No comments about The Department of Homeland Security (The U.S. Government: How It Works).

No comments about Wired for Survival: The Rational (and Irrational) Choices We Make, from the Gas Pump to Terrorism.

No comments about Jack Bauer for President: Terrorism and Politics in <I>24</I> (Smart Pop series).

No comments about Patient Zero: A Joe Ledger Novel.

5 comments about The Bureau: The Secret History of the FBI.

1. The author has gone out of his way to present a balanced and well-researched account of the FBI's history and culture. Even though the Bureau remains one of the greatest law enforcement organizations in the world, the agency must make some changes to adjust to the changing nature of crime and terrorism. In examining the FBI's history, Kessler lays the foundation for changes to come.



2. Ronald Kessler's book, "The Bureau:The Secret History of the FBI" is the most detailed and
   well-sourced book about the FBI that I have ever read. As a kid, I wanted to be an FBI agent and
   went to law school solely for that purpose. But, an FBI agent in the Minneapolis office dissuaded
   me from my goal and suggested that I become a Treasury agent, which I did. I worked some with
   - and was around - the FBI for several years, as well as several other Federal law-enforcement
   agencies. Then, I joined the CIA and served mostly overseas. In private security practice in
   Dallas, I came to know several former FBI agents.

   This book is probably a fair assessment of the FBI, an agency of mostly intelligent and dedicated
   employees with a history of disastrous management. We all knew how maniacal J. Edgar Hoover
   was about the Bureau's image and his own image. Kessler documents this very well with story
   after story. And he documents the many violations of the law Hoover committed, from illegal
   entries to wiretaps.

   If there was any doubt that Hoover had personal files on celebrities and politicians, which he
   used to keep everybody "in line," Ron Kessler provides ample proof. From personal contacts in
   the FBI, I had heard about the files many years ago. Hoover was untouchable because of those
   files. His private files kept him in office for nearly 48 years! Plain and simple.

   Kessler brings us through the inept leadership of Director Sessions, to the tenure of Louis Freeh,
   whom he describes as having "... left the FBI in a shambles." Before reading this book, I had no
   doubt that the policies of Louis Freeh had handcuffed the FBI in the area of intelligence and
   analysis. In the book, you can see decision after decision by Freeh which weakened, almost
   destroyed the FBI. That the FBI was using 386 and 486 computers is unpardonable. Congress
   was willing to appropriate the money, but did not think Louis Freeh had a clue as to what to do

   with it. He had the computer taken out of his office and did not use e-mail. How do such
   incompetents as Freeh stay on the job for nearly eight years? Ron Kessler explains.

   The culture within the FBI was that "none of us would ever betray our country." That kept
   polygraph exams from being administered and periodic background investigations from being
   done. So, for many years, Robert Hanssen, who had access to our greatest secrets, betrayed his
   country. It is improbable that this will happen again, with the new Security Division and the
   checks that are in place. Louis Freeh said at a congressional hearing that he had scheduled a
   polygraph for himself, but he left the FBI without ever taking one.

   The author was granted the first interview with Robert S. Mueller III, the new director. I had
   already formed a very positive and hopeful opinion of Mueller, an ex-Marine and prosecutor.
   Kessler reinforces that perception. But the book shows you what a horrendous mess Director
   Mueller inherited.

   I have a couple of quibble points. In his discussion of Ruby Ridge, I thought Ron glossed over
   the FBI's role and actions there. When he spoke of the fatal shooting of Vicki Weaver by an FBI
   sharpshooter, which was probably an accident, he says "...second shot blasted through the cabin's
   wooden door and into the face of Vicki Weaver." Actually, there were glass panes in the door,
   which leaves more open to question the judgement of the sharpshooter - who was looking though
   a high-powered scope. I have written at length about Ruby Ridge on my Web site. I had been an
   ATF agent. I knew exactly what this case was all about. In ways, it was perhaps a greater tragedy
   than Waco, because it was built from the start on a bad premise. Randy Weaver was entrapped by
   the ATF.

