2 comments about 11 Septembre 2001: L'Effroyable Imposture.

1. I dont know if the information this book contains is true or not. However this book makes some sense. As a French, i think the author could be able to be very objective on 9.11, and i believe that what he said is not lie. Maybe what we believe to be true is a big fat lie



2. mes commentaires ne sont pas en rapport au livre mais bien à votre site, j'aimerais recevoir le volume l'Effroyable imposture, mais il n'y a rien qui donne suite à ma demande.....rien qui me dit que je vais le recevoir etc....
   merci

5 comments about Thinking Like a Terrorist: Insights of a Former FBI Undercover Agent.

1. THINKING LIKE A TERRORIST: INSIGHTS OF A FORMER FBI UNDERCOVER AGENT covers the latest war on global terror - thought the eyes of one fighting it. Mike German was a former FBI counterterrorism agent who here contends that despite all American efforts, there's a basic failure to understand the terrorists' wants and how they intend to get it. Our policies are driven by misunderstanding: THINKING LIKE A TERRORIST seeks to define and analyze the thinking of terrorism and is essential for any collection strong in terrorist studies, whether it be high school, college or public lending library.



2. Thinking Like a Terrorist: Insights of a Former FBI Undercover Agent
   I am about three quarters through with the book and I can't say that this book is one that you can't put down, but I don't think it was written as a novel. I have enjoyed the book as an educational document. I would highly recommend it to anyone who would like to understand a little more of what is going on behind the scenes of today's terrorists; what motivates them to carry out their attacks and what philosophies they adhere to. Great Job



3. Considering 9/11 and current events regarding Al-Qaeda, this book should be on everyone's nightstand.
   
   Mr. German has written a very enlightening and informative book on not just how to get into the mind of a terrorist but also to understand their motivations. Though he discusses primarily the KKK and the IRA, he does mention Al-Qaeda occassionally. In essence, all terrorist groups are motivated by the pursuit of legitimacy, regardless of if this means losing every physical battle with auhtorities. As he says in the book, when they lose, they win. For terrorists it is not about military victory; it is about legitimacy.
   
   This book has helped make it very clear to me that the USA is losing its battle against Al-Qaeda in the same way it lost against the Viet Cong, in the same way the French lost against the Algerians and in the same way the British lost against the IRA; by not understanding how terrorists think and what motivates them and by treating their actions (regarding Al-Qaeda) as military acts and not the criminal acts they truly are.
   
   I truly hope many in our government at all levels read this book.



4. A far left view of the war on terror.
   
   The author believes we should arrest bin laden and haul him before the International Criminal Court (ICC).
   
   The author refers to the Founding Fathers as terrorists.
   
   Do you really need to hear anything else?
   
   Zero stars...



5. This was a very good book, but was not what I expected. The author was an undercover agent with the FBI and infiltrated the White Supremacist movement. I got the idea that basically terrorists are fascists. I thought that the definition of the term fascist was especially interesting.
   
   The following ideas are the necessary ideas to being a fascist government:
   
   1. A Cult of Tradition.
   2. The rejection of modernism.
   3. A compulsion to action for action's sake.
   4. The inability to withstand analytical criticism.
   5. An exploitation of the fear of difference.
   6. An appeal to a frustrated middle class.
   7. The obsession with a plot.
   8. Humiliation at the wealth and force of the enemy, yet conviction the enemy can be defeated.
   9. An acceptance of life as permanent warfare, for pacifism is considered trafficking with the enemy.
   10. Popular elitism exhibiting contempt for the weak.
   11. The possibility that everybody can become a hero.
   12. A machismo ethic implying both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.
   13. A selective populism that disdains parliamentary government.
   14. U-Fascism speaks Newsspeak (a reference to Orwell's 1984.).
   
   The author states that the methods that have worked in defeating terrorism have been to treat them as criminals. Bobby Sands and 9 others starved to death because the British quite treating them as political prisoners and started treating them like the "other criminals". Getting rid of Habeas Corpus and rounding up civilians didn't make them mad; in fact that was part of the plan. The author further states that the government should always follow the rule of law, mentioning that when torture has been used, it works to the advantage of the enemy. I picked this up at the Wichita Public Library.

5 comments about In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror.

1. Written with a rare combination of wise hesitation and committed passion, this book has so much to commend it is difficult to know where to start. In short summary, this book presents a well-argued 'take' on current political terrorism, as well as public reaction to that terrorism, from the perspective of Terror Management Theory (TMT). TMT is an increasingly important area of social psychology that was originated explicitly as an attempt to subject Ernest Becker's main ideas to empirical testing. The robustness of the theory is now causing many heads to turn that 20 years ago quickly passed over Becker's ideas as 'speculative philosophizing,' unworthy of serious attention from social scientists. One of the great values of this book is that they have taken all of this two decades' worth of research and boiled it down to two concise chapters, in which they both lay out the research results itself in coherent format and discuss its significance in the context of Becker's wider theories and relating it to other current material in the social sciences. In subsequent chapters, as they lay out the psychology of terror, focusing both on the terrorist mentality itself, but even more so on the public reaction to the events of 9/11, the theory genuinely springs to life with cogent illustrations of each point from the very newspaper headlines we have all been recently reading ourselves. The feeling is that of reading 'lived history' in which the reader is also an intimate actor as well as an interpretive observer. This is easily the most riveting interpretive account of these events I have seen in the growing mass of 9/11 literature.



