least it had a personal touch.

   The definitive Unabomer book has yet to be written; it would take someone like Vincent Bugliosi or Ann Rule to do it justice -- or else the Robert Graysmith of old.




2. Has anybody ever seen a complete list of the contents of Ted's cabin? I need to know the books he had. I've heard he had hundreds of books. What were they? Can anyone tell me what books Ted was reading? Have you noticed how the press squashed that aspect of this man's life?



3. It's clear right from the start that Mad Genius was written in a hurry. The writing is uneven in places, there are stylistic rough edges, but this is no novel, and if Kaczynski would like a nicer biography he'll just have to write one himself. Still, the book is timely, and important, and sufficiently well written to make for easy reading.

   The book helps answer many questions about the Unabomber:

   - What are the facts of the case? [ not a trivial question for such a protracted case ]

   - What is the Ted Kaczynski's background? Who is he, where did he come from, could anyone have guessed that this is what he was up to?

   - Why he did it -- motives, frustrations, ideas.

   And that's basically all that most people will ever want to know about the unabomber and his story. The book will also give you plenty of minutia to relish over, such as his the inventory of his cabin at the time of the arrest, what "technology" (or lack thereof) did he use to assemble his bombs, and it lists his manifesto in full. The book is not expensive and read quickly -- get it, read it, satisfy your morbid curiosity! :)

5 comments about Unabomber : Desire to Kill.

1. Released in November 1997, Robert Graysmith's UNABOMBER: A DESIRE TO KILL fills a current publication void. During the O.J. Simpson trials, trial watchers and media produced tomes of printed commentary. The woes of Ted Kaczynski, however, have vied for media attention with sundry other high-profile criminal trials, including those of accused Oklahomah City bombing accomplice Terry Nichols, announcer Marv Albert, and British au pair Louise Woodward. And even as opening arguments in Kaczynski's trial commence, the spotlight is being stolen by the biological weapons crisis in Iraq.

   Overshadowed by this three-ring circus, the Unabomber trial may actually reap benefits in the form of a jury untainted by media spin. Unfortunately, this won't be the case with readers who turn to Graysmith's book for the facts. Although it purports to be a documentary--and is set up amid the trappings of objective reporting--both appearances are false. It is a book-length editorial, infused with Graysmith's unchecked imagination, his overhelpful interpretations, and--unfortunately--with his relentless determination to cast David Kaczynski, who surrendered his brother to the Feds and virtually certain death, in the role of beatified saint.

   It's not that the book doesn't make compelling reading. It does, and that's its danger. For it is largely fiction, in which Graysmith's extensive investigations serve mostly to launch his creative interpretions of events, characters, and the relationships between them. This hand of invention first appears in Chapter 1, "The Vanishing Professor," depicting Kaczynski's days at Berkeley, where intermixed with factual background such as Kaczynski's 1967 faculty appointment, we find:

   "The Professor entered Cody's bookstore, gigantic and well-lit at 2460 Telegraph. He fingered some books on calculus, and climbed to the fiction department on the second floor. He saw Conrad's The Secret Agent, one of his favorites which he'd read many times . . . . The real-life Professor continued down Telegraph and passed Channing Way. The gray mantle of fog, speeding on its way, met a blue-tinged and fading golden light. There were many on the street but the Professor had mastered the ability always to be alone, even in crowds. And what crowds they were to the unhappy man. Grim, wide-eyed skeletons. Walking skulls, their featured [were] etched away by the street lights leaving only staring eyes"(p. 7-8).

   Wonderful writing--highly atmospheric--it's worthy of Dickens. But, Dickens did not pretend his writing to be other than fiction. This incident--which never happened--is used by Graysmith as visual scene-setting; he does not scruple to attribute to his "real-life Professor" actions, emotions, and perceptions invented out of the whole cloth. However, nothing but scrutiny tells the reader that Graysmith is willing to embroider in the service of aesthetic presentation. And if one thinks that insult to the truth is slight here--who cares if Kaczynski saw strangers' faces as skulls?--one ought to think twice. Invention is a slippery slope for Graysmith, and his descent accelerates throughout his pages.

   For example, the author's one-sided opinions regarding the tenor of Ted Kaczynski's childhood upbringing are set forth as truth. "By the seventies," writes Graysmith, "the Professor had convinced himself that his parents were insensitive, if not cruel, to him during his formative years." However, David Kaczynski's suspicions of Ted's mental state are quoted as solemn fact: "One senses [in Ted] a psyche that fells itself terribly isolated and threatened in the world, tormented by its own complexities, unable to hold things in their proper perspective or to find comfort security or rest for itself "(p. 450).

   Such claims are reinforced by sentimental diction: the elder Kaczynski is "the gentle father," while Ted consistently has "a sly smile" and "tortured thoughts." Kaczynski's assertions about parental abuse are made into delusions produced by, and in a circular way proof of, his diseased mind. Further, because Graysmith depicts David Kaczynski as motivated by none but noble motives in turning his brother in, he must bend every interpretatation to fit this sanctified portrayal. All too frequently this verges on melodrama. In a chapter actually entitled "A Brother's Anguish" appears this passage:

   "Now the investigators had enough that they felt they would have to speak to David's mother, Wanda. Was this the worst moment of all for him? He had never mentioned his suspicions to her . . . . Haltingly, he told her of the last few months and of his excruciating decision, the harrowing nights, the haunting dreams "(p. 381).

   By contrast, there are significant omissions of material one would have thought Graysmith compelled to include--but to do so would have embarrassed his double portrait of the crazed Ted and sainted David. A salient example is Graysmith's choice NOT to include the text of the Unabomber Manifesto, thereby denying readers the chance to study it firsthand. As those who have read it know, its level-headedness hardly suggests a madman; this is largely why federal prosecutors wish to use the Manifesto as evidence. However, Graysmith evaluates its freely in its absence, declaring it permeated with rage. He also uses excerpts from it as headings to each chapter, exposing another awkward omission for those familiar with the Manifesto's contents:

   ". . .a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system . . . . (paragraph 51). . . take the gypsies. The gypsies commonly get away with theft and fraud because their loyalties are such that they can always get other gypsies to give testimony that "proves" their innocence. Obviously the system would be in serious trouble if too many people belonged to such groups"(footnote to paragraph 52).

   Given Graysmith's format of chapter headings, this was the obvious choice to lead the one recounting David's communications with the FBI. It is more than obvious that David's actions constitute a textbook example of the phenomenon described by his brother: the individual whose family loyalties have been weakened and subsumed by loyalty to the system. It is equally obvious, regretfully, that Graysmith had no intention of permitting his readers to make this connection, and this attitude of concealment is the book's chief handicap. Consequently, his choice to entitle the chapter on Ted "Cain" and the one on David "Abel" is not surprising, but he ought to recall that it was Cain who was the agent of Abel's death, and not the other way round.

