5 comments about Londonistan.

1. I stopped reading this book in the middle because it becomes just another piece of pro-Israel propaganda.



2. The cult of death called Islam is spreading like the plague across the globe and only because it is allowed by the myopic, historically ignorant, illogical, naive and morally rudderless Western civilization. This book attempts to wake up the dozing Westerners who are more obsessed with saving the whales, trees, caribou and spotted owls while ignoring the danger growing right under their very noses. Westerners who are more concerned about multiculturalism and political correctness, and not offending anyone than with real nighmare sneaking in diguised as exotic "religion of peace".



3. Melonie Griffen's excellent book about the Muslim threat to traditional British values should be required reading for all English speaking people. The facts in her well-researched thesis convinced this 88-year-old reader that radical Muslims are well advanced in their plan to create a Muslim world. Londonistan should be required reading for all American High School Seniors.
   
   Al Kayworth; author
   
   Abenaki Warrior
   Legends of the Pond
   The Scalp Hunters
   Iceman to the Internet



4. A frightening warning to the United States on what could be if we continue to allow political correctness to guide our country's future. The author does a fantastic job of laying out the failures of the British government to take the appropriate steps to stop the madness before it began.



5. This is a window into our future and the results of our politically correct world.

5 comments about The Only Road North.

1. If you have ever had an unanswered calling that keeps nudging you, please read this honest story/JOURNEY from some very brave young people! The story does leave you shocked, but it won't let you stop reading until you finish.



2. As a crim trial atty inner-city Boston courts, and 61 years old now, I do not meet up with the cream of the crop re America's youth, as you can imagine. In fact, I have grown rather cynical over the many years of this kind of work, like working in the ER your whole life. This book was delivered last night and I am halfway thru it already. It is without a doubt one of the two or three best books I have EVER read. I recommend it to anyone, whether you are interested in pure adventure, unusual travel stories, human nature stories, etc. Whatever your particular interests in life, this book is for you. I wish I could give it ten stars instead of five!



3. when i was a junior higher, i read a book many christian boys read at the time: bruchko, by bruce olsen. it was (and still is) the true, autobiographical story of a teenage boy who wanted to change the world, and took off as a missionary to some unreached tribe. it's full of peril and adventure and gripped me like no book had done before.
   
   erik mirandette's book is that kind of book -- for boys of all ages (including my age: 45).
   
   the only road north is erik's autobiographical story of leaving the airforce academy to find himself in africa, on a three-pronged adventure that would change everything. everything. his first year was in northwest africa, near spain. during this period, he has a come-to-jesus spiritual awakening of sorts and is thrust into a world of "if i don't do this, no one will" terror, humanitarianism and salvation. sensing he needed to understand africa more, the second part is erik, his younger brother, and his best friend's motorcycle trip from cape town, south africa, to ethiopia, through 9000 miles of fear, adventure, wild animals, life-threatening experiences, personal connections, spiritual reflections, motorcycle maintenance, love and friendship.
   
   erik's slightly unpolished "not a professional author" writing style totally works, as it brings an urgent sense of realism to the already true story.
   
   then all hell breaks loose. after their trip is over (this isn't a spoiler, as this was all over the news when it happened, and is revealed in the first chapter of the book), erik and his brother and their friends (a 4th guy has joined them at this point) are sightseeing and walking around on one of their last days prior to heading home to the states when a suicide bomber explodes a bomb right in the middle of their foursome. eriks' brother dies. erik almost dies. the ensuing months are filled with pain of every kind, questions and doubts, and the shocking kind of spiritual and emotional honesty one almost never finds in a christian book. the end isn't pretty and tidy. there's only the slightest upturn toward hope -- just enough to keep the readers from wishing we hadn't read the book.
   
   no, it's not only for manly men. but it is a rare sweet-spot book for guys of all ages -- about 14 on up, with the perfection-point at about 16 - 26.



4. I recently read The ONly Road North by Erik Mirandette. I read it because I know one the the guys in the story, as he was a part of our college campus ministry group for several years.
   
   I will get to the point-this is possibly one of the worst Christian books I have ever read. It is deceptive, has terrible theology, and could really mislead others to follow the author and his friends' example
   
   To be brief:It is deceptive because the ending implies that all the guys are doing fine spiritually. Not so. The one I know has lost interest in pursuing God and does not even claim to be a Christian, as far as I know. Secondly, there are way too many crude expressions and outright swearing in a supposedly christian work. The NT teaches in several places to avoid crude language-apparantly not important to the author or Zondervan
   
   As he mentions several times while having a beer, there is no conclusion or really anything to be learned about God or the Christian life. His brother is dead, they spend tons of money on themselves, treated Africa like their personal motorcycle course and threw rocks at hippos. Yet he is convinced "God made him for this". Based on what? His feelings? And for what? To sight -see? Yet real missionaries, who daily risk their lives to lead people to Christ, are barely mentioned, and then only when they save these guys from danger. Incredible.
   
   What nonsense. They did little for others or for the gospel, and suffered terribly. (In fairness, at the beginning Eric is helping the poor in Morrocco, but it has no spiritual component nor is there any hint that it made much of an impact in the long run)
   
   How is this inspiring? Yes, the survivors bravely healed from their wounds and tragedy. But what does this really teach us? If you take stupid risks you probably will get hurt. God may give you the strength to deal with it. But hey, just go have a beer.
   
   Hardly what I expect from a respected publisher like Zondervan



5. First, I applaud the author for his earlier humanitarian efforts. However, I can't help but get the feeling the entire time he was really only seeking adventure. I know there are thousands of people who volunteer for humanitarian efforts for all of the right reasons, it just doesn't mean everyone does. For example, there are plenty of poor/underprviledged/needy (whatever you wish to call them) right under the author's nose in Grand Rapids, MI. But then again, that wouldn't give him "stories to keep the grandkids busy for hours".
   
   Also, there really isn't anything wrong with volunteering for Foreign Humanitarian Aid efforts partially for the experience. Just don't write a book afterward unless you have a point to make.
   
   To be frank, the author seemed to be quite self important in the "blog" and many paragraphs and "stories" were dedicated to the glorification of his deceased brother. I can't tell you how many times he mentions that he was made for this life. What life? The life of a Young thrill seeking American needlessly risking his life in unstable countries while treating the Dark Continent as his own private off-road course?
   