2. This book explores our recent experience of terrorism through the lens of psychological research into the impact of "death anxiety" on human attitudes and behaviors. By the end, we readers have been carried far beyond The Obvious - that death anxiety is aroused by threats to our lives --- and smack into Surprise and Dismay: Surprise, to realize that "death anxiety" is a constant in human nature that is also aroused by perceived threats to anything with which we identify or through which we give meaning to our lives. And Dismay, to realize that death anxiety itself, is a root-cause of human violence. No, that doesn't mean that all of us are physically violent, nor does it mean that psychology alone explains human violence or terrorism. (The authors, true to their multidisciplinary commitments, push the analysis well beyond psychology.) It does mean, however, that we cannot understand or hope to diminish violence without insight into the human factors that contribute to it. The authors paint an accessible but realistically complex picture of the causes and the impact of the events of 9/11, and although they offer no easy answers... their research and analysis give rise to new insights into our human and historical predicament. This is powerful, provocative reading, and while it is often disturbing, it is also peculiarly satisfying because it has the ring of truth. Whether or not you agree with everything the authors say, you will finish this book with new and revealing ways to think about human nature, individual and collective violence, the struggle for meaning, and the demands of and obstacles to freedom and tolerance.

   Here's some more detail on how the book unfolds:
   The "psychological lens" here is Terror Management Theory (TMT), developed by these authors in the effort to test Ernest Becker's claim that the human fear of death is a source of "human evil." (See especially his Pulitzer Prize winning Denial of Death.) Pyszczynski, Solomon and Greenberg explain how that research was conducted (over about a 15 year period) and present the findings. These chapters can be challenging for those unfamiliar with psychological research methods, but their frequent summaries and conclusions keep the reader on track as the evidence accumulates in support of Becker's claims and TMT. Next, the authors use TMT to analyze the American confrontation with terrorism on September 11, and our responses to it, both individually and collectively. Then they explore the causes of terrorism, adding to their psychological analysis, historical, religious, political and economic factors that must be considered. Here too, the application of TMT leads to some unexpected insights. In the end, their concluding suggestions point towards comfortably familiar "American values" but with uncomfortably honest reminders of the challenge they present us.




3. In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror (Washington: American Psychological Association, 2002), Tom Pyszcynski, Sheldon Solomon and Jeff Greenberg.

   Many have observed that America will never be the same in the wake of the terrorist attacks on US soil on the morning of September 11, 2001. The sudden impact of the explosions, captured in vivid detail and replayed over and over again on television, fundamentally altered the illusion of invulnerability that Americans had enjoyed since World War II. Beginning almost immediately a host of Middle Eastern analysts and academics of all stripes supplied an endless stream of hypotheses concerning "why they hate us" and the general nature of terrorism, all in a well-meaning effort to come to terms with a national tragedy.

   But to plumb the depths of terrorism one must look beyond the sound bites, beyond the narrow focus on Middle Eastern politics, beyond popular opinion concerning the supposed differences between Islamic and Judaeo-Christian cultures. This is one of the chief accomplishments of In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror. Its authors have succeeded in recasting the psychology of terror against a general theory of human nature. Working in the tradition of cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker, they trace the roots of terrorism to the troubling yet inescapable reality of human mortality. Becker long ago proposed that there exists at all times a latent fear of death that threatens to upend societal equilibrium. To shield ourselves from the ever-present threat of death anxiety, we seek to bolster our self-esteem through group loyalty. Hence competing worldviews threaten us at a very deep level.

   Becker's prolific publications were hailed by many as brilliant and garnered him a Pulitzer Prize (for his 1973 classic, The Denial of Death). But he was unable to gain widespread acceptance within the academy. His interdisciplinary methodology ran contrary to the emerging trend toward specialization. And there was the recurring criticism that his bold and far-reaching ideas, while intriguing, were ultimately untestable. Like many pioneering visionaries, Becker's death was followed by a period of neglect and dormancy.