   Perhaps the FBI should have let the ATF stew in its own juices and stayed out of Ruby Ridge.
   Nobody had to die over this case! But a U.S. Marshal, Weaver's teenage son, and his wife all
   died from gunshots. Eventually, the Justice Department paid Randy Weaver $3.1 million dollars
   to settle his wrongful death suit.

   In several places, the author speaks of the many clandestine entries (black-bag jobs) made into
   foreign embassies in Washington, D.C. by the FBI. I don't think so. Not many, anyway. That
   was what I did for the CIA overseas. Embassies are sacred ground and are normally guarded
   around the clock. Most electronic penetrations are by wiretap or a bugging device carried in by a
   recruited person - or bugs planted before the occupants take possession of the building. Sneaking
   into an occupied embassy is mostly the stuff of movie fiction. With rare exceptions.

   Every American who cares about our national security ought to read this book. Then, you can
   understand what all the shouting is about, and what all the posturing is about that you see in
   those congressional hearings about the FBI. And how the FBI fits into the Homeland Security
   effort. You also can see what a horrendous mess Director Mueller inherited.

   As Ron Kessler seems to suggest, I am optimistic that the FBI will get back on track and will
   regain the reputation it once had as the premiere law enforcement agency in the world. If I were a
   younger man, I would ignore my FBI friend's original advice. I would apply to become a Special
   Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It is a worthwhile and honorable career. Now
   more than ever before.




3. This is an excellent, highly readable and enjoyable review of the history of the FBI. It dispenses with boring organizational history, and focuses on episodes that illustrate various themes nicely. Kessler has written extensively about various government agencies, and his familiarity and experience pays off in this volume.

   My only quibble is that he seems to have something of a personal agenda in describing the strengths and weaknesses of the various directors. He was personally involved in reporting on the more recent directors, and his personal opinion of them is obviously reflected in his writing. Clearly, he felt that Sessions was a dunce, and remembers vividly being taken to the woodshed - unfairly - by Sessions because of his reporting. He also felt no respect for Freeh - could some of this negative feeling be the result of Freeh's "never talk to the press!" edict, which Kessler dwells on repeatedly? Finally, Kessler obviously liked and respected Webster tremendously, which is reflected in Kessler's glowing account of Webster in his previous book on the FBI as well as in his book "Inside the CIA" which was written when Webster was Director there. It seems clear that Webster gave Kessler tremendous access, and that Kessler remains in regular contact with Webster.

   Overall, though, I think Kessler's personal involvement in reporting on the agencies and these individual adds substantially to the book, rather than detracting from it, and he backs his writing with extensive sources unrelated to his personal views. So, I point the above out more as an cautionary note to keep in mind while reading this excellent book, and not as a reason to stay away from it.

   I look forward to Kessler's next book!




4. It's hard to put this book down. There is no superflous fluff -- "Just the facts, mam!". I REALLY enjoyed it!



5. I found this book to be quite interesting. As an investigative reporter, Kessler has dug up facts about the Bureau that most of us never realized.

   From the birth of the FBI in 1908, to its current leadership under Mueller, for most of its history the FBI has been plagued with poor leadership (Mueller seeming to be a notable exception). From the illegal and unconstitutional activities of J. Edgar Hoover, to the bungling "leadership" of William Sessions and Louis Freeh, it's a wonder that the FBI accomplishes as much as it does. That is a credit to the hard-working agents who make up the Bureau, I suppose.

   In this book Kessler focuses mostly on the directors and their successes and failures, and how they molded the FBI into what it is today. He also gives some details on past FBI operations involving spying and counterintelligence. There is quite a bit of information on recent cases such as that of Robert Hannsen, Wen Ho Lee, and others.

