5 comments about Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad.

1. This is an excellent book written by a person who has the insight of Islam, experiencing the hate and threats of those with a mind set different from theirs.



2. Dr. Gabriel presents an authentic analysis of the threat of Islam. He was raised Muslim, memorized the full Qur'an by the age of twelve, and eventually was a professor at Al-Azhar University in Cairo - the most revered Islamic University in the world. He tried to teach his students to be open-minded and for his effort, was kicked out of the University, spit upon, beaten and branded a heretic. He was arrested by the Egyptian secret police and tortured to near-death. He has been attacked and stabbed by Muslim fanatics for proclaiming the truth.
   
   I have read all of Dr. Gabriel's writing and have met him personally. He is a humble, sincere and soft-spoken man. He has a heart for Muslims and desires that they be given the freedom to think for themselves and have the opportunity to choose.
   
   I encourage you to read all of Dr. Gabriel's books in order to gain a full understanding of the threat that Islam represents - and more importantly - to offer hope and a refuge to those trapped in its oppression.
   
   I have the highest respect for Dr. Gabriel and refer to him often in my blog: www.y-factor.net



3. Dr. Gabriel has written an easily digestible accounting of what he experienced and how Islam as he knows it differs from how most of us in the West have been led to believe. I am becoming more firmly convinced that we need to devote more resources to actively study this religion/way of life in order to gain understanding and develop ways to communicate with the types of terror minded people he is writing about. The difference between the Noble Quran and the other translations is pretty startling... and scary!
   
   I read this book in preparation for a presentation I am making to team members on my police department. I found Dr. Gabriel's source list to be as helpful as the book itself! To date, I have read three other books on the subject, one video and several internet feeds. I have been trying to read the Quran and when I get a copy of the Noble Quran, am interested in comparing the two. Any suggestions for additional sources would be greatly appreciated!
   
   All the best,
   
   Jay



4. I had gotten this book as part of my thesis related to the global Salafi jihad, unfortunately within a couple of minutes I realized that I could not cite a book such as this whatsoever for several reasons:
   
   - The author, despite having acquired a Ph.D., does not provide citations nor complete quotes or correct translations when referencing Arabic sources.
   - The author's knowledge of Islam is terribly superficial, so that no real substance or Islamic jurisprudence is included or analyzed.
   - The book is simply a long rant against a small radicalized section of Islam, it's more like a long opinion piece for some fundamentalist Christian journal than anything else.
   - The publishing firm and its editors make it a non-credible source that no real thesis supervisor would less pass without questioning it.
   
   Seek other sources for research, but if you are a fundamentalist Christian seeking affirmation of the evils of Islam that is perpetrated by less than 1% of the world's Muslim population this is an excellent book. It is written at a middle-school level, making it a very easy read.



5. Gabriel's book exposes the lies and distortions being unwittingly disseminated by western media and governments. It could be the most important book you will ever read. Gabriel once taught in the Egyptian university that is the spriitual seat of Islam. He was forced to flee for his life when he began to question some of the tenets of his faith. He became a Christian and wrote this book using an Americanized name. Muslims the world over want to kill him. He explains exactly why in this clear and concise work.

5 comments about The Far Enemy: Why Jihad Went Global (Cambridge Middle East Studies).

1. Though the author seems to belabor the point at times, the end result is a study in the jihadist trends of the past 30+ years. In this book you will be introduced to the key players in this drama along with the historical background of how their thought and teaching developed. It will take some time to digest it all but do not rush the reading and you will be rewarded with a level of analysis lacking in most books and reporting on the subject. It is well written for such a complex and daunting study.



2. I will admit, I stopped after reading the first 50 pages. It's very repetitive. After a 15 page prologue, the author offers a 25 page introduction. Maybe both should have been skipped. The main idea: up until the 1990s radical Muslims focused on fighting their own governments (the near enemy) and in the mid 1990s a small fraction of them decided to fight the U.S. and Western countries (the far enemy). Interesting, but in the first 40 pages, the author made this point at least ten times. Not only ideas and arguments, even whole sentences are repeated from one page to the other. For readers interested in this topic, I recommend 'The Next Attack' which I'll give at least four stars.