   Still, the book has many virtues, with vivid writing heading the list, in particular when the author evokes graphic images or communicates the technical construction of the many bombs. Graysmith is also a gifted illustrator, whose pen-and-ink drawings of the landscape around Lincoln, Montana and of Kaczynski's Thoreauvian cabin augment the historical perspective derived from his regional studies. Essentially, the book is a wildly uneven agglomerate of sterling scholarship and serious deficits of objectivity. What the author brings alive is impressive, but it is frequently not what took place.

   Another important book is being published at the same time, Dominick Dunne's Another City, Not My Own (Crown, October 1997). Like Graysmith, Dunne has created a dramatic, highly imaginative treatment of a high profile criminal matter--the O.J. Simpson murder trials--but as a novel, Dunne's book wears its fictional status openly. One can't help thinking this would have been the wiser choice for Graysmith--it would have given his speculative talents free rein without distorting real lives. In any case, the reader must take the bad with the good--no other book exists that so coherently brings together the many strands in the Unabomber matter, regardless of the author's bias. UNABOMBER: A DESIRE TO KILL is an admitted "must read," even though the reader must beware.




2. This was a great descriptive book about the UNABOMBER'S whole life- from his successes in college, being a genius and going on to become a proffesor at Harvard as well as other highly educated universities to the components that made up his killing machines.



3. I live in Lincoln, Montana and I found a number to statements in this book not true. They may be small statements, not very significant, but in a non-fiction book every statement should be lchecked for truth before being printed. We do not have a bus that goes from Lincoln to Helena. If just one statement is not true, then it makes you wonder what else in the book is not true.



4. Everyone seemed to know about the Unabomber. There wasn't a bigger surprise than when they found the maker of some 15 bombs was a Harvard graduate living in the woods in Montana. This book helps explain why Theodore Kaczynski had reasons for his mail bombs, why he picked his targets, and it will answer that important question, "How could a poverty-stricken man, riding a bike, living in a shack with no electricity or running water, spread fear from coast to coast, and elude the police for almost eightenn years?"



5. The story of the Unabomber is quite fascinating, but I feel it could have been told better. This book could have used some more aggressive editing; some of the writing is downright sloppy and it could have been told just as thoroughly using a lot fewer pages.
   Here's an example of what bugs me (page 126):
   Much of their squad's training is done by the FBI and the military. And so one comfort is that if a bomb squad gets "into a situation that was over your head, it's easy to call for help. You can call military -87th EOD.
   Where's the editor?
   The book is worth reading but, as I said, could have been better if some more time had been spent cleaning it up.

5 comments about The United States of America versus Theodore John Kaczynski: Ethics, Power and the Invention of the Unabomber.

1. If there is a particular strength to this book, it is in the revelation that the man who dared to judge Kaczynski, one of the fed's premier affirmative action judges, failed to understand the processes of his own courtroom. Unwilling to become a joke like Brother Lance, this judge decided that his courtroom would not become a soap box for Ted's deranged philosophies, forgeting, along the way, that the Constitution requires that the courtroom become a soap box for the defendant, his one chance to speak his defense, and for the people to weight that defense. Thank you Michael Mello for reminding us that everyone is entitled to his day in court. Top notch book.



2. The author well states legal points of debate regarding the "non-trial" of Dr.Kaczynski. Provides interesting insight to the legal system and inparticular Dr. Kaczynski's plight. However, the book could have been reduced to 2-3 chapters if such points/observations were concisely and clearly stated once.



3. This book is an antidote to the kind of pop psychology in which people live in a loving society in which each one strives to obtain as much popularity as possible by pleasing everyone. Instead, this is the work of an expert in the law's use of the death penalty, a measure which ought to be reserved for those cases in which something evil needs to be eradicated, as the Unabomber seemed to be successful on a few occasions in which he picked his own targets and used our customary methods of communication to deliver his bombs. What is most offensive to me is a presumption that there is any innocence here, a legal fiction which is often used as a professional matter to keep anyone who has formed an opinion from speaking about things which are obvious to those who are not engaged in the drama which conswists mainly of pretending that no one knows what is going on. There is still a little doubt in my mind that Ted was absolutely sincere in pleading guilty to what he did, but after he managed that bit of confession, it is great that a law professor like Michael Mello could write this book to show how the attempt to defend him was even crazier than he was.



4. The author appears so involved in his own axes to grind with other public defenders, and his own self-promotion, that the book never tells us anything of interest about Kaczynski, Kaczynski's mental states, the accuracy of media reporting or the delicate balances in the legal system. There is an interesting conflict in our legal system around the issue of self representation since the Supreme Court decided Faretta v. California in 1975. The case of Colin Ferguson in New York (the man who shot the passengesrs on the LIRR) exemplified this - a marginally sane defendant, allowed to represent himself, who uses the trial as a forum for his paranoid ravings. The question - can a barely competent defendant not only waive their right to an attorney, but also their right to a meaningful or fair trial? Should a barely competent defendant who is seriously mentally ill be allowed to refuse to present evidence of their mental illness because they believe that their delusions are true? The book doesn't begin to explore the frequent problems of conflicts, miscommunications, and deceit that pass both ways in many criminal (and civil) litigation. The author appears only interested in portraying Kaczynski's attorneys as rigid ideologues ( as opposed to himself). The author's critique of modern psychiatry is as superficial as his exploration and pseudo-psychology of Theodore Kaczynski. (The author nowhere fills in the gap between Kaczynski being teased as a child to deciding upon killing strangers). The author's premise that Kaczynski was a normal person who was cheated out of his day in court is fatally weakened by this lack of explanation of Kaczynski's psychology. The author's style is in desperate need of editing (the same sentences appear repeatedly). The author's self righteousness makes this an even more difficult read.



