2 comments about Full Metal Panic! Volume 9 (Full Metal Panic (Graphic Novels)).

1. Sadly, this is the last graphic novel for the FMP series, according to the illustrator's notes in the back of the book. That said,
   
   It does clear up and finish the main plot that has been building with Gauron, the Tuatha de Danaan, and Chidori. At the end of book 8, Kaname, worried about Sosuke as he returned from a mission, was verbally rebuffed by him and fled, crying, making her examine her purpose on board the TDD. As she flees, she runs into Guaron and two traitors, who hold her hostage and then take over the TDD in book 9!
   
   Gauron, to assert his power, reprograms the computer to listen only to him, and then commences an attack on an innocent battleship nearby, but only after setting up a false Fire Drill to isolate most of the crew. Sosuke, feeling as though something is wrong, and realizing that he had been harsh to Chidori, defies direct orders and joins Kurz in a mission to save the ship and Kamane, who is just as determine not to "be annoying" and to save herself. Then Tessa plays her hand to rescue the day and her crew, but it is Kaname that saves everybody at the end (not spoiling it!). For another variation, see the end of the DVD series--Kaname's part is beautiful!
   
   For more books on the FMP series, check out the Boku-Tachi website.



2. This is the final volume in the Full Metal Panic manga which brings it right up to the point where the first anime ended. Gauron has gained control of the Danaan and holds Tessa and Chidori's lives in his clutches. One false move and he won't hesitate to kill them. While Gauron knows that both of the girls are "Whispered" he has no idea that they can communicate telepathically. The girls hatch a desperate plan to take back control of the ship. Meanwhile, the Danaan's crew are virtual prisoners, locked by Gauron in the hangar, and he's thinking about cutting off their oxygen! Only Sousuke and Kurtz have gotten out and set out to rescue Tessa and Chidori, but they'll have to contend with some of the crew that turned traitor and now serve Gauron.
   
   If you've already seen the Full Metal Panic anime series, there's really nothing new here. But that doesn't detract from the enjoyment of seeing a different interpretation of the same material. Retsu Tateo's art is spot-on and she has handled the mix of humor and action quite elegantly throughout the entire series. Most of volume 9 is missing comedy but the artist does a good job of conveying the energy and suspense leading up to the final battle between Sosuke and Gauron. The manga does a better job of conveying the affection between Sosuke and Chidori than the anime did. I'm sad to see this series end.

5 comments about The West and the Rest: Globalization and the Terrorist Threat.

1. In this short but illuminating book, Scruton examines the political institutions of the West as regards the relation between religion and politics, and the threat of radical Islam. Briefly but with great clarity he explores the political history of West that gave us individual freedom, prosperity and the pursuit of knowledge. These pillars rest upon Greek thought, Roman Law and Judeo-Christianity. He points out that freedom needs to be defined and that it also needs restraints in order to continue to function. The success of the West is based on the practice of separating church and state, of recognizing the two different realms. This is the fundamental difference with Islam.
   
   Islamism is a totalitarian ideology precisely because the totality of society must submit to religion. The author argues that the political process in Western societies is what has made it so successful - western democracies are governed by politics while the Rest is ruled by force. In the West, the political process functions through negotiation and compromise. Religion and culture are binding principles but they do not prescribe. But with the collapse of these roots in much of the West, a vital defence of our culture is being lost. According to Scruton, the love of freedom alone is not enough for our civilization to survive. He considers the nation state as a precondition for democracy and the rule of law. Under Islam, the Sharia is the only source of law and there is no room for dissent.
   
   The UN is a club of gangsters. Most UN representatives do not represent the people of their countries but only the thuggish regimes that lord it over them. In addition, Western elites and radical Islamists both despise Western civilization. This is particularly pronounced in academia, the media and the entertainment community. This alienation manifests also in the Muslim immigrant communities in Europe that do not want to assimilate, enjoying all the benefits of their new society whilst at the same time hating it. There is a sick synergy between the immigrants and the elites that despise their own heritage.
   
   Scruton explains the modern roots of Islamic militancy by discussing Wahhabism, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Khomeini revolution in Iran. He rightly criticises the West's dangerous commitment to multiculturalism but I do not agree with his conclusions that globalisation fosters terrorism and that democracy is not suitable for "the rest." One need only look at successful democracies like Japan and India to see the fallacy here. Even Turkey, a predominantly Moslem country, has a somewhat flawed but functioning democracy.
   
   But overall, and for its multiple insights, this is a most valuable and enlightening work that provides much food for thought. Scruton is an original thinker and a gifted writer. I highly recommend The West And The Rest for those who are interested in history, culture and politics.
   