   I'd recommend this book to anyone who is interested at all in the FBI, or in federal law enforcement. The book is well written, and did a great job of keeping my attention.

3 comments about Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan: The Case of Aum Shinrikyo.

1. I read this book for a college class. The book provides an interesting and unbiased account of the Aum Shinrikyo "cult" who attacked the tokoyo subway with serin gas. The account of the group's history is complete, and the book provides suggestions as to the motives of the group and its leader. Reader puts a lot of research into this book, including interviews with members and former members, and I would recomend this book to anyone interesting in the case or religious violence in general



2. Reader's Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan is a masterpiece of solid in-depth research and analysis that should be read by all persons interested in contemporary Japanese society and in modern religious movements. He consulted an amazing array of sources and conducted in-depth interviews with former and current Aum members who provide amazing insights into the movement. The most interesting chapter contains in-depth profiles of several members. Reader is also a brilliant writer whose lively and clear prose makes this book a genuine pleasure to read.



3. It seems that most books about the Aum Shinrikyou concentrate on the gas attacks of March 20, 1995. Of course this is extraodinarily important, but it is only a small piece of the puzzle because Aum Shinrikyou and its founder Asahara Shoko are much more complex. Reader gives the reader a very detailed look into the early days of Aum and its 's founding by Asahara, and he gives detailed entires of Asahara's sermons giving a step by steo analysis of how Aum went from a yoga group to one bent on the destruction of the world. A wonderful book that peels back many of the mysteries of Aum.

5 comments about Violent Politics: A History of Insurgency, Terrorism, and Guerrilla War, from the American Revolution to Iraq.

1. Foreign Service and State Department people are immensely knowledegable about their areas. It means learning an odd language or two, absorbing many volumes of history and past international relations, becoming respectful of myriad social customs and religious practices and consequently forming a political astuteness that will be useful to the boss in Washington. Of course, when the boss communes with God and gets direction from a higher authority, all this can be ignored. Just bring'em on.
   
   William Polk examines eleven insurgencies from 1776 to the present. This is a short book. The author has distilled hundreds of books and many years of service into 223 refined pages of text. The simple message is that occupiers are always unwelcome. Supression may succeed temporarily, but the day of reckoning eventually arrives. This book is filled with important history lessons that our leaders have ignored.



2. This is a book about insurgency and some of its major tools--terrorism and guerilla warfare. William Polk begins by observing that one factor is common to insurgencies (page xiii): "no matter how they differ in form, duration, and intensity, a single thread runs through them all: opposition to foreigners. Occupation by outsiders creates the conditions for insurgency, then. That is the central thesis of his book.
   
   Throughout the book, he explores his thesis by examination of a number of case studies--some well know and some less so. The first case study has an ironic twist to it--it is the American Revolution. He then considers, in order by chapter, the Spanish resistance to Napoleon, the Philippine insurrection, the Irish case, Yugoslav partisans in World War II, Greece after World War II, Kenya and the Mau Mau, Algeria, Vietnam, and Afghanistan.
   
   One commonality across many (but not all) of these examples is that the insurgency begins with a ludicrously small number of militants. However, there are circumstances where this small group will expand and, in the end, triumph over the occupation. Other trends: as the small bands successfully carry out ambushes and otherwise annoy the foreigners, others within the occupied country begin to pay attention. Often, the dominant government then seeks to suppress the rebellion. Sometimes, they become so oppressive and repressive that it begins to trigger larger and larger numbers of people joining the insurgency.
   
   Another factor that is important is Mao's famous argument that in a successful insurgency, the rebellious ones are like "fish" in a "sea" of sympathetic people, able to hide among and operate within the supportive masses.
   