   That changed with the appearance of three social psychologists (Pyszczynski, Solomon and Greenberg) who possessed the ingenuity to do what others said could not be done: put Becker's ideas to the test. Their results demonstrate conclusively that Becker's ideas are not only theoretically compelling, they are empirically verifiable. Years prior to the devastating events of 9/11, they were testing and developing what came to be called "terror management theory." Fine tuning Becker's ideas, they discovered, among other things, a clear and testable relationship between the awareness of mortality and hostility toward those who appear to subscribe to a different worldview. More specifically, they found people who were asked to consider their mortality would be more favorably predisposed to people who shared their basic world view, and conversely, more negatively predisposed toward outsiders of one kind or another. These findings fit both the surge in patriotic hoopla and the hostility toward foreigners in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

   While acknowledging that "terrorism results from the interaction of a wide range of social, political, ideological, and psychological forces," the authors set out to "illuminate the psychological aspects of the problem" (p. 187). The result is a veritable calculus of depth psychology that identifies the factors inclining groups toward violence. Drawing from their cumulative research efforts (spanning over 150 empirical studies) the authors provide a concise overview of their research (Chapters 1-3), then proceed to apply their findings to the social and cultural milieu of post 9/11 America (Chapter 5). Chapter 6 is devoted to the application of terror management theory to Islamic extremists, while Chapters 8 & 9 point to the way out of the cycle of violence. Acknowledging the enormity of the issues and the gravity of the current socio-political state of affairs, the authors suggest that hope resides in new, more inclusive worldviews that are neither too rigid nor too diffuse.

   Much has been written concerning Becker's allegedly bleak view of human nature and his seemingly macabre fascinations with humanity's destructiveness. But those familiar with his writings can attest to his great compassion for the human condition and the reverence for the "life force" that sustained his long descent into the night. "In ways that are yet unknown to us, this spirit will continue giving birth to its own possibilities" (Becker, Angel in Armor, p. 118). In the Wake of 9/11 adds another important chapter to the story Becker so urgently wanted to tell.




4. Pyszczynski et al have done a fine job of presenting a theory of the human emotion of terror. However, most people browsing in Amazon.com would be more interested in books explaining terrorism. Terrorism is an extreme form of violent, political activity; terror is a profoundly distressing human emotion. The two concepts are distinctly different, and readers interested in the former will be disappointed to purchase a book on the latter.
   Having said that, Pyszczynski et al have done a good job explicating what they deem their -- existential-evolutionary theory -- of how humans manage the fundamental, existential terror inherently associated with the contemplation of one's own mortality, and by extension, the meaninglessness and finitude of existence. Basically, unable to tolerate the thought that we are all transient, meaningless specks of dust in a vast, indifferent universe, we busy ourselves investing in goal-directed activities to win cultural approval, gain self-esteem, and derive existential solace in the thought that we are important parts of a larger, meaningful, enduring cultural enterprise that, collectively, achieves a kind of super-organismic immortality.
   After explaining the theory itself in an interesting manner in the first three chapters, the authors present two long, research-based chapters, in which they review dozens of controlled studies done, predictably, on undergraduate college students, in a reasonable attempt to demonstrate empirical support for aspects of their theory. Good enough for a solid, thoughtful, interesting psychology textbook. What follows, however, is somewhat of a change of topic, and, perhaps, an unreasonable attempt to capitalize on the sensationalism of the 9/11 attacks (the book was published only shortly following the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01).
   The authors shift from their very attractive theory of terror, and specifically -- terror management -- how humans handle our moments of existential terror - to a theory of terrorism - and that portends a rapid deterioration in quality and insight. The chapters that follow find the authors presenting an embarrassingly shallow theory of terrorist motivations and behavior, and a sophomoric, platitudinous, solution to the problem of world terrorism: yes, indeed, it is so bad that they actually have a chapter on how to solve the problem of world terrorism called, quote -- Give Peace a Chance -- unquote. Ouch! The second half of the book is actually a good example of how quickly good scholars can plummet into an abyss of ill-informed gibberish once they stray outside of their area of considerable expertise.
   The first part of the book is good enough to merit a stand-alone text, but the second half of the book, in which the authors behave as if nothing of significance has ever been written about the psychology of terrorism, is so fatuous that it is embarrassing and painful to read. Many people, I fear, will buy the book due to the current intense interest in understanding terrorism, when in fact, the better reason to buy the book is to better understand the complex set of human emotions related to how we struggle to deal with the fact of our inevitable mortality.
   Larry H. Pastor, M.D., Oakton, Virginia



5. As a "self-styled" student of Ernest Becker myself, I take a special interest in this brave book. I am writing a book myself on racism in America, and Becker's paradigm on the Science of Man and the social and existential psychology that it rests on (mostly death denial, mortality salience and death defiance), as well as the "American worldview," also will serve as the basis of my own theoretical platform. So, one cannot imagine how excited I was to see these brave men launch a first foray into the use of Becker's paradigm as part of a set of testable hypotheses.
   
   As a trained scientist (Mathematician and Operations Research Analyst) and quantitative behavioral scientist (advance degrees in International Relations Theory and Political Science), I read this book with great enthusiasm. In many ways, it looks very much like my own Phd thesis: It develops (or appropriates) a suitable theoretical framework (TMT), forms various hypotheses (about death defiance, mortality salience, the American worldview and how 911 disturbed the American reality and conscience), collects appropriate data (reactions of victims to the 911 experience), and then proceeds to try to test those hypotheses using the most suitable tools available (subjects of psychometric and social psychological experimental test designs, etc.). This is all to the good.
   