   Other recommended books that cover similar terrain include Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left by David Horowitz, The Force of Reason by Oriana Fallaci, Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild by Michelle Malkin, Hoodwinked: How Intellectual Hucksters Have Hijacked American Culture by Jack Cashill, Intellectual Impostures: Postmodern Philosophers' Abuse of Science by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont, Anti-Americanism by Jean-Francois Revel, The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left's Assault on Our Culture and Values by Tammy Bruce, and The Anti-Chomsky Reader by Horowitz and Collier.



2. 
   We're all asking what alienated the London suicide bombers to do what they did. This book offers some real insights into the Islamist state of mind.
   
   There are no easy solutions : the West now offers the Muslim immigrant welfare benefits, free education, free medical services and plenty of work on the illegal market (the European Union having priced work out of the official economy). What the immigrant won't find is any process of nation building so he lives in strict isolation; being a member of only his family and his immigrant community.
   
   The chapters on how the West built nations through shared language,shared religion, shared customs and a shared legal system (all absent from the European Union) are extremely thought provoking.
   
   Please read this book. I came to the conclusion some time ago that the nations of the West are giving up their countries. A price it seems we pay for freedom (freedom gone too far?).
   
   I am a fully integrated immigrant. I came to the UK at the age of six some 42 years ago and firmly believed that all immigrants would seek to become integrated. I failed to understand why this has not happened but this book along with some others I have read recently (eg Bernard Lewis: Islam in Crisis) have helped me to make some sense of the current situation.



3. Although relatively brief (161 pages) this volume is densely packed with careful analysis and incisive observation. Subtitled "Globalization and the Terrorist Threat," this book explores a number of related themes. A major thesis is how modern Western democracies differ from other types of societies in general, and the Islamic world in particular. His historical and philosophical investigations provide a framework in which to judge both the September 11 attacks, and the ongoing threat of Islamic terrorism.
   
   He begins by noting that social bonding can take place by means of either religion or politics. In the pluralistic West, social cohesion is mainly found in the form of the social contract, whereas in the Islamic world, religion alone provides that basis. Roman law and the Christian religion helped provide the basis for the social contract, as well as bring about the Western conception of the demarcation of the religious and political spheres.
   
   Islamic societies on the other hand know of no separation of religious and secular authorities, with religion the sole basis of the state. Just as the Communist party was a law onto itself, so "Islam aims to control the state without being a subject of the state". As a result, there are no political or social mediating structures between Allah and His will (Islam) and the submissive Muslim (Islamic citizen).
   
   The freedoms of a democracy, including the freedom to oppose the state, to vote for alternative parties, and to freely express dissenting opinions are thus not to be found in Islamic states. In theocracies, such dissent is just not possible. And given that Islam means submission, the good Muslim is an obedient Muslim.
   
   Both secular Western societies and Muslim societies have notions of membership. Membership in the West is made up of the voluntary, the tribal, the linguistic and the political. Muslim membership is credal, based only on the religious. The political process of the West allows for the separation of society from the state, while there is no such distinction in Islamic jurisdictions. Thus the political is the religious, whereas the genius of Western democracies is to separate the political from the rest of social and personal life.
   
   Democratic citizenship helps to limit state power and deter totalitarian temptations. However as the onslaught of radical individualism and secularism sweep the West, former loyalties and the sense of social membership are quickly giving way. As the concept of citizenship disappears, social membership is strained and the basis of democracies is undermined. In the light of such social and political fragmentation, the religious membership of Islamic societies stands in sharp contrast.
   
   However Islamic unity is based on force and power, not consent. Religious toleration, taken for granted in the West, is a foreign concept in Islamic societies. Islamic law applies to every aspect of life, and leads to the denial of the political. All is religious, and mediating structures are unheard of.
   
   While Christianity teaches us to give to Caesar what is his, in Islamic thinking nothing is Caesar's, everything is Allah's. All is religious because all is Allah's. Thus Islamic membership is all-embracing and all-demanding.
   
   But Western membership, or citizenship is unraveling, making Western democracies vulnerable and lacking in direction. Thus the inability of Western nations to unite against the real dangers of terrorism. Thus the mistaken notions of moral equivalence, where ruthless Muslim dictatorships are seen as no better or no worse than Western leadership. Thus the real possibility of the continued demise of the West coupled with a resurgent rise of Islam.
   
   Yes there are exceptions, such as authoritarian democracies (e.g Singapore) and democratic Muslim states (Turkey being the only real example). But Islamic nations are inherently undemocratic. The political freedoms we enjoy in the West are largely unheard of in Islamic societies. And while the majority of Muslims do not support terrorism and murder, enough do to make for a lengthy battle between the West and Islam.
   
   In the past Christians may have wrongly used the edge of the sword to command loyalty to the faith, but that has always been a perversion of Christ's gospel, not a fulfillment of it. But for a Muslim to take up the sword for Islam against the unbeliever is both sensible for a member of a theocracy and endorsed (at least in some interpretations) in the Koran.
   