   One interesting tidbit in this book focuses on current American counterinsurgency theory. The current handbook, the 2006 Counterinsurgency Field Manual, has as one of its authors Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, currently in charge of the American action in Iraq. Many people assess the current counterinsurgency doctrine as sound (and, indeed, if you read Petraeus' manual, you will find it pretty convincing), but Polk demurs. He contends that despite its apparent freshness, the American doctrine is still flawed. Polk remains deeply skeptical of any occupying power being able to determine beforehand if the occupation will be successful or if insurgency will develop and, in the end, triumph over the occupier.
   
   I'm not sure that I am in accord with Polk in all details (his conclusion does not convince me), but it is a thought provoking work, and the various case studies provide historical examples of what can go right and what can go wrong for both insurgencies and occupying powers.
   
   Worth a read. . . .



3. William R. Polk, a veteran foreign policy consultant and former Harvard University graduate and professor, was the founder of the University of Chicago's Center of Middle Eastern Studies. He has written a collection of books in his lifetime and wrote Violent Politics in 2007. This book takes an in-depth look at insurgencies, terrorism and guerrilla warfare, using specific historic examples of each. The opening example is the American fight for independence against the motherland of Britain; it is an insurgency that also incorporates guerrilla warfare. He explains, like in the case with Americans, why insurgency sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails like the Irish struggle for independence.
   Throughout the book, Polk does a wonderful job of explaining the background of every particular historical event. This is partially because each event is given their own chapter in which he describes a brief but necessary history of events leading to the conflict, and then goes into great detail about how each conflict functioned and ultimately failed or succeeded. Even though each chapter is only about twenty pages long, you walk away from the book having a much greater understanding of not only these historical events, but also a greater understanding of the way the world of politics is shaped through aspects of both formal warfare and low-intensity conflict. Polk uses these examples to illustrate a common theme in these types of conflicts.



4. This is an important book. William Polk reviews important insurgencies from the American Revolution to Iraq. He lays out principles of successful and failed insurgencies and equally importantly why interventions fail. Shelby Foote, the great Civil War historian, relates a brief story about a Union officer interrogating a captured Confederate soldier that summarizes an important part of William Polk's thesis. The officer asks,"Why are you rebels fighting so hard?" The Confederate responds, "Because you are here."
   The most disturbing aspect of this book is the repeated failure of governments to learn the lessons of insurgency, despite repeated costly failures that have been widely recorded. A common line currently about the Iraq war is that if the U.S. had only planned better, we would have a better result. William Polk argues otherwise. In addition, he is rightly critical of the Army Counterinsurgency Field Manual, which is riding such a wave of popularity that it was published by the University of Chicago Press. On the other hand, "Violent Politics" has had very few reviews.I do not believe it has been reviewed by a single major newspaper.
   Each of the books chapters is a worthwhile read, but perhap the most intertesting is Chapter 1 on the American Revolution. It is the best brief discussion of the American Revolution that I have ever read. The chapter on Iraq and Afganistan are very painful.
   Doug Wilson
   Boston



5. The historical chapters are decent. Nothing really new, but readable summaries. The conclusion--in which the author discusses current conflicts--is, and I can't think of a nicer word, utter nonsense. It is filled with factual errors and unfounded assertions. About half way through the conclusion (at the point the author asserted that the Bush administration has created 737 new military bases) I put it down and couldn't bring myself to finish. It was a shame to end a decent history with propaganda instead of serious analysis.

5 comments about Others Unknown: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing Conspiracy.

1. This book was written by Timothy McVeigh's lawyer , it raises the questions: Were there Others Unknown? Were there other countries involved in this conspiracy? Why weren't the defense teams allowed their own independant investigation in the bombing? Why was evidence withheld by prosecutors? A very good book to read, try also reading Freedom's End by James Nichols.