   If the reader allows the authors to get away with this smoothly developed tableau, there is very little to complain about here. However, since I too am going through the same exercise, I have a few questions to raise: of the same sort that have plagued my own research.
   
   For instance, how can the authors so causally speak of the "American worldview," (which, in the background, does most of the heavy lifting), and is the most pivotal of all concepts in their research design), as if it is a "given" without first properly delineating its content and tracing out its outlines? It certainly is not enough to assert that: "national identity is a large component of most people's worldview." This is the beginning, not the end of an analysis of worldview.
   
   In these authors design, the "American worldview," remains essentially a black box, indeed an unopened (possibly cocked and loaded) black (pandora's) box! I believe that if they unlock this box, rather than presume to know and thus able to intuit its contents, they will discover the all kinds of things will come tumbling out:
   
   The "American Worldview" as a psychological construct is a house of horrors that cannot be intuited or taken casually for granted. Once opened, they will discover, as I did, that it is a fantastically complex, not just multidimensional, but more importantly, a multilayered psychological construct, that never quite stops unraveling. At the very bottom (not at the top) of this multilayer psychological chain is of course death denial. And as one ascends the chain of sublimated complexity, one discovers, not just death defiance and mortality salience, but also many other things that are equally as "weighty" as death defiance and mortality salience: things such as an almost existential dependence on and a preference for a "barely transparent racist ideology," a very localized and parochial set of contradictory moral rules, a specter of sex and violence at every turn; dependence on strange and contradictory religious concepts and beliefs, and on an avowedly white male "hero system" all couched in a social hierarchy that often contradicts the much revered notions of freedom, independence, and democracy, just to name a few. These go well beyond just national identity.
   
   And while it is true that these all inevitably do connect in one way or another back to death defiance, mortality salience, and thus ultimately back to death denial, the connections are never straightforward or linear ones. They are invariably very circuitous and tenuous connections, and there exists, equally plausible alternative explanations for each of them. And most of all, there is very little that can be assumed about the construct of "an American worldview" itself, or about the connections to it as the variables upon which it depends, proceed up the psychological chain. Nor indeed is there very much that can be assumed about the way these disparate elements and their respective connections are to be properly "weighted" in the larger overarching concept called "the American worldview."
   
   Because so much of the authors design depends on how the "American Worldview" is conceptualized, this is not a casual matter at all. It is not a matter that can be easily ignored or simply glossed over as simply, a matter of "national identity." If the assumption is that it does not matter how the "American Worldview" is conceptualized, since all roads inevitably lead directly back to a deeply sublimated death denial anyway. Then that is no longer just an assumption, but amounts to a grand global meta-hypothesis that is larger than, and indeed engulfs the whole research design itself. Such a large meta-hypothesis cannot be allowed to enter the research through the backdoor, but must be wrestled with, up front. And at the very least somehow be acknowledged and defended, if not proven out right.
   
   I of course have not finished the book, but hope that this is the only major concern. For bravery alone the book merits five stars.

No comments about Financial Terrorism : Hijacking America Under the Threat of Bankruptcy.

No comments about Defining Terrorism in International Law (Oxford Monographs in International Law).

5 comments about Shadow War: The Untold Story of How Bush is Winning the War on Terror.

1. This is the second Miniter book a nephew gave me with the idea that it would convert me to his way of thinking. Right from the very cover, it doesn't. The title is a prediction, and it's a premature one. He did this in that other book "Disinformation..." That too has a prediction of how "we're undermining the war effort."
   
   This book bothers me on a number of levels.
   
   First, it's the impression Miniter wants to give to the reader that he is an investigative journalist who is objective, and has no agenda. The title of his two books (that I know of) reveals that he does. He writes for a periodical called "Human Events," This publication is widely regarded as having a right-leaning, conservative philosophy and editorial staff, which includes Ann Coulter. (Need I say more?) If he trying to prove something then he is an advocate, not an investigative journalist. He is promoting a conclusion rather than finding one.
   
   Second, I have gone through the irritating process of checking some of Miniter's sources: newspaper articles, opinion statements, and many others that offer no empirical evidence to support his, in some cases, wild assertions.
   
   Third. Let's get to those assertions. The fact that we haven't been attacked in five years because of this administration's anti-terror campaign is conjecture. There could be reasons he could not even fathom. More importantly, what would Miniter's explanation be if we were attacked tomorrow? Would it somehow be Clinton's fault? By the way, in a truly fact-based book, "America the Vulnerable," Steven Flynn, a retired Coast Guard officer states that the 9/11 attack was five years in the planning.
   
   Fourth. Miniter's assertion that the mainstream media know about the same information he has, but don't report it because a) they don't want to, or b) their editor will kill the story, or whatever is even more conjecture. Is it just possible that main stream media press don't see the story in the same way Miniter WANTS it to be seen? Is it possible that they see it as speculation rather than fact?
   