   I'm also surprised that this book was published by a "christian" publishing company. What exactly was the "message" that was intended to be sent/received? That if God doesn't act as your own private "genie" granting all of your prayers as if they were wishes you will abandon the little faith you profess to have?
   
   I stuck with this book continually hoping the next chapter would offer something of value. It never delivered. Save yourself the time.

5 comments about The Force of Reason.

1. I think that Oriana Fallaci and similar minded people need to be heard. Basically she is tired of the debasement of Western Civilization and the unfounded extoling of alternative cultures. Much of her rhetoric is passionate and funny. In the end we are all human and it is our thinking and culture which set us apart. Western Civilization has done much bad throughout history; however, it has also done much that is good. To naively dream that all thinking or ideas are equally valid is utter nonsense. People should be respected but not dysfunctional behaviors. This is one of the major points that Fallaci makes. In addition, it is sad to hear some of her stories about the defacing of important historical buildings in Florence and other parts of Europe. She providies a number of interesting vignettes.
   
   What is needed, is a new Renaissance and Age of Reason. I only wish that Ms. Fallaci had lived to translate her third book in this series.



2. Fantastic book. A must read for everybody interested in today's world.
   THUS LADY HAD MORE "GUTS' THAN ALL THE POLITICIANS PUT TOGETHER.



3. She makes me laugh and she makes me want to cry.
   
   This book is written with such passion and intensity that it makes you want to howl with rage at the stupidity of Eurabia and at the same time clap your hands with joy that someone, this Oriana Fallaci, had the brains and the wisdom and the courage the put it all down. The brains, because her perceptions are clear minded and sharp, the wisdom because she has a huge experience in person of the modern world as a journalista - left for dead in Mexico in '68 was it? - and the courage because, as we all know and as few are prepared to articulate, criticise Islam, and you are likely to be put in the gun sights of a the nasty-be- nasties.
   
   This book is written by a highly principled person who knows that the West is the best and it is being given away by the politicaly correct mind-dead people of the zombie left, who hold power in Europe. Read it.



4. This is a gravely important subject and Oriana Fallaci, never afraid to speak the truth, has said what must be said. Will people in the West listen or will we become victims all of the degenerate "religion of peace"? Everyone who cares about freedom, democracy, and the values and culture of the Western World should read this book and also her previous one on the same subject. They are vital messages from a great prophet of Truth.



5. This is a keeper. Oriana Fallaci was smeared by conventional media a few years ago for detailing the Islamic threat to Europe and to the world.
   
   Brave woman, excellent writer. Had she not died of cancer after the book was published, she might have been murdered.
   
   The Islamists had a price on her head.

5 comments about The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America.

1. Not a conspiracy book at all, but more a historical analysis of what's happened to US power over the past 50 years: how the "deep state" has swallowed what remained of the Public State. When people wonder why there seems to be a total de-link between what the American people desire and vote for, and what they actually get -- here is the answer. In November 2006, the US voted for the end of the Iraq War, the readjustment of the Bush Vampire tax burden, and for greater accountability(investigations, public hearings, supoenas issued, etc). What they got was the exact opposite. Why? This book is a good place to start to find the answer.
   
   When Professor Scott gets to 9/11/01, he goes into very minute detail over the very strange discrepencies involving Dick Cheney's whereabouts from 9:25 to 9:55 the morning of the attacks. Cheney has just flat out lied about where he was and what he was doing. He tells the 9/11 Commission that he did not enter the security bunker/command post just off the EOB until 9:50. Yet several witnesses swore that he was inside the bunker(including Leon Panetta) as early as 9:25, repeatedly going off to make phone calls in the tunnel which leads from the bunker to the EOB, on secured, untraceable phones. Why lie about this? Who was he talking to and about what?
   
   Even stranger is the testimony of an Air Force Lieutenant who kept asking Cheney the same question over and over: "Do the orders still stand? Do the orders still stand?" Eventually, Cheney got angry and responded: "Have you heard anything different?!"
   
   What were the orders? The assumption is that they were orders to shoot down incoming planes. Yet, this query had already been asked at least once before the plane plowed into the Pentagon. And if they were the logical shoot-down orders, why would the Lt. keep asking for confirmation? Scott theorizes that the orders in fact were STAND DOWN orders.
   
   A magnificent, chilling work by our greatest political historian.



2. The American author Peter Dale Scott shows how the richest 1% control key covert parts of the US state, including the Pentagon and the CIA. The private power of this military-financial complex has been secretly growing ever since President Truman founded the CIA. The US state serves the class interests of Wall Street's owners, not the national interest.
   
   The US state is becoming more repressive: in 1970, 31% of California's budget went to higher education and 4% to prisons, by 2005, 12% and 20% respectively.
   
   Scott shows how the US state built up fundamentalist Islam. From the 1950s, the CIA, allied with MI6, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, used the mullahs and the Muslim Brotherhood against secular nationalism across the Middle East. Later the CIA outsourced its operations to MI6, the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, the Saudis, the Shah, the French intelligence service, Egypt and Morocco. In Latin America, the US state backed the fascist Operation Condor run by the military dictatorships of Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Paraguay, funded by South Korea, Taiwan and Saudi Arabia.
   
   Scott describes how the US and British states have fomented wars across Asia. From 1986, the CIA, MI6 and Pakistan's intelligence service launched guerrilla attacks from Afghanistan into Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In 1988 the US and Pakistani states promised to end military aid to the mujehadin when Soviet forces left Afghanistan; Thatcher and Bush ensured that they broke that promise.
   
   Scott shows how the drive for oil determines much of US foreign policy. For example, in 1997, the Wall Street Journal stated, "The Taliban are the players most capable of achieving peace. Moreover, they are crucial to secure the country as a prime trans-shipment route for the export of Central Asia's vast oil, gas and other natural resources."
   
   In sum, Scott shows how the US state is not a force for peace and progress, as Gordon Brown fondly believes, but backs war and reaction. Its ruling class wants to continue their disastrous attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan: it believes what Kissinger said in 2005, "Victory over the insurgency is the only meaningful exit strategy."



3. See 'Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil' by Michael C. Ruppert and Catherine Austin Fitts



4. 
   Somewhere between George Bush and Noam Chomsky, who believe the 9/11 Commission Report, and David Ray Griffin, who believes "the Bush-Cheney administration orchestrated 9/11" (Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11, 2006, p. vii-viii, ), there is Peter Dale Scott.
   