3. it is a panoramic view of the Jihadist endeavor (different from
   Islamist, regional Islamists and transnationalist jihadsits),
   particularly in the early 70's through the emergence of several
   Islamist Organizations, in the lands of Islam, from Egypt, Algeria, the
   Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and culminating with the Russian Invasion in
   Afghanistan. from the treatment of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Tanzim
   (which was then lead by al-Zawahiri), and Tanzims eventually marriage
   with al-Qaeda
   
   the title of the work it-self 'The Far Enemy' begs in it-self, the
   rupture in the jihadist movement, as they turned their frame and focus
   from 'The Near Enemy', i.e the focus on toppling proxy regimes
   supported by the West, in Egypt in particular, and Algeria to the 'Far
   Enemy', i.e the United States in particular. with brutal suppression
   and oppression of the Islamists in Egypt and Algeria (which was an all
   out civil war), the very infra-structure of the irredentist movement,
   i.e the local jihadi movements was severely undermined, before the
   Russian Invasion
   
   the Book contends, that the Russian Invasion, gave the likes of
   al-Zawahiri, the pre-text to train and re-organize them-selves in the
   beautiful land-scape of Afghanistan, not with the intent of assisting
   the Afghanis, but with the intent of garnering up more energy, training
   and organization, following the brutal repression of the jihadits in
   Egypt. many Islamic Countries, where happy to send elements of this
   Islamist out-fits to Afghanistan, to simply get them "off" their backs
   for the time being, and let the furor of their dis-agreements channeled
   into the Afghan conflict.
   
   sad is the reality, that when the altristic jihadis who went there to
   defend the defenseless Afghanis returned home, they had to face the
   wrath, not only of the authorities, but also that of the un-willigness
   of the societies to integrate them. importantly, the doctrinal
   brain-washing which represented, the perpetuation of "jihad" as a
   defensive posture, was turned around and suggested as a "continious
   struggle" against the other. (this is the Qutbian paradigm, which is
   the hall mark of many jihadis)! left with such a large pool of highly
   trained, social mis-fits (it makes me think, about the prophetic
   tradition, that 'who-ever moves forward of the jama'ah ...', it places
   the onus and responsibility of the jama'ah to create avenues where
   their energies and motivations are duly applied and appreciated, and
   not let to wander off to the rants and raves of mis-fits like
   al-Zawahiri and Usama b Laden), it really presented a "social problem
   of sorts"!
   
   but the reader ought not to be confused, and lump sum all jihadis and
   Islamists within the same category. there are and continue to exist
   various variations of Islamic Activities that are non jihadi in nature,
   and only contend a defensive jihad, building up societies, working with
   the given institutions.
   
   so what was the turning point of this radical departure from the 'Near
   Enemy' to the 'Far Enemy', as it relates to al-Zawahiri, and his
   collusion with Usama b. Laden? several factors, but most of it with the
   decay and the loss of leadership within the Islamic Lands of these
   regional Islamists, followed by the utter failure of the Islamists to
   "integrate them-selves" within the Community (i.e they had seceeded
   out-side the realm of the Community). the Gulf War I provided for a
   pretext for Usama b Laden to turn the tables around, after being
   snubbed by the Saudi Royal Family, and the Saudi 'Ulama (including bin
   Baz and Uthmayin, who feared their lives). such an insult to the
   persona of Usama b Laden really catapulted him, and his journey from
   various Islamic Lands, eventually to Afghanistan, under the protection
   and aegis of the Taliban, and the Commander of the Faithful, Mulla
   Omar!
   
   it was the collusion between al-Zawahiri and Usama b Laden that lead to
   the formation of al-Qaeda, with a very large following.
   
   but the work, also sets to de-bunk and de-mythologize these aspects
   
   1. that the jihadist movement was organized: there was and continues to
   be great opposition to the al-Qaeda Organization, evident even from the
   ranks and files of those who had served within al-Zawahiri. targetting
   the United States, lead in and of it-self the opening of two frontiers,
   which the Islamists were not able to contend with, and voiced their
   large opposition to it, but to no avail
   
   2. that the jihadist movement represents the collectivity of the muslim
   participation: again, the current organization is lead mostly by
   "arabs", and there was extreme dis-pleasure expressed by non Arab
   jihadis on the preference given to the arab Jihadis, vis a vis money
   and positions of power within these organizations
   
   3. the presence of shura: practically absent, since Usama b Laden, was
   not only able to gather followers by the dint of the personality cult,
   but was also able to suppress any dissenting opinions under the
   pre-text of the baya that was given to him/organization
   
   the work truly breaks down our frame of thought in lumping all jihadis,
   whether they by regional, irredentist (re-deeming the land of
   Afghanistan from the Russians) and trans-national as simply
   self-serving and false. given the retractions of several Islamists in
   the Islamic World and their out-spokenness against the jihadi posture
   that calls for a "clash of civilizations", it also helps to under-stand
   the short-comings of the 9-11 Commission in treating the subject at
   hand. while the 9-11 commission report does a brilliant work in
   breaking down the tragic events of 9-11 "tactically", there is a very
   little from the pespective of the nuanced analysis that comes from this
   work.