   Fifth. Our beliefs. It is a fascinating feature of the human psyche that people will pursue those opinions which confirm their beliefs. They will describe this book as well-researched without ever checking, or they will say the book has many sources without researching those either. Just so long as they want to believe it's steak, it will be, even though it is only hamburger.
   
   Six is a question. Is his prediction coming true? Are we winning the war in Iraq? This the biggest test of the book's credibility. We have ten of our twelve divisions committed around the world constantly. Troop levels in Iraq are at an all-time high. More national guard units will be activated, or units will be rotated with less time out of a combat zone. Our losses are not declining. Iraq is an unstable government. Shi'ia and Sunni are murdering each other daily. The Iraqi army is allowed to return home for a couple of weeks whenever they want to, or they will refuse to fight outside of their province. With no clear statement from this administration of what victory is, how can Miniter write a book with "Bush is winning the war on terror" in the title? Winning what?
   
   This title as well as his conclusions are premature. I am old enough to remember another title published in Reader's Digest many years ago. It was called, "Why We're Winning in Vietnam." It was written by the Commander of the US Army Vietnam, General William Westmoreland.



2. Bush is winning the war on terror?
   
   Who here is sufficiently blissfully ignorant to still believe that? Iraq has completely imploded--even CENTCOM has acknowledged that we are fast approaching "chaos" and total anarchy there. Bush's occupation there is effectively at an end.
   
   As for Afghanistan, the military now admits that the Taliban is making a major, widespread resurgance, and now controls much of the country. Our recent bid to push back at their growing offense ended in failure. In fact, we now only control the capital of Kabul, and that only tenuously. Of course, Bin Laden still runs free, laughing at those he killed on 9/11.
   
   No, the sad, plain truth is that Bush is not in any way, shape or form winning the war on terror. This book has simply become a pathetic relic of a bygone era, useful only as an object of sarcastic mockery and derision. Bush, like those who believed in him, has become nothing more than a very sad joke.



3. Shadow Warrior asks three questions: 1. Where is Bin Laden? 2. Why hasn't there been another terrorist act on American soil? 3. Is Bush winning the war on terror?
   
   "Defeat a plot a day" has been a reality for US defense performance. Al Queda has killed over a thousand civilians since 911. US intelligence anticipated a 2nd wave of terrorist activity after 911. In response to this intelligence, US forces started a massive bombardment of Al Queda strong holds in Afghanistan. The rentless campaign has kept the terrorist at Bay. Al Queda gets weaker with each attack: Djerba (capture of one cell), Bali Indonesia (elimination of all cells in UK, Italy, Spain, Germany, Netherlands, and Phillipines), Riyadh (30 dead) (a dozen Al Queda arrested), Istanbul (62 dead) ( 2 cells smashed), and Madrid (202 dead & 1500 wounded) (17 arrested). Al Queda plots were defeated in their attempt to bomb the warship in Spain, US embassy in Paris, and US embassy in Mali.
   
   Bush states, "The cat has rabies and the only way to cure the cat is to cut off its head" and since 911 over 3,000 operatives have been seized or slain in 102 countries. Iran's vast Sunni population influences the Sunni reactions to US Occupation in Iraq. The Media hypes Sunni fighting against the Shiite and Kurdish majority implying civil war. Sunni insurgency against the Iraq's Shiite majority has been a source of bloodshed. Iran has a strong industrial base of 40 million people; Iran is changing and western economics and ideas are enticing; Iran is advancing technologically; Iran needs electricity for industrial development; Iran is Sunni; Iran fundamentalism controls the people's idealogy; and Iran is the largest provider of oil in the world for India. Iran's development of nuclear power and the possible uses of this power are real, especially, if the Bin Laden terrorist can influence how they are used.
   
   The threat of Iraqi power destabilization is a pressing concern. A power vacuum exists in Iraq and it will take time for Iraq's people to self govern. It does not seem probable that US force will withdraw from the region. The US leadership stability and continued presence has politically driven values and policies.
   
   The author claims Iran is sympathic to Al Queda and some 500 low level Al Queda reside in Iran. House of Saud weakness is encouraging Al Queda surges for tribe control and terrorist membership. The author implies that US military force may be needed in Iran to root out and hunt down the terrorist: 1. Iran is developing economically and needs nuclear power to supply the electricity for industry, however, any nation that possess nuclear power becomes militarily invincible 2. Iran has sponsered terrorist activity through out the middle east and the fear of Islamic fundamentalism escalates tensions and decreases trust that they will be using the nuclear capabilities peacefully. 3. The world has a strong fear of nuclear weapons 4. Suspicious behavior, such as, disguisting and removing buildings thought to be creating radioactive materials for a nuclear bombs does make the West, leary. Iran credibility does not seem strong. 5. Iran's harbouring of Terrorists may cause a military response. 6. Iran has historical connections with Russian: Military aid and equipment, Iran - Iraq war machinations, and East verse West cold war fighting over the territory.
   
   The author states that Bin Laden could be in Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or the Philippines. In 2004, Bush's senior advisor stated that Bin Laden most likely was in Pakistan.
   