   Scott doesn't say who did it, but as Ola Tunander puts it,
   
   "Peter Dale Scott exposes a shadow world of oil, terrorism, drug trade and arms deals, of covert financing and parallel security structures - from the Cold War to today. He shows how such parallel forces of the United States have been able to dominate the agenda of the George W. Bush Administration, and that statements and actions made by Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld before, during and after September 11, 2001, present evidence for an American "deep state" and for the so-called "Continuity of Government" in parallel to the regular "public state" ruled by law. Scott"s brilliant work not only reveals the overwhelming importance of these parallel forces but also presents elements of a strategy for restraining their influence to win back the "public state," the American democracy."
   
   This is not very different from the more widely held "rogue network" theory described, for example, by Webster Tarpley, as "an outlaw network of high officials infesting the military and security apparatus of the United States and Great Britain." Tarpley sees this network as "ultimately dominated by Wall Street and City of London financiers," but many other candidates have been proposed (Bilderbergers, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones, Illuminati, CFR, CIA, Mossad, Federal Reserve, etc.).
   
   What these two points of view have in common, if indeed they are different at all, is the idea that there is, or still is, a "public state" (or "non-rogue" network) at all. This sounds comforting, to the extent that it encourages us to think that if we can just expose and get rid of the bad guys, we can "win the country back." The latter expression brings us all the way back into mainstream politics, where anyone dissatisfied with the status quo can complain about the country having gone to the dogs and being desperately in need of change.
   
   It is along this continuum that we lose Chomsky and other advocates of a "structuralist" or "institutional" approach, which they oppose to "conspiracy theory" generally. The system cannot be fixed, they say, by superficial reforms, or by getting rid of the bad guys, because it is based on capitalist imperialism and the profit motive. Even if the "deep state" were exposed and removed, things would not improve significantly because the public state is the real killer. Chomsky's entire (political) oeuvre is dedicated to showing how the US government (and its allies) wreak havoc in the world, not by conspiracy but openly and consistently as the logical and predictable consequence of the economic system it serves.
   
   I think both points of view are flawed. Why Chomsky et al. refuse to acknowledge the evidence for high-level government complicity in "deep state" events like the JFK assassination and 9/11 is simply not comprehensible. They fit easily (and politically very effectively) into a "structural" analysis: both events precipitated imperialist wars -- the latter undeniably, the former arguably.
   
   On the other hand, is this notion of a coexisting deep and public state not precisely the state of doublethink Orwell described in 1984 -- "holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them" (Orwell, 1984)? How is it possible, logically, to have both at the same time? The concepts, it seems to me, are mutually exclusive. If the deep state exists, there can be no public state, by definition. The same is true of the rogue network. There can be no rogue network within the government controlling the government, because if that is the case the rogue network is the government.
   
   This is not "semantics." Scott is not talking about the public face, the propaganda mask, that "bad" governments use to disguise their evil nature. There would be nothing new about that. He is talking about two governments ("states"), a good one and a bad one, that are so intertwined they can hardly be told apart, like Jekyll and Hyde. This is what Scott's oeuvre is all about -- showing us how closely intertwined they are. My problem with this is that precisely because they are so intertwined, I see no point in trying to distinguish them.
   
   Worse, Scott's theory in the end exonerates the very institutions (CIA, FBI, Military Intelligence, etc.) he impugns. Like his friend John Newman, who can present a mountain of evidence proving that Oswald was a CIA agent without implicating the CIA as an institution, Scott does not locate the deep state in the CIA or any other government agency, or in the government at all, since the "overworld" extends far beyond the US government into organized crime, international banking and finance, transnational corporations, foreign intelligence agencies, etc. Thus "9/11 was an inside job," for Scott, does not mean the (US) government did it. Ditto for JFK, and all other "deep events."
   
   As long as this doublethink holds, one is paralyzed. One cannot blame the government, or agencies of the government, because they didn't do it. Despite the overwhelming evidence tying them to all sorts of misdeeds, they are innocent as institutions because they are, after all, part of the "public state." This is where Newman leaves us, and it is where Scott leaves us. Maybe there is something about being a former intelligence officer (Newman) or a (Canadian) diplomat (Scott) that prevents them from taking the final, logical step, which I see as inevitable. If everything, or even half, of what they say is true, the government did do it, and only the government can solve the so-called "mysteries" and rectify the situation, whereupon it follows that we must try to remake the government into a true "res publica." Rather than exonerate the CIA as an institution, for example, it should be completely reformed (or abolished) as an institution. Since this can probably not be done without reforming the overarching institution, the government, of which it is a part, we can now rejoin Chomsky et al. in calling for fundamental change. I wonder if Maj. Newman and Prof. Scott would be with us on that one.
   
   Michael D. Morrissey
   August 26, 2008
   
   http://www.mdmorrissey.info/deepstate
   There is also a useful discussion at http://www.911blogger.com/node/17364#comment



5. Professor Scott, in his book "The Road to 9/11" provides a detailed analysis and discussion of contradictions in the 9/11 timelines, the reports, the inquiries ... In this regard, I believe that Scott writes in a manner that is quite easy to follow. It is well-written and superb in conclusions. I regret that it might have been more comprehensive - although, it introduces topics, such as the history of and manner of operations of the continuity of government.
   
   In the concluding chapter, Scott rises to his highest potential, not only summarizing the events of that most horrific day, but, it offers the readers insights and arguments inspiring, at least, me, to seriously evaluate the credibility of statements prepared by the US federal government and examine the appropriateness of bottom-up movements to take back our government and return it to the people.
   
   While the first 15 or so chapters were superb, the final chapter is sublime. The is well worth the purchase price, new or used.

No comments about Global Rebellion: Religious Challenges to the Secular State, from Christian Militias to al Qaeda (Comparative Studies in Religion and Society).

5 comments about America's Secret War: Inside the Hidden Worldwide Struggle Between the United States and Its Enemies.

1. A few months ago, at the suggestion of a friend who is active in the American intelligence community, I subscribed to the Friedman's Stratfor email newsletter. In it I have found some of the best analysis out there. It consistently gives clear, concise, and factual explanations of world events--something that is very rarely found in the mainstream media today.
   
   This book met the same high standard. The discussion covers the 9/11 attacks and the American response. Friedman attempts to cut through the fluff and public statements and looks at the hard geopolitical realities of the events, and he does an excellent job of doing so.
   