4. It took me over a year to finish this book, and there were times when I had to force myself to continue reading just a few more badly-written pages. The book is touted as having something to do with globalization, but I don't see where it has anything to do with that. Instead, it's a critique of the American war on terror disguised as a scholarly text, and that's if you call the author citing himself (what he said on previous pages) scholarly. It implies that the al-Qaeda or jihadist movement would self-destruct on its own if we just left its inherent disorganizational tendencies run the course. In fact, it argues al-Qaeda is a fluke, and repeatedly argues that peace, love, and/or truth-making is what Mohammed practiced and what real Muslims are all about. It argues the root cause of terrorism is a need for upward mobility in the Arab world, and that becoming a transnationalist, antiglobalist terrorist provides that kind of upward mobility. Neither of these latter two ideas are supported by anything but argument and a cursory swipe at Marxism. What is extensively supported and cited via interviews and analysis of tape recordings are the contradictions in logic by al-Qaeda leaders and supporters. Hence, the book cherry picks the easy things to do, and glosses over the hard stuff. I'd call that insignificant.



5. The term Jihad is based on the Qur'an saying "...you who believe fight the unbelievers who are near to you." In practice this has been interpreted to mean defending Islam, including the Shari'a (Islamic Law), against internal and external threats. This interpretation has produced the concepts of the `near enemy' that is threats from within the realm of Islam (Dar al Islam) usually from secular or apostate rulers and the `far enemy' that is threats to Islam from non-Islamic States such as those of the West or Israel.
   
   
   
   This is a way of introducing this most important book by Fawz A. Gerges. Its central thesis is that the concept of Jihad is far from monolithic, but has splintered into many separate movements with very different agendas. According to Gerges these include a relatively small movement that adheres to the far enemy ideology of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda movement. This movement see the principal threat to Islam as coming primarily from the U.S. and Israel as well as the West in general. Gerges does not discount the threat posed by this movement, but does note that it is very much a minority movement within a much broader spectrum of Jihadist movements. The inference from Gerges book is that if al Qaeda is understood for what it is, a relatively minor group in a much wider Jihadist movement, it can be better combated.
   
   
   
   As Gerges makes clear the concept of Jihad is a complex one and requires a good deal knowledge to understand the implications of Jihadist movements for U.S. National Security. This is not a perfect book and Gerges is at best a pedestrian writer. Yet, the attentive reader can extract a good deal of relevant information about the ideology and institutional structure of the perpetrators of the dreadful attacks of September 11 2001.
   

1 comments about The Taliban and the Crisis of Afghanistan.

1. This book is extremely well written and is a fount of information. It is a must for anyone trying to understand the mess in Afghanistan.

5 comments about One Tuesday Morning (September 11 Series #1).

1. This is the first book I ever read by Karen Kingsbury. Actually, it was the cover that caught my eye but even as I gazed at the picture of the twin towers, I thought to myself, "I....don't know about reading something on this order." I am SO glad I took the plunge because I found out well-written Christian Fiction is the best! Here's a tip. Make sure you have "Beyond Tuesday Morning" waiting in the wings for you'll kick yourself if you don't.
   
   I am now an avid reader of Ms. Kingsbury's work and have a whole shelf dedicated just to her in my own personal library. All I have to do is see her name on a book and it's mine. It is so great to be able to say that about an author, isn't it?
   
   "Oceans Apart" and the "Redemption" series would be my next recommendations to a new Kingsbury fan.
   
   PS I GAVE THIS BOOK 5 STARS BUT THE COUNTER SLIPPED AND I COULD NOT EDIT IT! WHAT A BUMMER.



2. Excellent 10 out of 10! This author is fabulous! I have read many of her books and have not read 1 I did not like.



3. Kingsbury handles a very difficult story line with grace, offering testimony of God's amazing love even through horrible times. The author says the story was given to her during the 911 attacks, and this book will help us all heal. Difficult to put down, this beautiful story lifts spirits out of the ashes of that dreadful day and its aftermath and into hope for times to come.



4. I couldn't put this book down and I have two small children to care for! I was able to stop only towards the end because I was crying so hard and couldn't see the pages. After a short break, I went back to it. The book showed how one person's life can have a huge impact on other people. It was inspiring!