   Bin Laden master minded: the attack on the US Marines, Aden, Yemen, Dec 29,1992; first attack on the World Trade Center, Feb 26, 1993; attack of the US Army Ranger, Magadishu, Oct 3, 1995; the plot to kill the Pope, 1994; the bombing of the Saudi Arabian National Guard, 1995; the embassy bombing, 1998, and the attack of the US Cole, 2000; and destruction of the Twin Towers, Sept 9, 2001 and Khadid Shaikeh Mohammad introduced the four point plan. Why did Bin Laden strike America? Bin Laden wanted a show down in Afghanistan; a show down where his resistence force would lose to allie troop force; a show down that would remove the Taliban from power which was the primary goal of the US; a show down in which the CIA would fund $200 million to aid the Northern Alliance machinery against the Taliban; and a show down that would establish a new government. Bin Laden believed the war would become a merciless ground war and another Viet Nam. The war cost a large sacrifice of lives. What are the long-term US political objectives for US troops in Afghanistan? Has the US policy makers created stability and economic growth in the new and emerging country of Afghanistan? How much money will be required to create stability in Afghanistan?
   
   In the desolate landscape of the Sahara, al Qaeda and its affliate terrorist groups have established more than a dozen training camps and safe havens; al Qaeda is in the Sahara and the Sahel to create a new Afghanistan; the land is far from flat: it rises to more than eleven thousand feet and drops to more than 100 ft below sea level. Even ground level searches are difficult: 1.5 million square miles, problems caused from lawless warlords. The war on al Qaeda in North Africa has largely gone unnoticed in the American media.
   
   The rebels are identified as one of four groups: The Justice and Equality Movement, the Sudan Liberation Army (waging war on behalf of Christian and animist south of Sudan), the Polisario Front ( independace of Western Sahara), and the Janjaweed (attacking blacks in Darfur). The Muslim brotherhood extends into Egypt, Sudan, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco, a source of radical Islam idealogy. In Algeria there are two Muslim terror groups: GIA and GSPC, who have kill more people since 1992 than any other non-governmental organization. Al Quadea thrives in these cruel environments.
   
   In 2003 in Algeria a meeting occurred between Hassan al-Turabi aides and bin Laden's deputies, in which, an agreement was formed "between African rebels and al Qaeda which provides assistance in the sacred war in the west of Sudan in return for certain support and security arrangements for them and those al Qaeda members on the run" "A senior Sudanese intelligence official in Khartoum told me that the link between the fiery Islamist and bin Laden network has strengthened in recent years" Since 1999, al-Turabi fighting against Christian and animist South has turned into a bloody civil war, costing over 2 million lives. Darfur is providing shock troops of the al-Turabi Justice and Equality movement; the troops killed 550 policement and anyone that opposed them; al Qaeda is operating new training camps in Chad; five al Qaeda trainers were dispatched to three training camps in Chad, where al-Turabi militants trained for war against Sudan.
   
   The al Qaeda and Iraq link: al Qaeda men arranged for the purchase of biological and chemical weapons from Iraq; al Qaeda soldiers are in Iraq and lead many attacks against US soldiers; al Qaeda Bin Laden sent men too Iraq numerous times and arranged support for his terror network. Lets look at the al Qaeda activity in Iraq: 1. 1993 Abdul Rahman Yasin fled to Iraq after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing 2. Bin Laden met at least eight times with officers of the Iraq Special Security Organization 3. Iraqi intelligence agents met with Bin Laden starting in 1994 4. Bin Laden met the director of the Iraq makhabarat in 1996 5. In 1999, Farouk Hijazi, senior officer in Iraq's mukhabarat journeyed deep into Kandahar Afghanistan to meet al Qaeda men 6. In Oct 2000, Salah Suleiman was arrested near the Afghan border while journeying to meet al Qaeda 7. 2001, Iraq embassy in Pakistan was used as aliason between Iraqi dictator and al Qaeda. 8. Spanish investigators seized documents from Yusaf Galan and charged him as being directly involving in the 911 attacks 9. Abbas al-Tanabi defects to the West and tells of the Iraqi - al Qaeda connection. 10. 2003, after the fall of the Taliban, 24 Bin Laden associates converge on Baghdad and establish a base of operations 11. 2003, al Zargawi mets with the military chief of al Qaeda, Mohammed Ibrahm Makwai in Iran 12. 1997-2000 Abdullah al-Iraqi was sent by Bin Laden to Iraq for the purchase of poisonous gas several times. 13. 2001 hundreds of al Qaeda fighters are believed to have holed up in Ansar al-Islam's strongholds inside northern Iraq.