5. I certainly agree with the reviewer,Dr.Alan A.Abrams, on his review of this book,especially in the area of editing.Although a few of the points in this book were,I feel correct,and well accepted such as the judges refusal to allow Kaczynski to defend himself even though the possibility of recieving the death penalty was being persued by the prosecution, the judges refusal to allow Kaczynski to proceed with the trial and defend himself with no clear sanity/insanity diagnoses determined was flawed. I don't know of anyone who doesn't believe in a defendants right to his day in court.I feel Kaczynski should have been allowed to defend himself not having been definitely diagnosed insane by the doctors and/or the court even though it was obvious that Kaczynski knew what was at stake and was taking advantage of every legal opportunity available to manipulate and delay the inevitable trial.The main point of this book was just that,the denial by the judge of due process, Kaczynski's right to represent himself.I believe most people agree with that even though Kaczynski accepted the plea bargain.This gets us back to this book,the main point of which has been stated above.After laborously enduring hundreds of pages of redundant text,hoping for a few new facts,I finally got to the end and was totally disappointed.There were few new facts in this book that hadn't been already in the news.As Dr.Abrams stated in his review,this book was in dire need of editing.I believe that the complete book could have been reduced to one or two chapters at most and still cover the main points brought out in this book.Definitely not recommended for anyone without a very,very long attention span who is also able to endure endless redundant text.

5 comments about Ecoterror: The Violent Agenda to Save Nature : The World of the Unabomber.

1. This book from Free Enterprise, gee I wonder what their agenda is? use's the same language that the violent hate group The Sahara Club use's, and who the FBI quotes in their press releases, to justify the terrorization & chemical torture of young activists. Amazon a company based in Seattle which has it's own experience with pepper spray sadists would link this filth with a noble title like Ecodefense. The efforts to reduce the virginal beauty of the last wild forests to sand dunes, sani-cans, and motorcycle trails is proceeding, the good guys are losing...



2. The book is a litany of jaded corporate arguments for the continued destruction of nature so that a few people can get richer. To be read only in the same way you watch a bad B-movie -- for the unintentional laughs. The book's inability to understand social activism (not to mention concepts like justice) would have made it a best-seller in Czarist Russia.



3. In dealing with radical environmentalist, I felt this book was right on. I have had the pleasure of dealing with their actions myself and this book explained my experiences to a T. The theory behind the radical enviros actions is compassionately explained in Mr. Arnolds analysis of them. I recommend this book to anyone who has ever been terrorized by or curious about the true objectives of the movement.



4. Arnold provides a valuable detailed account of how eco-terrorism got its foothold in the United States and to what end some environmental vigilantes are willing to go to affect social change. It is only by fully understanding what drives eco-terrorism that we as a community can expect to prevent the considerable social and economic harm caused when eco-terrorists take the law into their own hands.



5. I read this book and found it to be a completely enjoyable COMEDY. It is hilarious. This is the unbelievably unreasonable anti-earth, anti-nature point of view of the logging, mining, fishing, land development and other destructive "resource" industries. It is written by a staunch Christian zealot. Just check out his website. Ron Arnold does not hide the fact he believes humans have every right to "extract" the heck out of the planet because it is "our god-given right" according to Genesis. Read and weep, gentle earth treaders, but you get to know the mindset of the other side pretty well.
   Please note: a laudatory review here is by Eureka, CA resource industry lawyer Andy Stunich. For the record, and you can easily Google this or check out the archives of the local newspapers (Times-Standard, the right-wing Eureka Reporter, also the lefty North Coast Journal), Mr. Stunich represents tree climber Eric Schatz who is hired by logging companies to "extract" earth defenders from ancient growth redwoods. Need I say more?
   Birds of a feather ....

5 comments about Harvard and the Unabomber: The Education of an American Terrorist.

1. IF U WANT TO LEARN ABOUT THE UNABOMBER & ALL HIS BACKGROUND, EVEN INTO HIS FRIENDS, HIS POLITICAL VIEWS, WHAT SCHOOL HE ATTENDED, WHERE HE LIVED, WHAT DEGREE HE HAD, ETC....THIS IS THE BOOK FOR U. I FOUND THE BOOK VERY LONG & BORING. I DO NOT THINK IT EVER EVEN DESCRIBED THE EXACT DEEDS & RESULTS OF HIS EFFORTS VERY DETAILED. IT ALL WAS TANGLED IN A VERY COMPLICATED CORE...NOT WHAT I EXPECTED AT ALL. A DEFINATE PUT TO SLEEP BOOK...



2. Every leader of our government should read this book, NOW! It is brilliant!!! Professor Chase shows us that the unabomber was not a psychological aberration, but rather, the product of a society which promotes pessimism and despair, creates technology without the restraint of ethics, and uses power without considering moral consequences. All terrorism shares these common roots... without facing this fact, without recreating ourselves with optimism and high ideals, we shall never win the "war" on terror. Jeff Zekas, Susanville, California, 7 March 2007.



3. _Harvard and the Unabomber: The Education of an American Terrorist_ by Alston Chase, published in 2003, is an attempt to explain the motivations behind the reign of terror unleashed on the American people by Ted Kaczynski (dubbed "the Unabomber" by the FBI). Kaczynski was a brilliant man with a 170 I.Q., a graduate of Harvard University, and at one time a professor of mathematics; however, he left his career in mathematics to go live out in the wilderness of Montana. Feeling increasingly alienated by industrial society (what he refers to in his _Manifesto_ as "the system") and increasingly troubled by the loss of "wild nature" to modernization, Kaczynski felt that he was left with no way out but to unleash a reign of terror upon those who he believed were furthering the technological system. Ironically, much of Kaczynski's justification for his murders, can be found in the writings of more mainstream sociologists. A constant theme that recurs in sociological literature (the very literature that Kaczynski himself read and studied) is the sense of alienation and anomie brought about by the disruption of traditional ways of life through technological advance. Further, the modern science of ecology tells us that man has caused untold amounts of harm to nature and has disrupted the wilderness, perhaps irrepairably. Kaczynski who for years had felt himself an outsider to modern society, first as a high I.Q. student and intellectual in a largely blue collar community, then as a student from a blue collar background among upper class Harvard students, and finally as a research mathematician (a field well-known for extremes in introversion), came to identify with the environmental movement in part because of his love for the wilderness. As a "green anarchist", Kaczynski saw little hope for modern industrial society and with each technological advance saw further dangers brought to humanity and the wild. This led him to take extreme measures against those who he believed were furthering "the system". This book delves into the influences on Kaczynski's thinking: the influence of Harvard University and its curriculum (which maintained that judgment was impossible and that values were meaningless), the influence of the Cold War, the CIA, and psychological experimentation on distorting Kaczynski's underlying perceptions of reality, and ultimately the influence of the 1960s and the environmental movement. As the author repeatedly states, "bad men do what good men dream of", and for those of us who have often felt disillusioned and disaffected with modernity and "the system", there is a certain sense of "There but for the grace of God go I", when we encounter the case of Kaczynski. There is also a sense of embarrassment felt by many who find that the very ideas they have been advocating are taken to their logical extreme by an individual like Kaczynski. Modern technological society has left many feeling profoundly alienated, and the loss of wilderness and traditional ways of life has only furthered this alienation. Those who champion "the system" and naively accept the idea of "progress" frequently scoff at such notions as "primitivism"; however, they then refuse to see the manifold harm that has been wrought upon nature and society by their own advances. It must be said though that while this book does appear to be somewhat sympathetic to Kaczynski and his ideas and way of life, it ultimately must not fall short in condemning his methods for attaining his goals as cowardly and futile. Further, I believe the author should not so readily dismiss the notion of "mental illness" in the case of Kaczynski. Kaczynski was obviously an extremely introverted and hyper-sensitive (he feared loud noises for example) individual whose inability to fit into modern society was readily apparent. As a society we have no other way of dealing with such people than to label them as "mentally ill". Further, it seems likely that there is some sort of underlying biological basis for such tendencies; though, the extent to which this biological basis operates is difficult to determine.
   