2. As a citizen of Oklahoma and Oklahoma City, I was incensed when Stephen Jones, an Oklahoma Lawyer, wrote a book about his attempt to defend McVay--the man who blew up the Murrah Building in our town. Jones had to have a guard when discussing the first edition of his book in the Library in Perry Oklahoma (where McVey was jailed when picked up on Interstate 35 on the way back to Kansas after the Bombing). Oklahoma people, to say the least, were not happy with Mr. Jones. After McVay published his own book, thus releasing Jones from his Lawyer's oath of Confidentiality, Jones wrote what I call "the rest of the story." I was still not impressed, and I was not going to enrich him by buying one of his books. After 911, I realized that the second edition of his book was written AFTER both World Trade Center#1, and Oklahoma City, and BEFORE World Trade Center II (911). Much of Johes' wanderings about the world in his effort to defend McVay, suddenly began to seem like something I should know about, as a Citizen of this country at this time in history. I bought a copy, and am awe-struck by the information in that book that might have had a bearing on "911"...One must discount all of the "losing lawyer's grumbling" about his poor treatment by the winning side; that is normal in Trial Lawyer Books...It is the portrait of international terrorism that he discovered, and wrote about in this book while preparing for that trial,that is engaging.I doubt if there was anything in this book that would have prevented "911"..but looking back sometimes is the only view of the future that we can have in such times. Perhaps McVay's only patriotic deed near the end of his life, was to free Mr. Jones to write this book, by publishing his own work. Two of McVay's co-defendants are still alive...one is awaiting trial in Oklahoma City for his part in over 160 murders....Find this book at the Library or somewhere and read it. No,I DO NOT KNOW MR. JONES. Clarence Robison M.D.



3. I read this book in 1999 and have shared it with many friends and family. I had the privilege of meeting Stephen Jones and immediately got the sense this was a man with integrity and a very strong belief in the Constitution of the United States.

   After 9/11 my husband and myself re-read this book and again were passing it around to friends.

   It makes you wonder why the government didn't pay attention to the information Stephen and his investigators were uncovering. It is obvious there was a connection of the middle eastern radical influence in the OKlahoma City Bombing.

   With recent information connecting the 9/11 terroist and Tim McVeigh staying at the same motel makes a compelling argument that they are connected.

   This is a must read if you Love America and all the freedoms we enjoy in everyday life.




4. This book is too poorly written to read and understand. Problems in organization, narrative style and structure, plus an occasionally annoying narrative voice, make it difficult to figure out what is going on. The time sequence is random and much that is irrelevant is mixed in and has to be sorted through.

   The author's coy refusal to state whether he believes Timothy McVeigh is guilty is negated by McVeigh's own post-conviction confession.

   Had the author focused on his actual thesis, that Timothy McVeigh did not act alone and probably had the support of some organization, and had he offered well-organized, well-reasoned and well-supported evidence to support this thesis, this would have been a much better book.




5. Jones's investigation revealed many things that were they taken seriously, events like 9/11 and TWA800 might not have had to happen. The Yousef connection in the Philippines, and his link OBL, long before 9/11, was demonstrated in this book.
   
   Jones also demonstrated that McVeigh, while far from being a choir boy, probably bore the brunt of the punishment when many others were involved, and are still walking free. Strassmeier, for instance, is living a good life in Germany, while likely having the blood of 168 victims on his hands as well.
   
   This book will forever change the way you think about OKC, and more importantly, the way our government prosecutes cases without a lot of substantial evidence. The question is not about McVeigh's guilt, it is about the others involved and government's failure to go after them with the same zealousness.

5 comments about Nimitz Class.

1. This is a book for right-wing people who never met a military person who didn't cause them to think, "What a man!!" (There aren't that many military women in this book.) And people who think that the US military goes all over the world making it safe for us and others. And people who think it's fine to talk about shutting down a newspaper that prints things disagreeable to the military. One might wonder why someone like me kept listening to this book. I can only answer that I was promised excitement and many twists and turns. But there were hardly any of these. I skipped many tracks and followed the story just fine. And exciting??? The protagonist can't drink a cup of coffee without your having to hear how it tasted. If you think this is exciting, have at it.