   I was constantly impressed by the innovative explanations he develops. For example, he argues that a major reason for the Iraq war was to put greater pressure on Saudi Arabia to reign in Islamists. Another compelling idea is that the very purpose of the 9/11 attacks was to provoke an American overreaction, which would in turn help Islamists gain ground within the Muslim world.
   
   [...]
   
   Friedman's prose is succinct and readable, with the occasional entertaining anecdote to keep things interesting. This makes for a fast and enjoyable read.
   
   My only criticism (and it is a significant one) is that Friedman does not cite any sources. There were many facts that I would like to have looked up, but I had no idea where he got his information.
   
   Still, this was a tremendously good book. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in America's contemporary foreign policy.



2. George Friedman gives us a rare look behind the scenes of America's fight with radical Islam. It was fascinating to get a look at how the U.S. viewed acts of terror and terrorists in general before and after 9/11. Friedman goes into detail that you simply cannot get from watching the news or reading papers. For example, Friedman lays out many reasons for invading Iraq other than WMD's. These include: a need for an impressive military victory to send a message throughout the Arab world, a point of leverage to deal with Saudi Arabia, and the fact the Saadam was a brutal dictator. Friedman discusses the strengths and weaknesses of various U.S. intelligence and law enforcement services in great detail. He also explains why Al Qeada has been as successful as they have and what seperates them from other terrorist groups. The book takes the reader through the military operations and campaigns of the first three years in the global fight against terrorism. For a more specific look at Al Qaeda and the rise of radical Islam see Lawrence Wright's "The Looming Tower."



3. Dr. Friedman explains the birth of Al-Qaeda, the failures of U.S. intelligence, and the goals and objectives of both the Bush Administration and Al-Qaeda in this fascinating and well written book. You're not going get this analysis in the major media.
   
   In short, Dr. Friedman says that the 9.11 attack was nothing really personal -- it was just a way for O.B.L. to unite the Arab world. The other main point: the invasion of Iraq was purely a strategic move to demonstrate the prowess of American forces to Saudi Arabia who was caught in the middle of Al-Qaeda on its turf and cooperating with its ally the U.S.
   
   In the end he concludes that the U.S. is generally winning the war but only time will tell who the real winner will be (and there will not be clear winners).



4. I highly recommend reading this book as one source in a broader study of US foreign policy since 2001. The author of this book, George Friedman, provides an interesting geopolitical explanation of the reason the US invaded Iraq under President George W. Bush as part of the broader war on terrorism. Even if one does not agree with Friedman's analysis, this book provides excellent insights into US foreign policy interests both in the Middle East and globally concerning the war on terrorism (including Afghanistan) that goes beyond events reported in the mainstream press. The book was published in 2004, so Friedman's analysis does not deal with events since that time. However, the book is still valuable for a different viewpoint into US foreign policy since 9-11-2001.
   
   NOTE: the title of the book might give the impression that this is a conspiracy theory type book. Not so! Friedman provides background material and analysis from a geopolitical viewpoint. Since the geopolitical aspects of international events are rarely discussed adequately in the press, this book analyzes the reasons for US foreign policies that are rarely, if ever, reported in the press. Hence, the title "America's Secret War" concerning the war on terrorism. Friedman also provides insights into the security interests of other nations involved in this conflict, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others.
   
   One drawback is that the author does not provide documentation for certain facts cited in the book. This is because the book focuses on his analysis of these facts. Still, providing references for these facts would make this book even better.



5. AMERICA'S SECRET WAR is a blow by blow account of the Bush regime's "war on terrorism." And while several chapters do offer valuable insights -- particularly the author's discussion of the war in Afghanistan -- overall, the book is a mine field. I cannot recommend it because the author, George Friedman, is either incredibly stupid in believing that a rag tag bunch of 19 jihadists using cell phones outsmarted the most sophisticated security establishment in the world on 9/11 -- or he is just downright devious.
   
   In the intelligence world deception is a finely honed art. The game is played by subtly spicing truth with falsehood -- and there are enough examples in AMERICA'S SECRET WAR for us to suspect that George Friedman is spinning yarns. Allow me to be blunt: He is quite skillful in the art of lying.
   
   Here are some examples:
   
   Friedman mentions the US-Iran discussions that followed 9/11 -- but he fails to acknowledge that in 2003 Iran made a bona fide peace offer to the US that could have resulted in a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement -- IF the US had responded. Iran offered to cooperate in the Gulf, to disarm Hezbollah, to accept stringent IAEA oversight of its nuclear program, and even signed onto the 2002 Arab peace offer, indicating that Tehran was willing to live in peace with Israel -- provided the Palestinians received a measure of justice -- in the form of a state.
   
   As we know, the National Intelligence Estimate in November 2007 provides strong evidence that the 2003 Iranian offer was genuine. The NIE concluded that Iran abandoned work on its BOMB program in 2003, which -- notice -- coincides with the date of the peace offer. The real question, which Friedman never mentions, is why the US rejected the Iranian peace offer out of hand.
   
   Friedman also poo-poohs the 2002 Saudi peace offer, characterizing it as nothing but political posturing. He writes: "The Saudis had consulted nobody about the idea. which meant that this radical proposal didn't even have the backing of [prince] Abdullah's own government." (p. 244)
   
   This is total BS. In fact, the 2002 Arab peace offer had the backing of every member of the Arab League -- and again -- could have become the basis for an Isareli-Palestinian peace settlement -- IF Israel and the US had responded favorably. Both, however, simply ignored it.
   
   The Saudi Prince Abdullah actually went so far as to personally confront Bush about the Palestinian issue during his June 2002 visit to Crawford Texas. At that meeting Bush promised Abdullah that he would take steps to solve the Palestinian question. Of course, as we know, Bush did nothing of the kind -- because his idol Ariel Sharon opposed a peace settlement.
   
   Friedman is also dishonest when he writes about an Iranian BOMB --as if Iran already had nuclear weapons. When in fact they did not -- and do not. There is no excuse for his getting this wrong. As a self-described intelligence expert Friedman should have known this. We must interpret this "error" as a case of calculated deception on his part.
   