   The author begins by discussing the crimes of the Unabomber. Noting his bomb-making skills and also noting some of the obscure influences on his ideas. For example, Kaczynski was obviously a fan of the novelist Joseph Conrad (a fellow Pole), and particularly enjoyed his _The Secret Agent_. Kaczynski signed his manifesto with the epithet "FC", which may have been taken from _The Secret Agent_. Kaczynski also advocated the "scientific method" and philosophically was a rationalist and strict positivist, though he ironically saw science and technology as destructive forces. Other instances of Kaczynski's intellectual games, include the recurrence of the word "wood" in his destructive acts. The author also explains various aspects of Kaczynski's "mountain man" existence which were distorted by the media. For example, Kaczynski was portrayed by the media as a "loner" (though he was known and liked by a few individuals who lived near him) and a "slob" (though his cabin was as neat as a pin).
   
   Following this, the author turns to the influence of Harvard on Ted Kaczynski. The author notes the fact that Kaczynski was from a blue collar community, in which he was an outsider both as a consequence of his high intelligence and strong mathematical aptitude and because his family were intellectuals. Kaczynski subsequently attended Harvard, where he remained largely alienated. At Harvard, Kaczynski faced a General Curriculum which de-emphasized the underpinnings of Western Civilization and Christian values instead promoting materialistic nihilism. Further, at the time the Cold War was raging, so intelligent individuals like Kaczynski were forced into mathematics and scientific related fields (something which Kaczynski always held against his parents). It was while he was at Harvard that Kaczynski participated in a psychological experiment directed by Henry A. Murray (who was influential in the early CIA). This experiment sought to assess alienation and may have promoted a breakdown in the mind of Kaczynski. At the time, the CIA was engaging in many reckless policies, including unlawful and unethical experimentation with LSD and other drugs and mind control (something that Kaczynski would make note of in his _Manifesto_). Kaczynski left Harvard to become a graduate student at Michigan and then a professor at Berkeley before dropping out of mainstream society and returning to the wilderness.
   
   In terms of philosophical influences, Kaczynski was a voracious reader. Principally though his writings seem to be distortions and perversions of the ideas of radical localists and anarchists such as Jacques Ellul (particularly _The Technological Society_) and E. F. Schumacher. Kaczynski also was influenced by primitivism, and the author distinguishes between different kinds of primitivism in the writings of sociologists and in Kaczynski himself. Kaczysnki's thinking also appeared to resonate with radical environmentalists such as the Earth Liberation Front, EarthFirst!, Edward Abbey (writer of _The Monkey Wrench Gang_), and anarcho-primitivist John Zerzan.
   
   It is an unfortunate and sad fact that Kaczynski found himself so alienated by society that he chose to lash out as he did. His methods of attacking the system were indeed cowardly and deplorable, and ultimately only resulted in the deaths of many innocents. He achieved little by way of halting progress or restoring the wilderness which he loved so much. This book is a good book in attempting to understand the motivations of Kaczynski. Ultimately to prevent such atrocities in the future, it will be necessary for society to rethink itself, for people to be less greedy, and to achieve a viable alternative to modern materialistic decline. Whether or not such a reversal can be accomplished at all remains to be seen.



4. Author Alston Chase is a contemporary of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski. Both attended Harvard in the late 1950's, both worked as university professors and, coincidentally, both retired to seclusion in Montana. Chase originally set out to write a book about the legacy of 1960's America. His research on Kaczynski revealed that contrary to the media's snap judgment, Kaczynski was not a product of his 1960's time at Berkley. The Unabomber manifesto is, in fact, rooted in 1950's Cold War ideology and the teachings of liberal arts colleges such as Harvard during that decade. Chase writes, "Once they had made up their minds about Kaczynski--whether deciding that he is insane, a profound philosopher, a misguided ideologist, or a representative of the sixties--many people lost interest in him. University scholars all too willing to devote seminars to such pop cultural doss as the Grateful Dead and Star Trek have virtually ignored the manifesto, producing just two articles on it since its appearance."
   
   In the first half of the book, Chase provides a chronology of Kaczynski's crimes and his never-ending quest for a more powerful, more deadly bomb. Chase sheds lights on the futility of the FBI search and the numerous red herrings Kaczynski set our for law enforcement. The media, cut off from Kaczynski's cabin, were quick to label his messy and unkempt, when in reality he was meticulously organized. He kept a standard mountain tradition of not wasting water bathing while doing heavy winter work, and for that he was labeled a strange, unclean hermit. The media interviewed people Kaczynski didn't like, and they labeled him a misanthrope. When Chase interviewed Kaczynski's friends in the local Montana town, however, they remembered him as friendly and intelligent, if somewhat reserved. And the desolate cabin in the woods? It was within hearing distance of a highway, and Kaczynski had enough neighbors that he managed to keep up several boundary and land use disputes.
   
   Chase's thesis is that Kaczynski was forever scarred by a series of intense psychological experiments he participated in as a Harvard undergraduate student. Researcher Henry A. Murray, a veteran of DoD psychology experimentation conducted highly unethical multi-year studies on a group of students. The subjects were deceived about the nature and length of the study, which aimed to discover their fundamental life philosophy and place them in highly stressful interrogations to observe their reactions to demeaning, belittling questioning. Chase provides a never-before-seen look at the experiments Harvard had tried to seal, but he never makes an ironclad case that this study was the linchpin for the creation of the Unabomber.
   
   The book also exposes a dark side of the US military involvement in funding academic and psychological studies in the 1950's. During that time, the government wanted to fight the Cold War with propaganda and psychological manipulation. Murray's Harvard experiments descended from his military work on these subjects. By the mid-1940's a quarter of all US psychologists were serving the US military, and in the 1950's, the CIA was directly and indirectly (via dummy foundations) funding a significant portion of academic research in psychology.
   