2. Kept me on the edge of my seat, couldn't put it down. Inaccurate? Hardly. This was written with the consultation of the retired commander of the British submarine fleet.



3. I am so sick of the political undercurrents in Patrick Robinson's books that I have stopped reading them. Though the stories are good, Robinson diminishes them by labeling and pigeonholing and demeaning anybody he does not agree with politically - especially Democrats. I stopped reading Scimiter SL-2 because I got so sick of it. I'm sure HarperCollins would sell more books if they could get him to stop the bashing.



4. I would not recommend this book to anyone. The whole cast of characters rang false. Don't bother.



5. Well, you can't complain much over a 75 cent garage sale investment but the enjoyment to time spent ratio was pretty low. Robinson spends way too much time developing characters that are killed off by page 70. Then the handsome naval officer, MIT PhD, cowboy, opera critic, wine connoisseur, etc. catches the bad guy and lands the Admiral's daughter. Yawn.

3 comments about Che Guevara on Global Justice.

1. If you want to get your feet wet in the waters of comunist ideals, this is a good book to start with.



2. Humanistic Socialism. When you read this book, you can really see the flexibility, a far cry and major difference from the scientific Hegelian materialism of Marx, the dogmatism of Luxemburg and the authoritarianism of Lenin. The difference is a socialism, which emphasizes the need to listen to and work with the people in a democratic means, rejecting the exploitation found in authoritarian and bureaucracy found in the former Soviet and European socialism.
   
   Of course this socialism is also against the neo-liberal free market fundamentalism in the framework of the capitalistic economy dominated by the strong players who take advantage over the weak, under the same rules applied for all under the misleading terminology of "free trade."
   
   In this system of humanistic socialism, che speaks of the flexibility of state control, which in turn, acts in accordance between the state and the masses or proletariat, which includes compromises as to private ownership in certain cases, as in the many farmers, and in creating a societal structure devoid of exploitation, one based on the principles of socialism in an equalitarian, fair and just society where all are entered into the economic privileges which are available. There are of course limitations, however much is due not to the system itself but to the U.S. blockade against Cuba in obtaining raw materials, oil and other necessary items for people to survive and have any degree of prosperity.
   
   The esteem in the whole thing is Guevara and Castro's efforts in this regard, rejecting all dogmatic and Hegelian formulas which create bureaucratic nightmares as witnessed in Soviet communism and the Eastern European block, which subsequently failed and is no more. Unfortunately, the results of such a fall are U.S. imperialism on the rise and on a much more dangerous level to the world community of autonomous and independent existence.
   
   Now in response to the claim against socialism, (Von Mises) that socialism cannot perform economic planning from lack of a free market, Guerra speaks of a planning of fixed prices and trade agreements prior to the trading itself. The trading of goods for goods and services is also endorsed.
   
   The only question that really hangs in the balance is that while humanistic socialism is flexible, fights exploitation, fights bureaucracy and so forth, it is still state control. And like a monarchy, the kingdom is ideal when the king works for the common interest of the proletariat, but when his successor replaces him or her, the balance of power can be radically altered to the point of Leninist and Stalinist authoritarian proportions. And so it is, the humanistic socialism practiced by Castro hangs in the fragility of his successors and/or the successors of the present leaders in the government. Over all, I find Che's political philosophy in this book very well to both read and consider. There is no question in the issues raised of both the fight of super power imperialism and the need for an equalitarian, non-exploitive government and society.
   
   However my above question on socialism strongly argues against this fragility. For what Che's socialism espouses is really democracy, unlike the capitalistic representative forms. And this difference entails both education and self education where all citizens become active participants in government, where the culture itself is self-governing, removed from economic alienations. So in this sense, the succession of leaders would not alter the social and cultural fabric of the democratic individualization found in socialistic practice.



3. Che Guevara on Global Justice was a Christmas Gift for my son from his Amazon wish list. He read it on a 6 hour plane flight and wanted more.