   
   Friedman's confused analysis of why the neo cons invaded Iraq fails to persuade -- and again -- we must conclude that the author is simply fibbing to us. Friedman fails to mention the obvious: that the war was largely about controlling Iraq's oil -- and had nothing to do with fighting terrorism. I would argue: It was also about destroying Iraq as a nation -- leaving Iraq prostrate so that it could never again challenge Israeli hegemony in the region. Now why couldn't an expert like Friedman simply tell the truth and state the obvious? Clearly, he has an agenda.
   
   Friedman gives a really bizarre justification for the US policy of arming BOTH Iran and Iraq during the bloody war which raged between these two nations between 1980-1986. He states that if either Iran or Iraq gained "the upper hand in the region it would try to sieze part or all of Saudi Arabia." (p 253) Which, again, is total nonsense. Why couldn't the author simply state the obvious: The US pursued a wicked policy of bleeding and weakening both nations for its own selfish reasons -- and also to divert attention from Israel's continuing illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. It had nothing to do with protecting Saudi Arabia.
   
   Friedman also repeats the lie that Saddam Hussein kicked out the UNSCOM inspectors in 1998. This lie has been told so frequently that it has taken on a life of its own. But Scott Ritter, the chief UNSCOM weapons inspector, knows what actually happened because he was there. According to Ritter it was Bill Clinton who ordered out the UN inspection team, on the eve of a major US bombing campaign in late 1998, Operation Desert Fox, which was an attempt by the US to assassinate Saddam Hussein. Indeed, this is why the Iraqi leader then refused to allow the inspectors to return. He correctly accused the US of using the UN inspection effort to gather intel about Saddam's whereabouts in an attempt to take him out. Ritter affirms this is what actually happened. Now, why couldn't Friedman get this right?
   
   What is Friedman's agenda? We get a clue from the author's discussion about the Madrid bombings in March 2004, which he attributes to al Qaeda. Yet, today, we know al Qaeda had nothing whatever to do with that attack, which ocurred shortly before major elections in Spain. The bombing was almost certainly staged by operatives of the ultraconservative Spanish government then in power -- as a way of terrorizing the Spanish people into re-electing that same government. They blamed it on Basque separatists. Fortunately, the false flag attack failed. The Spanish people saw through it -- and voted out Bush's allies -- in the process, electing a new populist government that immediately fulfilled its promise to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq -- consistent with the strongly anti war sentiment in Spain. Here, again, by misfiring, the author shows his true colors.
   
   Friedman is the founder and chairman of STRATFOR -- which claims to be an independent intelligence agency. However, I suspect he has links to the Israeli Mossad and maybe even to the CIA. The reader should beware: Read the book with a discerning eye -- because the author weaves many falsehoods between the lines. He is a liar.

5 comments about The Rage and The Pride.

1. Having written a factually accurate book she was condemned to death by the islamic hordes. They threatened, hounded, followed her and all of her family. She died a natural death quietly.
   A MUST READ for anyone that knows and understands the deadly threat coming from the cult of islam. Borrow, steal or buy, but read.



2. With a rare courage and honesty, Oriana Fallaci shinest the light of the truth and candid scrutiny on her country and the world- breaking a ten year silence after the horrific terrorist attacks in New York on September 11, 2001.
   
   A modern day version of Emile Zola's J'Accuse, Fallaci steps in boldly where most fear to tread, exposing the truths that all of us know but all fear to speak. Fallaci writes that this book was an effort to "open the eyes of those who do not want to see, to unplug the ears of those who do not want to listen, to ignite the thoughts of those who do not want to think"
   She does this admirably. She attacks Islamic fundamentalists and the arrogance of the politically correct elite whom she refers to as the "cicadas".
   Fallaci was a teenage partisan during the Second World War, fighting Mussolini's Fascist regime in Italy and was an intrepid journalist for decades, covering many wars and struggles. Fallaci writes of the frightening Islamic terror network which is growing like a cancer in Europe, protected by the politically correct Left, who manipulate or deny the evidence.
   She writes of her pride in her Italian culture and swears that if Moslem terrorists destroy any of her countrie's landmarks and treasures: "I swear: It is I who would become the holy warrior...War you wanted? War you want? As far as I am concerned war is war and war will be. Until the last breath."
   If their were more people like Fallaci in the West and Israel, we could certainly win the battle against the Islamo-Nazis and their cheerleaders on the international left.
   Fallaci aptly points out the reasons for Islamic terror:
   "Dont you see that all these Ousamas Bin Laden consider themselves authorized to kill you and your children because you drink alcohol, because you don't grow the long beard and refuse the chador or the burkah, because you go the theater and to the movies, because you love music and siing a song, because you dance and watch television, because you wear the miniskirt or the shorts, because on the beach and by the swimming pool you sunbathe or almost naked or naked, because you make love when you want or with whom you want..."
   She also attacks the politically correct hypocrites of the left who in the name of Humanitarianism revere the invaders and slander the defenders, absolve the delinquents and condemmn the victims, weep for the Taleban and curse the Americans, forgive the Palestinians for every wrong and the Israelis for nothing.
   
   You HAVE to read this book if you want to understand the great strugles the world is faced with at the dawn of the 21st century.



3. Let there be no mistake. This is a book that explodes with passion. Ordinarily that would give pause at the prospect of blind invective.
   But.... Fallaci's anger at the violent Islamists and their quiet co-religionists is exceeded only by her fury at a politically correct west that refuses to see our values as high ones, and refuses to see the existential threat facing us. Indeed, she is totally bent out of shape, and properly so, at our propensity to be so fair to everyone, that it reaches the absurd extent of viewing the openly presented Islamist threat to us as just a different culture we are supposed to understand. I can only hope that her book makes a positive contribution to waking us up, because, it is invective and personal, to be sure, but it is also based on horrific facts we must face, as a prerequisite to defending ourselves.



4. I will say right now (and warn those with more....*delicate* sensibilities) that this book will make you feel one of two emotions: love or hate. You'll either understand and see *exactly* what Oriana Fallaci wanted her readers to see and hear (she wrote a letter in an Italian newspaper, and this book is that letter plus added material that never made it into the paper), or else you'll vehemently deny all she has to say and call her a bigot, hate-monger, and anti-Islam. If you are part of the latter group, congratulations, you are the "cicadas" the very type of person she abhors for their willful denial of what is going around them regarding Islam.
   