   Chase's book serves two important purposes--(1) revealing the true Ted Kaczynski, a brilliant and disturbed man who was judged quickly and incorrectly by the media and (2) revealing the military's significant influence on two decades of psychological research in the U.S. Chase doesn't have a smoking gun for the creation of a domestic terrorist, but he probes previously unexplored and unpublished areas in his search for answers about the genesis of Ted Kaczynski as the Unabomber.



5. the book "harvard and the unabomber" addresses several interesting issues that many rebellious intellectuals face. Among them - the desire of some to move to remote places like Montana, their issues with poor career prospects there, the double standards that many of them possess when they attack "the system", their issues with emotivism and moral relativism, and their skepticism of the moral legitimacy of authority. It also addresses the schism in academia over the question of whether a core curriculum should be put into place, and whether the said curriculum should inculcate moral standards in the students or not. It also addresses the fact that a Harvard degree is not necessarily a guarantee of success - that many Harvard graduates end up as nobodies.
   
   Those are incidental, of course, to the main topic of the book, which is how these themes have influenced the Unabomber.

5 comments about Unabomber: On the Trail of America's Most-Wanted Serial Killer.

1. The book was intersting, but a bit to brief for my liking. The actual story of the Unabomber life took less than 150 pages. The book details each of his bombings and suggests the reasoning behind the target and M.O. Douglas also takes you through his thoughts in the investigation. Many readers feel Douglas is a bit arrogant in his writing. I do not agree with that opinion, nor do I feel this book is written that way.

   The rest of the book was not very interesting outside of the inclusion of the full manifesto of the Unabomber. The manifesto contains nothing shocking, but contains what you might expect an outsider hermit radical to say. I'm sure there are better books about the Unabomber than this, so I suggest you try a more detailed account.




2. Douglas may present a clear chronology of events relating to the investigation of Unabomber. However, that is the sole limit of the books's worth. The remainder of the book is a staging ground for Douglas' brand of psycholinguistics, the analysis of a person's patterns of expression and thought in order to provide a psychological profile of the person. Instead of accomplishing that, though, in any meaningful way, Douglas perpetrates a sort of freehand poetic literary criticism on the so-called Manifesto. He completely fails to gain any insight into Unabomber's own statement of policy in "Industrial Society and Its Future". On page fifty-three, Douglas boils down his view by claiming simply that the Unabomber's fixation on wood and nature "...probably served as his rationale for setting the bombs off, his substitute for whatever deeper psychological problems had actually caused him to commit the crimes. A lot of violent terrorist activity is the result of political beliefs, but at the same time, I've never seen a violent terrorist yet who I didn't feel had deep psychological problems and a serious character disorder." Oh, yeh. Lest we forget, Douglas goes on: Unabomber "diabolical" too.

   Douglas essentially claims that the Unabomber's activity is irrational and eludes sensible thought. That is Douglas' most egregious fundamental flaw. If he's serious in that claim, then he is less insightful than he himself seems to think he is. On the other hand, Douglas' apparent perspicasity in his craft leads me to think that he has another goal in mind: distributing disinformation to the segment of the citizenry who haven't yet bothered to read, consider, and ponder Unabomber's veritable position. That can be accomplished only by directly encountering "Industrial Society and Its Future", not the perverted and oblique interpretation of it which Douglas works so stridently to champion under a charade of sophisticated psychoanalysis.

   Basically, and to his credit, Unabomber provides an analysis of the sociology of technology. His central point is that being human and organization-dependent technology are inherently antagonistic and mutually exclusive entities. This basic tension provides the battleground for a choice: remaining human or allowing everyone to be psychologically, physiologically, and anatomically re-engineered in increments to fit the needs of the aloof and impersonal organizations that determine the course of industrial society; instead of allowing humans to put an upward limit on the intrusion into the psychological sphere that is demanded by the ever-increasing velocity and volume of conveniences that ultimately, and ever more quickly, become indispensable for the functioning of society and any given individual's participation therein. (E.g., ATM, FAX, refridgeration, pharmaceuticals, genetic recombination, etc.)

   A careful reading of Unabomber's own words is very much worthwhile. He's talking about us, you and me, not some creature on another world.

   And let us not forget what Douglas carelessly sweeps under the rug: Theodore Kaczysnki was arrested in the course of the execution of a speciously expedited search warrant that originated by his brother, David, ratting him out. The government's role in the story should be considered under the optic of a triple treachery: the government policing agencies, fraternal back-stabbing, and Douglas' attempt to obfuscate the truth about Unabomber's quite rational motivations as articulated in "Industrial Society and Its Future". Read Unabomber before you read anything about him.




3. I had never heard of John Douglas until one day my sister told me about this great book she was reading. She gave me a copy of 'Obession'. Now I am hooked ! What great reading all of his books are, from start to finish. I am now a fan. Looking forward to more books from this author.



4. I felt like I was reading the notes for a book about the Unabomber, not a real book with a beginning, middle, and end. Usually true crime books make a sequential pass through the crimes (in this case 16 bombings) and end with the arrest, and sometimes the trial of the perp. Not so "Unabomber" where the author seems more interested in proving that his profile of the bomber was correct, rather than describing the hunt for the criminal. The 16 bombings are described in Appendix 1, "An Overview and Chronological Summary," rather than in the text of the book.
   
   A manifesto on criminal profiling certainly wasn't what I expected from "Unabomber," but that's what I got.
   
   Potential purchasers should also note that the book itself is only 150 pages long. Appendices and an advertisement for "Mindhunters" by John Douglas take up the latter 150 pages.
   
   The book proper is padded out with stories that have little to do with the 'alleged' Unabomber, ('alleged' because "Unabomber" was published before Theodore Kaczynski was tried and convicted). These stories are interesting, especially the case of George Metesky, the 'Mad Bomber' of the '40s and '50s, who had a grudge against New York City's Consolidated Edison (Con Ed).
   
   (George Metesky is the only bomber I've felt the faintest amount of sympathy for, maybe because I spent so many years working at an electric utility!)
   
   The author also spends quite a bit of print defending the legitimacy of profiling as a forensic 'art.' His team's profile of Theodore Kaczynski (disgruntled genius with ties to academia) was accurate, although the Unabomber task force neglected it in favor of another profile (blue collar aviation worker). Neither profile was essential to the capture of Kaczynski. His own relatives recognized his style of writing in the Unabomber manifesto that was published by the "New York Times" and "Washington Post," and they turned him in to the FBI.
   