5. I love Karen Kingsbury and I enjoyed this book. It's not one of her best, but it is a great story. I have to say I had the ending figured out about half way through, but I was still interested enough to finish the book. Kingsbury did a great job of bringing the day of September 11th back to life. Everyone has a different story about that day and I think we can all relate to the pain and fear that you feel reading this story.

5 comments about World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.

1. The Bush Doctrine on our struggle against Islamofascism is basically correct but by not naming it "World War IV" the doctrine lost clarity and focus and that has had a negative effect on the conduct of the war.
   The author takes on all critics from the left the right and the media with logic and facts. He is fair in blaming Presidents from both parties for decisions that made 9/11 possible.



2. A book called The Much too Promised Land by Aaron David Miller makes Carter out to be a hero by talking about his success at Camp David but deletes any mention of how Carter let the pro-Israeli Shah fall and the anti-Israeli Khomeini rise! This book shows how Carter is indeed responsible for Khomeini's and now even Ahmadinejad's bad succcess!



3. The title of the review says it all. If you want to kill scary brown people on behalf of hardliner Zionists in Israel and the Lobby, then keep drinking the neoconservative Kool Aid. The whole world knows that the so-called War on Terror was conducted using already created off the shelf plans (PNAC), and is about US-Israeli domination of all resources in the region, from oil in Iraq to water in southern Lebanon.
   
   Face reality or Drink the Trotsky loving Pod Man's Kool Aid and continue to be conned by the same old Wilsonian interventionist myth about America's role in making the world safe for democracy. Whatever keeps Israel happy and gets Lockheed its welfare check, Nanny/Surveillance/Police State at home and endless war abroad, all wrapped in the flag, soaked in patriotic self-love, and delivered by an all powerful executive. Rah rah rah, everyone loves a winner, nobody likes a loser, especially The American People. That is what "Conservatism" has become.



4. Its hard to believe in 2008 that so many racists still feel comfortable
   spouting hate against 1 million people. 99% of whom are innocent and good.
   Yes, I have been to the middle east and not as a colonial occupier with a gun but as a traveler who respected their culture. I don't believe the
   WEST is the best philosophy. That is juvenile type of thinking. You boys like to play at war without contemplating the long term effect of everyone involved. Shame on all of you!
   Ms. Podhoretz is beyond shame. His belief system is as extreme as Osama Bin Laden without a doubt. People who are that arrogant glory only in there own light. THIS BOOK sucked and good thing I got it second hand!



5. Relatively short, it is actually the extension of an essay published previously. At heart, it is a heavily polemical defense of the Bush Administration's view of the War on Terror. Not entirely convincing, Mr. Podhoretz is on firmer ground when he talks about the U.S. cultural and political debates than the actual nuts and bolts of foreign policy. In the latter area, it's clear that he's very intelligent and well-read, but nonetheless essentially a precocious amateur. In my opinion, Mr. Podhoretz also demonstrates a better understanding of the ideological and moral opposition to the Bush Administration's policies coming from its left than he does of that coming from its opponents on the right.

No comments about The Way of the World CD: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism.

5 comments about The Age of Sacred Terror: Radical Islam's War Against America.

1. I read the preceding reviews and wonder: is it me?... Perhaps, but I found this book disappointing. While containing good material, I have to say that the book is poorly written and unorganized. Perhaps that's the fault of the editor, for the authors are obviously qualified by their experience to speak on the issue of terrorism. I've read several books on this subject, and understand it well enough to fill in the blanks. By the same token, however, having to do so was a bit of a frustration.
   The chapter fields of Jihad is a fairly good overview of the countries involved in birthing and spreading jihadist Islam, however - overall the book is wordy and cumbersome. I think a hallmark of a good author is that he/she uses few words and uses them well. That is not the case here. I guess I expected more: well-qualified authors, great subject matter, interesting title...but overall (to me) a disappointing read.
   I would not recommend this book. Save your money and invest it in "The Cell" or "The New Jackals" instead. Both are impressive and engaging accounts of terrorism in action.



2. Though slightly dated-it was published in the interim between 9/11 and the Iraq War-this book by two U.S. government anti-terrorism officials is an excellent description of what is commonly referred to as the Global War on Terror. From the mechanics of the attacks on September 11, to the ideology of the terrorists themselves, to our government's response to Islamism, this well rounded book is an excellent resource for those looking for a window into a very complicated subject.
   
   Most interesting in comparing this book first published in hardcover in October 2002, with events since then. Benjamin and Simon lay out a reasonable description of why 9/11 happened, as well as certain measures we can take to overcome the enemy. The large leap the Bush administration has taken away from these reasonable steps is striking--and disturbing.
   