   This book is no objective, detailed analysis of Islam. Fallaci states up-front that she is not ashamed to say what she has to say. The very first page after the preface, she states, "I am very, very, very angry. Angry with a rage which is cold, lucid, rational". This book's audience is mainly those who are still blind and deaf, in her own words: "a work which aimed at unplugging the ears of the deaf and opening the eyes of the blind".
   
   She is unafraid of what people think of her views, and the letter, later which became this book. The letter she wrote was in reaction to September 11 (she had left Italy, more like *driven* away by her detractors). She broke her years of silence, because in her words: "there are moments in Life when keeping silent becomes a fault, and speaking an obligation". No longer able to stay silent, in the after-math of September 11, as shocked and horrified as any American, she wrote long and furiously. All her sorrow, rage, and passion came out onto paper. The result was what she called, "a scream of rage and pride".
   
   Fallaci pulls no punches. She doesn't sugar-coat her words for the easily offended. She is blunt, brutally honest, and scathing in her opinion of her politically correct-minded country (which, she doesn't hesitate to add, also includes all of Western Europe). She laments how this political correct establishment turns a blind eye to the terrorists in their midst, all the while harping and hating America and its own identity as a country and people. She rails against this establishment that would rather willingly submit to a culture that suppresses ideas and freedoms and individuals and appease, than to stand up and be courageous.
   
   This book also doesn't mince words when it comes to describing the atrocities committed by the terrorists or how the mass Muslim immigration to her country (and the rest of Western Europe) is slowly, but surely causing it to rot from the inside. For her willingness to state bluntly how she felt about the terrorists and Islam, she received death threats, but continued to voice her opinions that were *not* politically correct. For this she was demonized and hated.
   
   The Rage and The Pride was a refreshing book, refreshing in that Fallaci said what she meant and meant what she said. No spin, or skirting of the issue, or waffling on an issue. She was one of the rare people in our overly sensitive and prickly society that didn't give a damn what other people thought. The truth is not always a pretty picture and *must* be told, and she understood this. It's a shame Fallaci passed away. I also recommend reading While Europe Slept: How radical Islam is destroying the West from within by Bruce Bawyer in addition to this book.



5. Fallaci here is not telling the world anything that it does not know...she is just reminding them. All the many abuses waged against the Western world by Islamic culture are collected and retold in this small volume, since we in the ever-tolerant West are always apt to forget them. She reminds us that it is not a question of how to coexist, but a stark reminder that coexistence is impossible. Their very religion/culture teaches that to coexist with the "infidel" is a sin.
   
   Fallaci's "sermon" is heartening because it can, and does in several spots, give the America reader something that he desperately needs--a morale boost from a foreign source. We get so used to hearing the world cat call us and to watching them burn our flags, that sometimes we forget why we bother to help anyone. Fallaci reminds us that there are some out there (even in Europe) who not only respect America but love it "like a husband", as Fallaci writes.

5 comments about Longitudes and Attitudes: The World in the Age of Terrorism.

1. Any thoughtful person will be outraged by at least a few of these essays. I cannot tell which ones those will be--because, dear reader, I do not know your politics. I do know that when it comes to the Middle East, everyone seems to have an opinion and as Thomas Friedman in this book challenges virtually all of the commonly-held ones (on the left and the right alike) it is quite likely that you, like me, will mutter over some essay "You utter idiot." But I hope you won't put the book down.
   
   For Thomas Friedman (unlike so many) has the courage to gaze into the heart of darkness in the Middle East that made 9/11, the Islamists' war against the West, and their war against the Jews possible. And Thomas Friedman reports what he sees.
   
   He tells us that our Arab partners do not present "an alternative positive view of America [in their countries]--even though they were sending their kids here to be educated." He tells us that "the terrorists can exploit the Interned.. but in their suffocated world.. they could never invent it." He tells us that "these terrorists aren't out for a new kind of coexistence with us. They are out for our nonexistence." He tells about how a friendship with an Arab Muslim intellectual disappeared when the intellectual questioned him about how Jews run the world and he tells us how frustrated the Jordanians are that the intifada and not the remarkable Jordanian reforms are dominating Jordanian news.
   
   In short, Thomas Freidman refuses to conform to facile "truths" of today; he refuses to look away. You may, at times find him frustrating and angry; you may get angry with him. But you will not find him substituting fashionable ideology for what he sees. For that reason, I recommend his book.



2. I normally don't read non-fiction books about world affairs, maybe because I suspect the author has a hidden agenda, and after reading this book I still feel the same way. I have heard Thomas Friedman a few times on NPR being interviewed by Terry Gross and found what he has to say captivating. Once finding myself staying in my car 20 minutes extra to listen to the end of the conversation. As for this review; I might enjoy his later books more, this one was written in 2001 - 2002 and felt a lot like backtracking in the past. Still interesting enough to recommend.



3. I only wish Tom Friedman worked in our government, however, maybe he would then be less influential than as a writer.....I find I agree with 90% of what he says.....Brillant....



4. I've read every book that Thomas Friedman has written, and they are all exceptional. Friedman seems to meet everybody significant regarding the subject at hand, and has listened with an open mind. He thinks outside the box, and the proposed solutions he comes up make a lot of sense. His reporting is extremely well-balanced and done with great heart. His documentaries on TV are of equal caliber.



5. This book is an informative look at current middle east Arab thought from a somewhat unconventional pro-Israel viewpoint, which deserves to be read, but should be supplemented. Friedman is a thoughtful and creative thinker as evidenced by his book The World is Flat. In Longitudes he reprints his newspaper columns from around 9-11 to the time the US invaded Iraq, which at times is repetitive, but gives a good account of his thought development at the time. His main thesis is that Arab anger toward the US stems from bad leaders, bad governments, and not primarily from Israel. His line of reasoning therefore encouraged the nation building policies that led our country into the Iraq debacle. He sees the Palestinian issue as a poor excuse for violence, and 9-11. He blames Arafat for the breakdown in peace talks, though the offer he was given was not at all fair. He implies that Arafat did not work toward peace which is in line with neo conservative thinking. Though he has been criticized by neo conservatives for calling for an end the West Bank settlements, his views still fail to take into consideration the level of importance of the Palestinian issue to Arabs and the gross injustice the Palestinian peoples have through the years have endured at the hands of the Israelis, and their primary benefactor and arms supplier the US. His view doesn't adequately explain the cheering Palestinians on 9-11. He thinks that all the Arabs need to do is form democratic governments, recognize Israel. But Israel continues its repressive policies toward Palestinians. The solution to the Palestinian problem is going to require more than democracy. Note that Israel bombed the civilian population democratic country of Lebanon with cluster bombs in 2006 with full US support. Read this book, but also read The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy by Mearsheimer and Walt which outlines the degree to which the Israel lobby and US neo conservative policy has supported Israel's aggression. Then you will understand the problem.