   If you'd like to read the unabomber's manifesto yourself, the full text is included in Appendix 3. It's 96 pages long and very dull.



5. Despite a delay with the postal service I received this book in a reasonable amount of time and it is in great condition.

5 comments about The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society & Its Future.

1. I really like Mr. Kaczynski's description of the power process, how the process is hindered today, his description of surrogate activities, and his explanation on how what we do with technology today can affect our future. ISAIF has had a big influence on the way I think of society.

   My problem with this critique, though, is that he focuses almost entirely on humans who live in industrialized countries when describing problems. He describes not our society's blatant destruction of the natural world and murder of animals, nor its harming of people in third-world countries, nor even the way that technology increases the power of those higher up in the socioeconomic hierarchy, but only what bad things technology does to individuals who don't know any happiness greater that what they get living in industrial society.

   Essentially, ISAIF was doomed to be looked as something more of a "rant" by people who can't imagine a life without technology (much less a happy life) and are content with the way they live now.




2. Ted Kaczynski's Unabomber Manifesto is one of the most bizarre and intriguing documents of modern times. From the apex of achievement and genius Kaczynski generated into the personification of paranoia and this manuscript, complete and unedited with spelling errors to boot, is the result of his time in isolation. Written in a fast and furious style that is akin to the rantings of Brad Pitt's character in the film "12 Monkeys", it is nearly impossible to take the argument seriously. However style makes the work all thmore interesting upon reflection. Anyone who wishes to make sense of why the Unabomber terrorized America must read this book and overall it is an impressive piece of outsider work.
   
   The book is extraordinarily interesting from a psychological and sociological point of view and also from a philosophical point of view. It purposes that our modern times take personal power away from mankind and that this is the root of our frustration. Based on something of a distorted Malthusian view, "FC", as Kaczynski calls himself, describes a world that is bound for doom in its current place and outlines why undoing the industrial revolution is required for the survival of mankind. He also supports an idea he refers to as "The Power Process" in which he states the we can only feel satisfied when we can perform an action from start to finish. This doesn't mean writing a book for instance. It means felling a tree, making paper, making ink, writing the book, distributing the book etc.
   
   While the philosophy behind his arguments is clearly insane it poses questions that are somewhat valid. He asks: what is the purpose of technological innovation and can man be happy in world where he is so dependent on others. These questions are worth exploring though his answers both in writing and in practice are despicable. This booklet provides an interesting glimpse into a psychotic mind and is valuable on many levels though the arguments certainly cant to be taken seriously.
   
   Ted Murena



3. This book _The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and Its Future_ is the published version of the Unabomber's Manifesto made available by Jolly Roger Press. In this manifesto, the man dubbed the Unabomber by the FBI (a noted murderer, now known to be Ted Kaczynski) writing under the name "FC" and claiming to belong to a larger organization gives his reasons for why he unleashed his terror upon the American people. The chief aim of the Unabomber appears to have been a desire to overthrow "the system", i.e. industrial society, completely obliterating mankind's dependence on technology and restoring man to his rightful place within "wild nature". Indeed, "FC" writes, "Never forget that the human race with technology is just like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine." Despite the fact that the Unabomber resorted to the most reprehensible and cowardly methods to achieve his aims, his manifesto is actually a thought provoking piece which attempts to shed light on modern man, his civilization, and its discontents. Like the anarchist Luddites before him, the Old Order Amish, and radical environmentalists, Kaczynski perceived the fundamental problem brought about by technology, regarding it as a source of problems for modern man, and completely rejected the naïve belief in "progress" and scientific rationalism. Much of this book is spent explaining the psychology of defeatism and the process of oversocialization brought about by man's reliance upon "surrogate activities" to achieve realizable goals within the "power process". Kaczynski provides one of the best critiques of leftism and political correctness available, showing how a psychology of defeatism arises among the upper strata of society causing them to experience excessive feelings of guilt resulting in their over-identification with the downtrodden, "minorities" (only the "respected" minorities, though), and the weak, all of whom they secretly despise. The leftist is oversocialized and thus prone to moralistic preaching; however, they will seek means to vent their natural hostilities by taking them out on "society" and becoming rebellious. Kaczynski also explains the power process, by which man comes to exert himself in order to attain a goal. If either the exertion is insufficient and the goal comes too readily or the exertion occurs but the goal is not reached, then depression, demoralization, and defeatism may eventually result. To rectify this situation, Kaczynski offers the insane suggestion that it is technology and "the system" which is to fault. Kaczynski shows how science is being used to create machines which control every aspect of an individual's life - with particularly horrorific consequences involving the untamed science of genetic engineering. Kaczynski also shows how "rules and regulations" result in the suppression of freedom, and how deprived of his freedom, man will become demoralized. With each new technological advance comes another suppression of freedom. Kaczynski's answer to these problems is revolution of the most violent kind. His revolutionaries are to reject propaganda (marketing and advertising, which lead man along like an animal to slaughter) and opt instead for the individual and small communities. In addition, they are to replace the ideal of progress with that of wild nature. Nature may invoke religious or mystical feelings for many and thus provides a suitable rallying point for the coming revolution against technological society. Further, his revolutionaries are to reject the leftist and collectivism as potential dangers. Kaczynski shows how leftism leads to totalitarianism once the leftists gain power (the communist countries illustrate this perfectly, as well as modern day political correctness within the university system) and within leftism itself there is not suitable grounds for preventing this totalitarianism. For Kaczynski, this revolution is man's only hope for reversing the Industrial Revolution and reclaiming man's natural place in the world again.
   
   While Kaczynski's thoughts are certainly interesting, his methods are to be deplored. Rather than waking man up from within, Kaczynski sought to achieve his ends through violence and resulted in many innocent deaths. Also, his schemes are utopian in nature because no one has been alive long enough to remember what society was like before the Industrial Revolution. While Kaczynski went out to live in the woods alone, his story may be contrasted with another individual who went out to live in the woods alone who had set out to accomplish his anarchist goals through much more admirable means; that is Thoreau. Violence is not the answer!



4. Although this is an excellent read, I doubt that Ted Kaczynski would encourage his work being sold in any way. Go to google, and search for "Unabomber Manifesto." You will find countless online publications of this that are free.



5. This manifesto is not totally original but he has some good, well articulated points. It is worth reading for those interested in social issues and problems, like Civilization and its Discontents, Brave New World and the other standards. It is perhaps a troubling thing that this writing is being discussed and obtained via the internet / technology. At the same time, ironically, the manifesto has reached a much larger audience via computers. Taking a frank and critical look at our use of technology is the first step towards any possible change, and "FC" invites this honest questioning within the reader.