   I highly recommend this book.



3. The book is easy to read and clearly explain the historical progress of radical Islam.
   
   My only problem is the authors are not quoting primary resources of radical Muslim thinkers but quoting others who wrote about these thinkers.
   
   In page 46 Ali is described as Muhammad's son-in-law and nephew. That is a huge mistake as Muhammad have no brothers or sisters and Ali is his cousin.
   
   Such mistake which is repeated in the reprint of the book in the paperback edition make me think, what else is not accurate in the book?



4. The central theme of this book is that Americans continue to underestimate the danger from Muslim terrorists. We couldn't conceive of a day like 9/11, and therefore it appeared a remote possibility. To the extent that we fail to understand this enemy's resolve, and the uncompromising hatred which it bears for us, we will enable them to continue to strike us. Steven Simon was Senior Director for the National Security Council's Directorate of Transnational Threats, and Daniel Benjamin was Director for Counterterrorism in the Clinton administration. It is stunning what they knew then and it is most remarkable what they have learned since then.
   
   The book starts with a summary of recent terrorist acts committed against American interests in the name of Allah, and then goes back to the earliest of the Muslim fundamentalists. They show the cyclical nature of terrorism, and how Islam has metastasized over the last 700 years since Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya and his Kharijites introduced terror as a core concept within Islam. We learn of the contributions of Muhammad ibn Abdel al Wahhab, of Rashid Rida, and of Hasan al Banna and Sayyad Qutb. But that's just the first 94 pages since this isn't a history; it's an analysis of contemporary events. Accordingly, the focus is on the present incarnation of the Muslim nightmare, Usama bin Laden. Throughout this historical narrative we learn that both the subculture of terrorism and the broader Muslim culture are strongly connected, so that the basis for terrorist violence is well established and legally unassailable.
   
   And this isn't the turgid prose of academic research, of ancient history, or of political wonkism. The writing is positively entertaining: "The Jordan Rift Valley, a deep and unstable fissure in the earth's crust, provides a metaphor for the country through which it runs. The Hashemite kingdom of Jordan straddles political fault lines ... and if any of these divisions widen, it could bring down the palace roof." And later: "Yousef and Kansi were anomalies; they fit no part of the accepted taxonomy of terror, with its two great phyla, the soldiers of national liberation groups, and the agents of state sponsors."
   
   And Americans still don't get it. Terrorism is now parodied on stage, and has become the staple of movie plots. The more we treat Muslim terrorism as a peripheral problem, the more we believe that we've broken the back of the problem, or turned the corner, the more vulnerable we become. They hate us; they're still out there; and they have the means. They don't want to negotiate; they don't want to influence our actions; they want to annihilate us.



5. This book, by two top Clinton administration directors at the National Security Council's counterterrorism desk, is an excellent work on the rise of radical Islam and America's response. It contains sustantial details about Islamic terrorism in the 1990s and the corresponding responses from their administration. It is not an introduction to the matter. While it is not deeply analytical, it also assumes some knowledge on the part of the reader, which one would better find in The Crisis of Islam by Bernard Lewis.
   
   The book contains serious merits which broaden its appeal. The authors simultaneously recognize the distinction between mainstream Islam and the radicalized Islam of the terrorists, and yet also the fact that they are indeed radical Muslims while a firm devotion to their interpretation of Shari'a and not poverty-stricken revolutionaries or misunderstood intellectuals.
   
   At the same time, the authors fall into a series of traps.
   
   For one, they are more sympathetic to Bill Clinton and hostile to the Bush administration without presenting substantial reason. On the one hand, this is both innevitable and excusable; they were Clinton administration insiders privy to the presented logic and extended internal debate, whereas they are forced to the Bush team from the outside (they even admit as much). At the same time, however, they operate on what seems a consistent double standard. The soil samble from al-Shifa is determined a legitimate cause for 1998 missile strikes, but biological contaminants in Iraq are simply passed over. This bias obscrues their most important argument against the Iraq war- that because the Iraq war has and will involved a continued guerilla war against an insurgency that will attract new members and will never be wiped out, it makes the country into a training ground where young terrorists can hone their skills.
   