5 comments about Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad.

1. This exciting and mesmerizing read is a represents a collection of writings spanning the years 2002 to 2007 analyzing Israel, the global Jihad, Europe, America and the Middle East. These were originally columns written by Caroline Glick, a veteran commentator on Israel who served in the IDF, as an advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and reported on the Iraq war. She provides excellent and jarring critiques of many of the issues facing Israel and the West today. Her viewpoints are both original and incisive.
   
   The writings are divided into ten themes including the Iranian threat, the Islamist threat to the world, the Iraq war and Disengagement. The critiques provided offer a very rich collection of assaults on the kinds of opinion that are either mainstream or `right minded'. Fania Oz-Salzberger of Haifa University is taken to task for her comparison of the situation of Muslims in Europe today with the situation of Jews in Europe in the 1930s. The article notes that "drawing parallels between the subjugation and genocide of European Jewry during the Holocaust and the treatment of European Muslims today runs dangerously close to Holocaust denial." Another article once again sheds light on the Kastner affair and shows that any attempt to rehabilitate his name (Kastner was a Hungarian Jew who saved the lives of 1,600 Jews but did not warn other Jews of their fate and saved people due to family and financial connections) constitutes an assault on history. Another excellent article dares to examine the media's role in creating various `blood libels' to implicate Israel and the U.S in `war crimes'. Glick is at her best excoriating `human rights' organizations such as Hamoked and Machsom Watch for their double standard of only caring for Palestinian Human Rights and never proving any help to Israeli victims, who also deserve human rights. In one the best and perhaps controversial articles the reader is shown how Europe has turned the Holocaust into a fetish, building memorials while working to destroy the present Jewish state.
   
   Collections of published essays tend to make weak reading. They often lack context since they were originally published just after an event and thus provide no historical view and assume the reader recalls the event, which at the time seemed important. Although this collection suffers slightly from this it makes up for it due to the level of intelligence and depth displayed in the writings and it serves as an important testament to the threats to Israel that exist today.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman



2. Israel is America's canary in the coal mine. No one does a better job of demonstrating this canary's importance to World Peace, in general, and to America's well being, in particular - and to the danger to both should this canary be extinguished. Caroline Glick is both brilliant and acutely perceptive. She also has a writing style that is easy to read, which makes the depth of her thinking and the accuracy of her observations that much more readily available to her readers. Glick is one of my favorite observers of the turnoil in the Middle East, whose problems have been made to appear much more complex than they really are. The only real question - which most try to obscure, and which Ms. Glick places in relief - is Does Israel Have the Right To Exist? On a scale of 5 stars, Ms. Glick is a 10-star author with a 20-star mind. KEN ELIASBERG



3. The redoubtable Caroline Glick is an outspoken commentator with profound insight into cultural currents, political trends and strategic developments in Europe, North America, Israel and the Middle East. In this collection of columns written from 2002 to 2007 she identifies and analyses the major threats facing Israel and the West. She insists that security, not peace, should be Israel's priority. Considered confrontational by some, Glick boldly challenges wishful thinking, duplicity and denial. The reader is immediately struck by her earlier predictions and conclusions that time has proved correct.
   
   Arranged by theme, the chapters cover the war against the West and against Israel as its frontline representative, all aspects of the global Jihad, the Iranian threat plus the sinister nature of both the Jihadist & the Western appeasement ideology. Israel is the warrior shackled internally by a weak government, subversive political elite and treasonous academics & externally by its indecisive ally the USA, a hostile Europe and the international mass media that overwhelmingly subscribe to political correctness, moral relativism and multiculturalism.
   
   Glick highlights the gravity of the menace on the cultural, economic and military fronts, fearlessly charging Europe with betrayal, exposing the naivety of public discourse in the West and truthfully reporting the real goals of the Palestinian and Arab leadership as they themselves articulate it. In the war of ideas, academia is the source & the mass media the disseminator of anti-Western pieties du jour of which the seeming benevolence masks a toxin of self-loathing, she argues convincingly. Amongst the most informative and insightful chapters are those on the media war against Israel and the USA, including analyses of the techniques. The double standards of certain "human rights" organizations are likewise exposed.
   
   One example of the West's loss of confidence & fragmenting psyche is the divergence of rhetoric from reality. In the first place this phenomenon manifests in Western & Israeli gullibility - taking seriously the words of the enemy while turning a blind eye to its deeds. Secondly, the trajectory of Left-Liberal rhetoric on the terrorist threat has removed this ideological cluster so far from reality that people are noticing as evidenced by imploding newspaper sales, public distrust reflected in opinion surveys and the proliferation of dissenting voices in the blogosphere and other media.
   
   In Europe, those who dare warn of the threat are demonized by the consensus-über-alles elites or intimidated like Geert Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali who courageously defy the fate of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh. The media habit of lending equal weight to the statements of Western leaders and totalitarian monsters under the pretense of "objectivity" is offensive but overt moral relativism. When the media present opinion as fact or slant the news by selective reporting, deceptive headlines & the use of scare quotes, they cross the line into propaganda. When organizations like the BBC insidiously demonizes particular groups and undermines western values in its entertainment programs the process becomes downright sinister. And when western media knowingly disseminate Palestinian propaganda they become complicit in evil.
   
   Amongst her more disturbing observations are those - shared by French philosopher Chantal Delsol and authors like Bruce Bawer & Claire Berlinski - on Europe's rejection of the lessons of the Holocaust. The simplistic fallacies of nationalism being the ultimate evil & of war never being justified distort reality. The nature of nationalism, a neutral concept, must be judged by the manner of its expression. Pacifism permits evil to flourish; it is neither pious nor benevolent as it denies the concept of justice and even holds it in contempt.
   
   The lesson of the Holocaust is that each individual is obliged to distinguish between good & evil and then to fight evil. Those who refuse to oppose beasts like Hitler, Stalin, Milosevic, Saddam, Bin Laden, Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad are not good people. Indifference in the presence of evil is passive endorsement. How often must history repeat itself before people realize that they have a responsibility to oppose it, that neither they nor their children are immune to its destructive effects? The warning in an old song: "What comes to one must come to us all", remains true.
   