4. In Appendix C of this second of three pro-Bush books written by Richard Miniter (the other two being Losing bin Laden and Disinformation), the author lists the "Status of Top Al Qaeda Officers" and how that status had changed during the first three years of the George W. Bush presidency. There are 37 officers listed, beginning with Osama bin Laden. Since September 11, 2001, into 2004, ten have been captured and 8 have been killed. I did some research, and during the next 4 ½ years, two more have been capture and two more killed, leaving 15 still at large, including the most wanted bin Laden. This changing list is just one of many arguments that Miniter presents to show that Bush is winning the war on terror. Miniter states that the Bush administration's anti-terror tactics got off to a slow start because he was behind in his appointment schedules due to the hanging chads and pregnant ballots in Florida that delayed his official designation as our next president. Once sworn in as President, Bush began a change in policy by relaxing the Clinton ordered U.S. police toward Sudan. Within months, Sudan and US intelligence began sharing counter-terrorism information and on September 12, the day after the World Trade Center attacks, Sudan provided the CIA with identities of 26 al Qaeda operatives. This would not have been possible during the Clinton administration. The book relates a number of failed terrorist attacks, both in the U.S. and worldwide, including a millennium attack on the Los Angeles airport and the attempted assassination of the President while in Italy. It claims that one big Bush administration victory is the fact that there have been no successful terrorist attacks in this country since 9/11. It gives examples of how Bush has established a global alliance with nations beyond any scope the country has had in its past. Of course, one of the Bush failures is not being able to apprehend bin Laden. Miniter makes the case that bin Laden has fled to North Africa and explains how this landscape makes it very difficult to find anyone. Finally, in Appendix D, Miniter present seven pages connecting Iraq with Al Qaeda to explain the necessity of that war. Although packed with information, I found the book somewhat confusing in its organization, and somewhat diluted when it gets off its main course; for example, when it delves into the terrorist attack on Madrid and how it affected their local elections. And again, as I find over and over again in various history and current events books: No map. How much can a map cost to reproduce in a book, especially when the payoff would be a much greater understanding of the information presented? I fail to see any rhyme or reason for this frequent omission.



5. I loved the book but I wanted more. Where is the next one? Read this you will enjoy it.

5 comments about The Monks of Tibhirine: Faith, Love, and Terror in Algeria.

1. This book recounts the heroic faith and works of "ordinary" monks living in dangerous times!



2. This is an enjoyable, but slightly dry book. It is definately hard to actually sit down and read without ones mind trailing off! But as I labored through it I came to enjoy the writers style, and actually feel the importance of the information about the trappist monks of Algeria!



3. From a tragic and almost incomprehensible act of barbarity, the author has fashioned a beautifully nuanced work of art that succeeds in bridging a good portion of the chasm now separating the Judeo-Christian and Muslim worlds. With great sensitivity and understanding of these seemingly antagonistic cultures, Kiser has succeeded in constructing an uplifting and heart-felt story that not only instructs the reader, but successfully addresses and perhaps heals some of intercultural bitterness rampant today.



4. Algeria is one of those places that you know of, but you dont know much about. There are Muslims there, the French USED to be there, and it's in Africa.
   
   But this story really brings Algeria to fruition. You see what a diverse nation it is; Arabs and Berbers; Francophones and Arabaphones; Conservatives and Liberals; Radical Muslims and 21st Century ones. It's with this diversity in mind that one can deal with the tragedy of this story at all. This is really a great book if one is interested in the story of Islam in Africa, the French in Africa or Algeria in general.
   
   I really connected with the monks and the difficulty the Church faces in Algeria. It also made me realise the love required to even stay sane in such hostility. Love was their oxygen.



5. Interesting book filled with facts and interesting opinions about an important event, an important country, and an important effort to live together made by Christians and Muslims. Kiser includes a valuable bibliography and time line at the end.

1 comments about The United States Department of Homeland Security: An Overview.

1. Fantastic book...no one seems to know what the Department of Homeland Security does or how it was form, this book accomplishes that.

5 comments about Act of War: A Novel.

1. I merely added this to my dale brown collection.



2. And Suddenly, there was a flash.. and so starts at least 4 battle scenes. We never learn how the task force gets it's intelligence to be where the terrorists turn up, how they get into position, what planning is done or if there is any plan. Each time, they just suddenly appear at the right time and surprise the terrorists.
   
   The action in each of the battles is slow. You can almost count the minutes that the task force is standing around idle whilst the terrorists are firing away.. and of course, most of them get away each time.
   
   The dialogue between characters is incredibly weak and could easily have been written by a 14 year old. That is not to insult any 14 year olds, just a comparison to the language that you would expect from a young teenager of today.
   
   Overall, extremely poor written book and boring cartoonish action.



3. This book is not real high on plausibility, but if you can stop looking at all the many loose ends, it really is a pretty entertaining read. If you're a stickler for details, pass it by. If you want to read a fast-paced action thriller for the fun of it, this might be for you.



4. Had to grab this book when I saw it. Its the last in its series till the author writes another. Great steal!!!



5. DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK. I will be frank. I did not read this book ... all the way. It was too painful for me to continue to the end. The errors of fact and logic became too much for me to continue to waste my time on it, even for a work of fiction. I found the characters juvenile as well. I was going to complete the book to just out of curiosity to see where the author would lead us and hope there would be nuggets of originality. However, I could not suspend logic or fact that long, even for a work of fiction.
   