   The authors also draw on the Cold War-era moral equivalency mindset when making an extended literary sidetrip into Christian fundamentalism and Jewish terrorism. It is almost a token attempt to appeal to more 'open-minded' and 'level-headed' readers taken aback with their pragmatic take on terror and the clarity of its status as a global enemy. While some of the Jewish points are valid, it is virtually irrelevant as an addative to their overall argument; and talk about Timothy McVey and the Christian Identity movement is laughable. The Christian Identity movement is a white supremacy movement founded on anti-Semitism far more removed from Christian orthodoxy than Islamic radicals are from their mainstream. This divergence from the narrative greatly detracted from the overall cogency of the book.
   
   Third, the authors seem convinced- and convinced that no reason needs be given- that international terrorism conducted by Islamic radicals is the most pressing foreign policy threat facing the United States in the early twentieth century. Perhaps a symptom of a limited, terror-oriented perspective or perhaps due to a antipathy toward the Bush administration, the authors repeatedly decry that Bush administration's campaign and first-year emphasis on the rise of communist China and the shift from the Clintonian view of China as a 'strategic partner' to a 'strategic competitor.'
   
   This is likely the chief pitfall of the work: the failure to recognize that the threat of radical Islamic terrorism, however important, is at least matched by the rizing hegemony of China, first in East Asia, and then in the global South.
   
   That said, however, I found this to be an excellent work filled with detail about both figures and operations within terror cells and the Clinton administration. It raises the bar for debate and leaves me looking forward to learning more about this existential threat.

2 comments about The New Global Terrorism: Characteristics, Causes, Controls.

1. I rarely give five stars to anything, but this is quite possibly the best terrorism book ever, at least in terms of the sample of readings. Twenty-one chapters in all, the contributors all being well-known scholars in the political science field mainly. The textbook is very scholarly, divided into three parts, corresponding to the purposes of science: description, explanation, and prescription. Each part is excellent, and the book is well-balanced. Part I (description/characteristics)is a little heavy on the theoretical side, especially where there is some repetitive use of the phrase "post-modern" and exploration of historical side roads, but doesn't devolve into a bunch of navel-gazing over definitions and typologies like so many other books do. One could actually "use" the stuff in Part I, either for further theory development or other grounded purposes. Part II (explanation/causes) is probably what most readers would turn to first. It's nothing more than a collection of writings by all the luminaries in the field: Crenshaw, Wilkinson, Rubenstein, Laqueur, Howell, Juergensmeyer, Lewis, and Gurr. One couldn't ask for a better lineup, and although some of the articles have been previously published, a lot of them look like they were updated and revised for this book. Selection bias is always a possibility with books of this kind, and to be sure, the book is overall critical of mindless understanding approaches to counterterrorism, but not overly concessionistic. Military solutions are discussed, and lesser-known authors like Howell write about darwinistic solutions like letting failed states collapse on their own. However, Part III has counterweighting articles like Falk and Johnson's excellent discussions of why the war on terrorism is a moral war against "evil" (in the non-metaphysical sense). The third part of the book isn't about strategy or grand strategy, as one might expect, but is about tactics and counter-tactics, representing, in short, as good of a primer as any, on the political science approaches to counterterrorism option selection. I highly recommend this little book be read by anyone who wants to quickly become an erudite scholar of terrorism. It's highly educative.



2. I bought this book for a class in terrorism.It's a well made paperback.It was very informative.Many views on terrorism from different leaders in the field have been compiled.A great idea.But I feel the book is WAY too wordy.I literally had to read it with a dictionary in the other hand.Not bad for people who want to train for a spelling bee or learn new words to dazzle their friends but it really does add a lot of extra time to a reading assignment that you may not have.I would like to say I learned new words from the book but they are really obscure words I will never ever use in day to day conversation and will likely forget...actually I can't even remember them right now.

5 comments about War by Other Means: An Insider's Account of the War on Terror.

1. In "Not a Suicide Pact," Judge Richard Posner offers an argument for sweeping executive power in the "war on terror" both better reasoned and more thoughtful than John Yoo does here. Still, as one of the architects of the Bush policy, Yoo's work offers a fascinating, and at times chilling, insight into the thinking within the White House. For the most part, Yoo's arguments remain on at best fragile legal footing, often cherry picking evidence and benefiting greatly from the fact that this book, like all books, is a monologue rather than a discussion. Despite that, one might at least hope that, as a lawyer, Yoo would at least create defenses that pass the smell test.
   
   Examples abound of thin arguments in support of administration policies. One must, however, give Yoo credit for taking positions few would want to make, such as arguing for the constitutionality of the since repudiated internment of Japanese in WWII as an example of the legitimate use of executive war powers. Of course that the Senate had, in '42, actually declared war, is a detail given scant attention. Nor does the author ever give much consideration to the rather ambiguous notion of "a war on terror" never choosing to wonder as to how one determines the end date to such a struggle. Likewise does this self proclaimed conservative claim that the post 9/11 Congressional resolution for war in Afghanistan gave the president cart blanch to violate civil liberties, this despite the fact that the majority of legislators state that this was far from their intent. So much for conservative notions of legislative intent.
   