   The widespread cult of victim worship together with the projection of guilt has led to Holocaust fetishization in Europe. Glick contrasts the memorials to the dead with the anti-Zionist agenda of the intelligentsia and the political elites. The dead are cherished whilst the sins of their murderers are being projected onto their surviving descendants. She is aware that the contemporary Antisemite is sophisticated, often a left-leaning academic who views crude expressions of his obsession with distaste.
   
   Unmoved by Darfur, Tibet or Zimbabwe, he displays extraordinary fervor when it comes to the plight of the Palestinians. He heatedly defends Iran's right to acquire nuclear weapons (Israel has them!), and considers a unitary state the only solution to the ME conflict. He resents American hegemony whilst the idea of an "Israel Lobby" with undue influence on US foreign policy enchants him with an attraction erotique. Consciously or subconsciously, the existence of the Jewish State gnaws at his soul.
   
   Robert Kagan's The Return of History and the End of Dreams brilliantly complements Glick's work in which she considers the most critical perils to be Iran's ambition for regional hegemony through its nuclear program & support of terrorists like Hezbollah and Hamas, the spread of a totalitarian Islamist ideology, the West's vulnerability arising from its dependence on Arab oil and the role of worldviews that undermine our capacity for self-defense. She sees signs of hope in rising public awareness, the sober outlook of some western political leaders and religious figures like Pope Benedict, the dedication of individuals who speak out in defiance of the consensus and the internet's abolition of media monopolies. Glick's is a voice of wisdom that shatters delusion, appealing to the civilizational foundations of justice, reason, truth and mercy that survive within us.



4. I'm gonna treasure this book and this author. Man, she can write! She's got the strength, the talent, the courage and the spirit of a warrior, a poet, a decent patriot and freedom lover. She's the best of Israel and the West. This American-Israeli young woman has been on the ground, she knows the people she talks about, she lived what she talks about. She's got the strength of Sampson and the wisdom of Samuel. And the heart of Ruth. I love her.
   
   The themes she writes about are:
   
   -How the Democratic Party has turned to Radical Left positions;
   -the de facto existence of the State of Palestine and hos it is run by thugs and heartless criminals, worse than mafia-like;
   -the astronomic corruption they have with the billions given them by the UN (the West);
   -Israel's political landcape, the names, the facts, the stories;
   -the state of affairs in relevant countries like Nigeria, Philippines, Irak, Somalia;
   -the Anglican church;
   -how US foreign policy is being hijacked by the Saudi family and friends like Condoleeza Rice and Robert Graves;
   -constructive feedback on how to win the peace in Irak;
   -Vietnam revisited in brief;
   -anti-Jewish media in America and how they operate;
   -the Iran threat;
   -the social landscape of Israel, the state of their freedoms, the tyranny of their Supreme Court, a who's who in Israel;
   -the role of the press in Irak, undermining America's effort, causing more lives to be lost than saved by their stupid falling in for the enemy's propaganda;
   -the intelligentuse of propaganda by the Palestinians and how their willing serfs in the leftist media in America succumb to their deathly charm;
   -the totalitarian state of the Academia in Israel and America, a de facto harakiri of Israel. Asked about the rampant anti-semitism on European campuses, the president of the University of Paris says: "What do you want from us? All we are doing is repeating what we hear from Israeli profesors." Absolute intolerance for the notion that professors with right-wing or even centrist views should be allowed to teach in their departments (of Tel Aviv University): "Over my dead body!" said one professor;
   -how Al-Hurra Television started out, financed by American tax-payer money, as a liberal, pro-American alternative to Al-Jazeera, and soon allowed itself to be used as a platform by terrorists from Hezbollah right after former CNN producer Larry Register took control;
   -testimonies from the troops on the ground in Irak, the humble silent heroes of the West: "No matter what you do for these people they are going to hate us because they are jealous of what we have. These people haven't made a decent contribution to humanity for over a thousand years. They hate us for our accomplishements.", "hopefully, she'll understand (the soldier's little daughter) that America doesn't exist because of selfishness, but because of individuals who made sacrifices for the greater good." Regretfully, many adults in the Left don't want to understand it.
   
   About the author's stay with the Army in Irak: "I don't know what made me decide to come here, when the opportunity arose, I said yes without a second doubt. But I do know what I am getting out of this experience. I have found my America. And I have discovered that I can never leave Israel. It sits inside of me, stengthens me, and comforts me to the center of my soul."
   
   This girl is too much to be true, but thank God she is true! Boy, she can write, poetically and patriotically.



5. great book, wonderfully sagacious and intelligent author, is she single, i think i have found my "beshert" oh if she could only say hello to me. but seriously, this is a deeply thoughtful book about what i fear is happening to Israel and the Jewish people. should be read by all who truly care about peace and justice in the middle east.

5 comments about Let's Roll!: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Courage.

1. This is a Must read book about one of the heros on flight 93.It is abook about Todd Beamer's Life,how he lived it fully,His spiritual life then the fateful day.



2. This book is interesting and touching. It's just amazing how God helps people through their trials.



3. This incredible story really needs to be read in conjunction with "Into the Wild" / by Jon Krakauer.
   No two people are the same for we are all unique individuals. But both of these stories involve very bright people, surrounded by very supportive friends and systems. Both of the main characters and people around them came face to face with incredible tragedy. Some chose to rely on philosophy. Some became stronger and some went into a destructible tailspin. In my opinion, these two fantastic books illustrate that it all comes down to faith, character and personal choices.



4. This is an amazing woman with an amazing story to tell. Very easy read. Very thought provoking!



5. I have read this book three times already. Lisa Beamer is just one of thousands of people who, on September 11, 2001, lost a loved one and had her world turned upside down. I am so grateful that she shared her story.
   
   It is inspirational to me how strong her faith is. Through her trial, she chose to cling to God. And He provided for her, as He does for those who trust and obey Him.
   
   After reading several negative reviews of this book, I think it's obvious that those who hate God cannot understand or appreciate the Beamer's faith. Regretfully, maybe this isn't a book for you.
   
   But if you love the Lord, do read Lisa's story because she and Todd are examples of those who live this life for Him, even through trials and triumph.