1 comments about The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and Its Future.

1. Kaczynski correctly identifies in some detail the cruel reality inherent in being a member of industrial society in terms of a blind and blinding exploitation of most human beings by a "power elite", and he proposes revolution by a minority of cognizant individuals to counter it. Ironically, he regularly chastises leftism and leftist views, while, not surprisingly to me at least, advocates an anarchistic and machiavellian strategy to "bring down" the technology-driven monster we have created that devours nature and that part of nature that is us.
   
   Why can't we all just get along?

5 comments about A Mind for Murder: The Education of the Unabomber and the Origins of Modern Terrorism.

1. This was a terribly disappointing book. Author Alston Chase's description of the psychological experiments which Kaczynski was subjected to at Harvard is disturbing, and he makes some interesting connections between the manipulation suffered by Kaczynski and his subsequent rage at 'systems of control'.

   But this potentially valuable insight gets lost in Chase's superficial and obsessive recounting of what he views as a social crisis bought on by 'value-free' education and philosphy. In the process, Chase condemns both academia and those who revolted against it, post-war society and those who pointed out it's failings, the US government and those who would try to move beyond a nation-state. By the end of the book, Chase has variously described Kaczynski as somehow representative of deep-ecologists, anti-globlization protestors, and even islamic fundamentalists (who, whatever their other problems, would not seem to be suffering from a 'value-free' education), all of whom (along with multiple other groups that the author doesn't like) are indiscriminately labelled 'terrorists'.




2. Though Chase does seem to suffer a need to attack what he views as the outcome of "value-free" education, I do not think the book suffers as much from this insistence as does the previous reviewer. In fact, there is much to be gained from such a study.

   Chase's book is an admirable study of both the Unabomber and the postwar currents that converged to contribute to the making of the Unabomber. Thankfully, Chase is wise enough not to offer excuses for Kaczynski's actions, but his research into what made Kaczynski "tick" provide a believable backdrop and a necessary antidote to the popular misconception of the Unabomber as a madman devoid of reason or motive.

   And rather than finding fault with Chase's attempt to tie the Unabomber's actions and theories to those of other "terrorist" groups, I found his arguments convincing, especially in regards to the pervasiveness of the positivistic, supremely rational curriculum of Western universities and the devaluing of the humanities.

   We need more thinkers and researchers like Chase who are willing to make us question our kneejerk reactions to men who make us as uncomfortable as Kaczynski.




3. Mind for Murder is an excellent book by Alston Chase. This book has two main components to it. The first component deals with the life and demise of Ted Kaczynski. The author gives us descriptions of Ted's early years as a child, his high school years, and spends a great deal of time expounding on Ted's time spent at Harvard.
   
   In the author's description of Ted's early years we our shown Ted grew to despise his parents pressuring him to excel academically. His resentment was especially strong toward his father who seemed to remain aloof and somewhat nihilistic till he committed suicide. Ted also resented his mother Wanda because he felt she intentionally subjected him to psychological abuses as a child. These feelings seemed to stay with Ted and even grow as Ted embarked on his college career.
   
   The second component of this book is a cultural analysis that centers around the time period Ted would have been at Harvard and proffers reasons why Ted and others in our modern times have felt the need to resort to terrorism. The author explains how Universities like Harvard used to place a strong emphasis on liberal arts education. Education that was paired with moral virtue. This way of thinking is found in the thoughts of the ancient Greeks who thought reason had to be bound with moral virtue. However, in the 1950s with World War II just having ended and the Cold War looming the universities seemed to adopt the stance of logical positivism. The idea that if something isn't scientifically verifiable it has no meaning. In other words, moral judgments are just the cultural attitudes of the time. Ted would have encountered this line of nihilistic thinking at Harvard. Is it any wonder in later years he would adopt and expound his personal philosophy to mean any ends justified the means? This is especially poignant considering moral judgments to Ted seemed to be just a bunch of efforts at psychological control by the system.
   
   Chase later gives us insightful details of how Ted was used at Harvard by Henry Murray for a psychological experiment. Ted and some other Harvard students at the time were participants in an experiment to submit these persons to dreadful psychological interrogation experiments. The Govt. at this time was very concerned with finding out how to treat or even coerce political prisoners into doing what they wanted. Even going so far as to study and try to learn how to keep the masses under control. Chase gives us historical insight into the Govt. intentionally trying out "new" drugs like LSD on college students, prison inmates, and anyone else it so fancied because surely the Russians had a secret "mind control" drug like this to coerce confessions out of POWs. Ted resented his being tested (even if he was being paid for it) and came to view the techno-industrial system as guilty of imposing unnecessary suffering on the masses. Mind control, feeling like a cog in the machine, depression, irritability, lack of leisure, pollution, were all some of the things Ted blamed on the techno-industrial system. The only way to stop these unjust grievances was to lash out against the system. Even killing if necessary which is just what Ted did.
   
   This is a sad book in some ways but it's a more important work in many other ways. It tells what happens when value gets subjugated below reason. It tells how the culture suffers when ideas like deconstructionism, logical positivism, and structuralism so permeate our culture that nothing has any meaning. Until academics and the culture in general start accepting the fact that reason is only half the puzzle; there is always yin with yang, objectivity with subjectivity, and mind with matter in any accurate depiction of reality. Until we understand these principles and adopt a more holistic approach to reality we are perhaps bound to repeat these same mistakes-the devaluing of society to utter meaninglessness. Worst of all, the suffering of innocents by acts of terrorism and the dependence on antidepressants will continue to be a prominent part of life.



4. A Mind for Murder is a compelling look into what contributed to the creation of the monster known as the Unabomber. It begins in the earlier years of Kaczynski and logs personal event and how these events contributed to his psyche as a murder when he grew. One of the most compelling insights in the book is how he is thought to be insane and a madman. Kaczynski Knew what he was doing and did not what to be declared as insane because his environmental/anti-technology cause would be thought a joke. He took a plea bargain in order to keep the defense from declaring him mentally unstable. I was a amazed at the book and the great insight and detail it portrayed. If you are interested in Domestic Terrorism this is a must read.



5. This book is useful as required reading for college students if the professor would like to help get the students past the trivial debates about whether Ted Kaczynski was a serial killer, ecoterrorist, or what. Far too often, attempts at criminological writing reduce to an essay on a "How crazy were they?" and this book helps correct that, making sense out of an episode in American history which frequently baffles explanation. For a taste of the author's writing, one should look for much of the same writing easily found on the web as a series of articles in The Atlantic.