   Nor does Yoo seem bothered by contradictions in his own argument. Thus, he claims that citizens need not worry about executive excess, since these will be reined in by the judiciary. Yet at the same time, he decries the judiciary as overly meddlesome. Similarly disturbing is the author's apparent ease in dismissing the central role the constitution gives the legislature in governing, in effect turning the Framer's intent on its head by arguing for a near unrestrained executive.
   
   In the end, simply for the window Yoo offers into the administration, this book proves worthwhile, though all and all the view proves frightening. Though I disagree with him often in his book, Judge Posner offers a far more thoughtful and honest defense of current efforts by the White House to claim greater power. Yoo, on the other hand, here will convince no one other than those true believers who've already shared the cool Aid.



2. WAR BY OTHER MEANS: AN INSIDER'S ACCOUNT OF THE WAR ON TERROR is not your ordinary survey of 9/11: comes from one of the members of a skeletal staff at the Office of Legal Council who stayed behind while Washington, D.C. evacuated in the aftermath of events, and thus offers the observations of one who had a ringside seat to the politics behind the response to al Qaeda. It was John Yoo's analysis which led to some of Bush's most controversial approaches and politics, from Guantanamo Bay to military trials and the Patriot Act: WAR BY OTHER MEANS surveys not only events and personalities, but the even more important legal foundations of these decisions, offering an unprecedented view of events key to any thorough understanding.
   
   Diane C. Donovan
   California Bookwatch



3. John Yoo saw himself as a king-maker. The only trouble was that he chose as his "king" a deeply flawed man. Now, he is into C.Y.A.
   
   Maybe if Yoo had experienced torture himself, he would bring real understanding to the subject.
   
   My only question is: why is he still on the faculty of a prestigious university?



4. Anyone who really wants to understand how the legal decisions in the War on Terror were made, rather than depend on the red state-blue state polemical attacks, should read John Yoo's book. That he perceived his first duty to be to protect the nation and to protect those in our military and intelligence services, who are on the front lines, rather than to protect political correctness or the Bush administration, is to his credit. He, too, is a soldier defending us, but in his case, moral rather than physical courage was called for. This Marine veteran says thank you to him.
   
   Robert A. Hall
   Author of "The Good Bits."



5. John Yoo is a short-sighted and dangerous man, and is quite possibly a war criminal. It seems ironically obvious that if you want to claim the moral high ground, you better HAVE the moral high ground; this book attempts to argue, in eight painfully dry chapters, why torturing goat farmers and bugging your own people is, somehow, that high ground.
   
   Insane.
   
   Certainly, it sheds light into how someone claiming to be a "compassionate conservative" and "loving guy," as George W. Bush has, would likewise attempt to claim that waterboarding someone who may or may not be guilty of a crime is a good thing. Like any drug addict (and Bush, as a dry-drunk, is most certainly that), our President has found a new fix: power. And John Yoo is an all too eager enabler.
   
   Reading this book was like watching a car crash is slow motion...from inside the car. I had to take a shower three times to wash the stink off...

5 comments about Kafka Comes to America: Fighting for Justice in the War on Terror - A Public Defender's Inside Account.

1. Mr. Wax's book describes the best (the skill and dedication of the Federal Public Defenders Office) and the worst (treatment of individuals caught up in the post 9/11 web) of our govenment's actions during the "war on terror." This book is wonderfully written; I could not put in down until I finished it - not the stuffy rhetoric one would expect from a lawyer! As engrossing as a spy-thriller, but infimitely more chilling given the subject matter. It provides essential insights into the erosion of our constitutional rights since 9/11.



2. It's good to know that there are honorable people who will stand up to an out of control administration.



3. I was particularly interested in finding all the details about a fingerprint which seemed to link an Oregon lawyer who did not speak Spanish to the March 11 train bombings in Madrid. The government presents a major challenge to the nature of American society, and the slow pace which it often chooses to deal with matters on which others think "look again" means actually considering facts but the FBI thinks it has a major significance as casting doubt upon previously arrived at conclusions is more than stunning.
   