   The concept for the book, an NBC attack on US soil, is interesting but then it went downhill from the start when author reveal it was the work of an environmental group. I could use the rest of this editorial space to list the many other errors of logic and fact but there is only so much space. I will end by noting that the tempo and personal interplay of characters were childless. This book looks like it was written by a schoolgirl who had sibling in the Air Force, not a military subject matter expert with literary talent.
   
   Do not buy any other works by the author even for light reading until you read the reviews. I would demand my money back for this book but I got it free. I plan to put it into the recycle bag.

5 comments about Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West.

1. The book starts by explaining how the Quran is translated and how some parts supersede others. This alludes to a dynamic document. This author highlights that the term "jihad" does not refer to a war, but a struggle, and that this definition doesn't appear to change. Jihad is a struggle that will no end until Islam is the supreme religion.
   
   By explaining this, the author quotes many, but without a firm background in this field, we would have no idea who these people are. Is the reader to assume that the people quoted are credible? Although he quotes Edward Said and Noam Chomsky, I wasn't really familiar with most of the people, so I really can't say. The author did have a habit of saying that whenever someone speaking for Islam was quoted saying anything violent or anti-American, then he was "quoted out of context." The author leads to believe that they aren't credible and are changing their story. Towards the end of the book, the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, but he feels we have to accept that his side really was quoted out of context. This turned me off a bit.
   
   The author does bring up a point that I found intriguing, and this was the idea of dhimmitude. Evidently, the Quran says that conversion to Islam must be voluntary. However, Jews and Christians would be required to pay a tax and accept being treated as second-class citizens. Whether this is true or not is merely a good reason to explore the Quran.
   
   The tone of the book seems to be a bit too right-leaning and borderlines baiting. Nonetheless, this book does spark study and discussion.



2. As an activist who is concerned about the slow death of one of the greatest democracies in the world, this book says why. Unless people understand that we are fighting an enemy, who uses the very freedoms of democracy to destroy it, we are doomed. Everytime I hear about another effigy burning, cars being torched, Churches and Synagogues painted with Swastikas, and the constant "anger" of the Muslim world, I am baffled as to how most of the world either just does not understand, or we live in a world filled with stupid people. We are facing the greatest threat to our life as we know it. Our freedom to travel without fear, to go to work in a tall office building, to congregate in a tourist spot outside of the USA, and freedom to speak without worrying about "anger". As Salman Rushdie said ot our dinner honoring five Muslims who decry the Jihadist radicals and the silent majority, Muslims today need "anger management" and western democracies need to read Robert Spencers books. If we live under the laws of Sharia, typing reviews online like this, and buying books, uncensored, will only be a part of past history. I would like the ability to read, write, speak, and live free, and enjoy others to do the same. Thank you Robert.



3. Robert Spencer assembles in lawyer-like fashion evidence (there is so much of it that in places it seems like repetition) from the Koran (and other Muslim publications) and from Islamic history -- to make the case that there is, even today, real power (the Bible does not have the same kind of power today) in these ancient writings -- and these Holy Words are a source violence. The actions of the West are not the main cause of the problem.
   Without pressure from the outside the essence of the Koran (found at the end part of the Koran, according to the author) would still call on Muslims to strive for Islamic expansion. And force is justified in the many different kinds of situations.



4. A POORLY WRITTEN BOOK,WITH MULTIPLE DISTORTIONS AND QUOTATIONS INTERPRETED TO CONFORM TO A POLITICAL AGENDA.MUSLIM TERRORISM IS A SERIOUS THREAT WE ALL MUST BE CONCERNED ABOUT,HOWEVER THE HISTORY OF VIOLENCE AND ASSAULTS ON OTHER COUNTRIES IS NOT PARTICULAR TO ISLAM. ISLAM IS NOT JUST A RELIGION,IT IS A POLITICAL RELIGIOUS AND ECONOMIC IDEA.THE AUTHOR'S ""research"WAS SELECTIVE AND IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE FIRST FEW PAGES HIS ONE SIDED PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS ABOUT ISLAMIC AND WORLD HISTORY IN GENERAL.



5. I have read all of Robert Spencer's books and they are all right on as to documented facts. He is on the hit list of most major Islamic organizations because they know he speaks the truth and his facts and sources are on record. I didn't have a clue as to the dangers to the civilizied world of Islam until 9/11. After 9/11 I did extensive research on all aspects of Islam and what I found greatly concerned and scared me. Just recently in Rome, Ga., a small town north of Atlanta, the authorities uncovered a Islamic terrorist cell in a mosque in Rome. A friend and I tried to get permission to attend a mosque in North Atlanta to find out what is being preached by the Imams, but were told we could go on a sanctioned tour but not attend a service. I fear that most of the USA mosques are condoning terrorism against the infidels. Otherwise why won't they let us attend their services? And why don't you hear from "moderate Muslims" about the evils of terrorism? You can attend any other religious service in the US without any restrictions?