5 comments about Unabomber: The Secret Life of Ted Kaczynski.

1. See the title? Well with this book you get to know an awful lot (repeatedly) about how the author new the forests betterthan the unabomber...ad nauseam. This is a book about the author, about 85% and very little about Ted Kaczynski. When you have tired for the umpteenth time of how but for the author we may never have found "Ted's Secret Cabin" you will have to seek out other books to find out about the unabomber.
   Is it me but why have the last two books I bought from American authors (last one supposed to be about Tim McVeigh) all about themselves and not the subject matter? Very very tedious book and to be avoided if you want to know much about the unabomber but great if you want to learn how skillful and terrific the author is.



2. Great job capturing the complexity of the situation and awesome depictions of the wilderness



3. Although, in general, I enjoyed this book, I (also) got tired of (supposed) writer, Mr. Waits, lauding himself and how (now that he was armchair quarter backing) he knew more than Ted, the FBI and and town locals - combined. He paints himself as the smartest hero in this book - heck, any book. He plays classical piano, speaks several languages and is skilled in most earth sciences. Yet, Mr. Waits never puts two and two together - that when a new weirdo moves into town - construction equipment and cabins start being destroyed, animals begin turning up dead or tortured and at least one person is shot in the back (of this small mountain community) and that it just may be... the NEW LOCAL WEIRDO committing these crimes. Hello! Because the local area and topography itself is so interesting and the little glimpses of Ted are fascinating I was able to make it to the end of this short read. But, I also got tired or hearing Mr. Waits grandstanding.



4. 
   A cryptic but scenic window into the clandestine side of the life, times, and the surroundings of the very disturbed mind of the Unabomber. Told by a friend as it was lived secretly by Harvard Math whiz kid and genius UC Berkeley Professor Dr. Theodore Kaczynski for more than 25 years in the mountains and environs of Lincoln, Montana.
   
   The reader should be warned that this book is not high academic political science or a learnt psychology treatise: Just the basic outlines of a life lived on the edge of American civilization: the bare bone facts with occasional speculation as to what Ted was up to, or usually down to, during his hermitically sealed life away from normal society.
   
   Chris Waits came about as close to a friend as Kaczynski was ever likely to have. Yet, for 25 years Kaczynski succeeded in remaining an elusive enigma even to Chris, his only friend and closest neighbor as he went about his calculated mission of committing the most horrendous of evil deeds. Chris helped Ted; allowed him to roam about his gulch; and then after Ted's arrest, helped the FBI uncover a treasure trove of evidence against him -- catalogued and detailed by Ted himself in such a meticulous fashion that only a compulsively twisted mind could have maintained it. Had Ted gone to trial, his own archive would have indicted and convicted him.
   
   It included, among many others things, Ted's secret cabin in which 22,000 pages of notes chronicling every evil deed committed -- including a vast amount of local vandalism was found. It chronicled how and why they were conceived, fashioned and delivered. Plus lists and schemata of his experiments, portions, machining techniques, wiring diagrams, etc. and Ted's own secret classification scheme and evaluation of his handy work: Altogether, a truly astounding window into a very, very disturbed mind.
   
   The book details how a truly evil mind, operating passive aggressively behind a screen of contrived sanctimonious principles about the evils of technology, and on the margins of society, works. All of the well-known clichés about genius being a close cousin of insanity and about its huge capacity for evil apply here. But it must also be said, if only in passing, that another unstated subtext of the book leaves us with a larger more disturbing message about our society in general that cannot continue to be ignored:
   
   It is that the growing isolation, disconnectedness and alienation in American society is becoming the incubator if not the mainspring for turning large reservoirs of passive aggressive hatred, resentment, and thoughts of entitlements and revenge into an engine that drives impulses towards terrorism.
   
   Whether it be a one man terrorist cell as in the case of a Ted Kaczynski or a Timothy McVeigh, and Rudolph Roberts, or a group coalescing around a committed but perhaps misguided idea, such as the white supremacists groups and militia of the Mid-West, larger and larger numbers of people are starting to feel that there is no legitimate avenue of expression or release from what they perceive as the oppressive conditions of our society?
   
   Whenever and wherever passive-aggressive hatred and resentment meets with a "felt sense of entitlement" and this sense is combined with a religious-like (and sometimes even religious) justification that can be used as cover, the jig is up: Any kind of action no matter how evil can then be justified in the name of a supposed higher moral principle.
   
   One can argue that with this tried and true formula, the threats of internal terrorism from the likes of Ted Kaczynskis, Timothy McVeighs, and Rudolph Roberts is equal to that posed by outside groups like al Qaeda.
   
   In the end, Kaczynski's main request, to publish his meandering anti-technology tract was yielded to anyway, but after 25 years, untold mayhem, death and injuries. And then it was agreed to under duress. Why not have a forum and a newspaper devoted exclusively to the open expression of any and all cockamamie ideas and grievances? Would that not serve as a release valve for some of the pent up frustration of the increasing number of alienated activists? This in some weird sense can be seen as enlightened democracy too.
   
   Three stars



5. I found this a fascinating read although not particularly well-written. Some of the chapters read like a series of statements rather than a flowing text. Like many other reviewers, I expected more information about Ted Kaczynski and the actual investigation; still, I was enthralled with the personal reaction of a Lincoln native to Ted Kaczynski's arrest.
   
   I found Waits' shock and dismay entirely believable and human. It is easy, in hindsight, to say, "Why didn't people figure it out?" It is difficult to remember that 25 years doesn't take place in a tidy 100-page summary. We are talking about 9,000 24-hour days during which one man's behavior and the occasional incident take place amidst a thousand incidents, conversations, foibles, habits . . .
   
   I think Chris Waits felt the need to "exorcise" Ted Kaczynski's ghost--to try to understand exactly what he missed while he was getting married and working massive logging jobs, etc. The book is him looking back and trying to piece together these odd disjointed events that seemed, at the time, rather innocuous. Of course, once he puts it all together, it looks obvious, but that's because he has created a tidy narrative for the reader.
   
   Lastly, I didn't think Chris Waits was grandstanding throughout the book. The book is written by Chris Waits AND Dave Shors. Part of the book's uneven tenor, in my opinion, occurs because the reader is not always hearing Chris Waits' voice. Rather, Dave Shors is writing in Chris Waits' "voice". I'm not sure I could guess what Chris Waits REALLY sounds like (other than from his journal entries and a few places that sound like interviews). I think these factors should be taken into consideration when judging the book.