   Jurisdictional questions might be of interest to lawyers, but by the end of the book it seems obvious that the real interest has been in any form of delay. YouTube news videos rock when real people get to explain how someone doing a legitimate job in a foreign country ended up in Gitmo. The author makes a few errors, but he has a grasp of the significance of the work that is being done by lawyers who actually believe in preserving a particular kind of society. I like the effort better than all the people who wonder why I am still running around loose after all these years of causing trouble for people who don't like being looked at.



4. Kafka Comes To America: Fighting For Justice In The War On Terror is lawyer and author Steven T. Wax's story as to how he succeeded in freeing two unfortunate individuals, an American lawyer Brandon Mayfield and Adel Hamad, a Sudanese hospital administrator working in Pakistan. Both were falsely accused in the war on terror and both were caught up in the U.S. government's post-9/11 counter-terrorism measures. These measures, as declared by the Attorney General of the USA, was that citizens would now be stripped of their rights of due process, there would be no grand juries, no entitlement to a defence attorney, and the rule of law was to be chucked aside based solely on the word of the President of the USA.
   
   
   Mayfield and Hamad were sent to Guantánamo where they were interrogated and prevented from receiving proper legal counsel and representation. In the case of Mayfield, he was suspected of being involved with the Madrid train bombing. Apparently, the Spanish version of the investigation pointed to the lifting of a fingerprint labelled "latent print #17" from a bag of unexploded detonators that was discovered in a van. The Spaniards requested assistance through Interpol wherein the FBI intervened and they were one hundred percent certain that the fingerprint was that of Mayfield. However, as the story unfolds, we are informed that the Spaniards were not convinced of this positive identification and they had informed the FBI of their uneasiness in accepting these findings. In addition, Mayfield was the subject of racial profiling as his warrant mentioned that he was a Muslim and that one of his client's, whom he represented, was a "bad guy," who was also a Muslim. Both of which had nothing to do with anything other than denouncing someone due to his religion and denying representation to an alleged criminal who is rightfully entitled to a defence attorney.
   
   
   Hamad was arrested by Pakistani security police and taken from his apartment in Peshawar Pakistan at 1:30 in the morning in July of 2002. Hamad had left his native Sudan in 1986 for Pakistan where he was employed by an international Kuwaiti charity that operated camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan for refugees of the Afghan war with the Soviets. Eventually, Hamad left this job and took on employment with a Saudi-funded charity in Pakistan, the World Assembly for Muslim Youth (WAMY). Over the years he would return to Sudan for brief stays with his wife and children. His arrest and subsequent transfer to the Americans was all in collaboration with the US government that believed that Hamad was involved with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, although there was never any concrete evidence to prove these allegations.
   
   
   Wax is the Federal Public Defender for the District of Oregon and executive abuse of powers has always interested him particularly, as he states, when the police can stop us on the street, enter our homes, intercept our telephone calls or e-mails, or monitor our Internet use. Although there are "bad guys" around whom we need to incarcerate, we still must be vigilant in the protection of our freedom and civil rights. Wax has spent over the last six years fighting against the abuse and the US government's assault on civil liberties and the corrosive effect of fear.
   
   
   When Wax volunteered to participate in the Guantánamo cases, he had no idea if the clients assigned to his office would be terrorists or innocents. However, he did know that the rule of law was under siege and that the battle to defend the rule of law was of utmost importance.
   
   
   Initially Wax was not all that familiar with habeas corpus litigation and he was required to brush up on this extremely important aspect of the American legal system. For those don't know what Habeas Corpus means, it is simply "bring the body forward" and is a fundamental part of Anglo and American law. As Wax mentions and as stated by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, it is the most powerful tool in Anglo-American law for guarding against executive abuse, "allowing our independent judiciary to act as a critical check on the Executive, ensuring that it does not detail individuals except in accordance with the law."
   
   
   Unfortunately, daily news reports very rarely portray the injustices that have been committed at Guantánamo. This is not to say that there are some really appalling individuals that are imprisoned, however, on the other hand there are the innocent that are entitled to their day in court. What Wax does with this book is meticulously delve into the details of the abuses, presenting thoughtful insights into the shortcomings that must be addressed. He presents a great deal of information in a clear and concise manner, although at times he is prone to occasional bouts of too much legalese. Probably the best part of Wax's story is his objectivity in showing why and how abuse of executive power poses a danger to all of us. As he asserts, "do we need to give up freedom to maintain our security?"
   
   Norm Goldman, Publisher & Editor Bookpleasures



5. Kafka Comes to America: Fighting for Justice in the War on Terror - A Public Defender's Inside Account
   
   A chilling reminder of what happens when we play loose with the Constitution and people's rights. Yes, even in America!