   Indeed, terrorism and conquest have a long history in Islam. And modern Western-trained Muslims, backed with Western technology and the revenue of Arabian oil wells, have made for the kind of terrorism witnessed in New York and Bali. Many explanations and justifications for such terrorism have been put forward, but the truth is, as Scruton documents, "Islamism is not a cry of distress from the `wretched of the earth.' It is an implacable summon to war, issued by globetrotting middle-class Muslims".
   
   Since opposition cannot be found in Islamic countries, only a re-invigorated West can adequately deal with the terrorist threat (and Muslim terrorism against other Muslims is not uncommon). But this requires a renewal of the idea of citizenship and community, and a renunciation of radical versions of individualism and secularism. The religious (mainly Judeo-Christian) basis of Western democracies needs to be revived and encouraged not just in the private sphere but in the public as well.
   
   Thus Scruton's book is not only a warning about the anti-democratic makeup of Islamic societies, but a wake-up call to the West to re-explore its roots and re-establish its moral and cultural foundations. Without a revived West the prospects for the war against Islamic terrorism look bleak. But this volume helps to remind us that the stakes are high and some things are worth fighting for. Hopefully this book will serve as a much-needed call to action by the West. If not, we have much to fear from the future.



4. Scruton gives us a piercing concpetual analysis and deconstruction of the major qualities of Western and Islamic mindsets, motivations and goals, from political "liberal New York" to creed based Tehran. Of particular interest is his conclusion, based fully on what he considers the central tenets of the West. A must read and consideration for any citizen concerned about the state of the globe.



5. In keeping with his philosophical approach to 'political correctness' and censorship I am sure Scruton would be the first to welcome debate on this potentially seminal text. I can't help thinking, however that a man of Scruton's intellectual faculty doesn't take all that well to being criticised. (Wo)men of vision are often quite precious about their opinions and words, though they offer them to an arena of intellectualism, where debate and discourse is a foundation, if we don't 'get' them, then we are at fault and not they, I disagree.
   
   Though these ideas are not new, and now a shade dated, this is essentially a potentially brilliant text that sadly suffers on three (3) accounts,
   1) It is far too short and thus inconclusive.
   2) It is poorly edited, it rambles in parts, has insufficient chapters.
   3) It is very subjective in parts, but paraded as not being so; fiction dressed as fact. [It's important to understand Scruton is an intellectual, a thinker and not a journalist as could appear the case]
   
   Had Scruton gone with a major press, then surely he would have received better editorial guidance and the above mentioned points would have been corrected. However he didn't, and we have what we have; a work of great promise that never reached a conclusion. One also can't help but feel that Scruton is a prolific thinker/writer and is abound with ideas, ideas which he never quite takes to a satisfactory conclusion - as clearly demonstrated here.
   
   I think it would also be fair to say that as a man of genuine vision, Scruton's vision is somewhat narrower than the average person, and so he has a tendency to dismiss alternative ideas as non-sense. I'm thinking here of his scoffing resentment of the French public for purchasing a book on the alternative 9/11 theories. I think any intellectual would be wise to consider that what information is presented through any news media or government agency needs taking with a pinch of salt. And that a wider discourse of the facts should be welcomed. I think too that Scruton's founding argument, the 'gem' that probably lead him to conceive of this text, i.e. the 'Architectural argument' is vastly overplayed and drawn from the Tower of Babel myth, convenient 'facts' linked together to form a half-hypothesis.
   
   To Scruton's credit, however he does present the reader with more than enough ideas to send them away pondering the society and world which we have created. Most notably of interest is his thesis on the 'Social Contract', which is an idea worthy of its own publication. It's curious though, to note how he praises the United States as a model of this social contract, yet the reality is that America is essentially a vast expanse of land partially inhabited and by numerous different groups and sub-groups, all with their own agenda (and language) - the myth of America is just that, a myth. The 'United States' being a much better and more accurate label. The idea that The U.S. was founded on a common social goal and encompasses one and all in a nation where all is possible is quite literally an American 'Dream'. The reality is that The U.S. is a very fragmented society - almost as fragmented as the terrorists that threaten its idea of 'security' where there is no real 'yard stick' no official language and very little common ground. Scruton totally fails to pick up on this and instead regurgitates the myth that 'America' is a working model, when it clearly is not. In this case Great Britain would have been a far better example to use, but that's quite literally another story.

5 comments about Children of Cain: Violence and the Violent in Latin America.

1. Rosenberg demonstrates the extraordinary ability to reveal a nation's history through an anecdotal tale of one of its citizens. She begins with these individuals to show you the end product _ then retraces the steps of Latin America's dark, recent history to show you how a nightmare became real. Rosenberg not only tells the story of the downtrodden and displaced, but also the story of the "victors," or the elites. It would be difficult to sympathize with anyone responsible for the murder and torture that has plagued Latin America this century, yet Rosenberg reveals the fears of the persecutors, valid or not, with the same perception with which she portrays the persecuted. In addition to nightmarish governmental indifference and inhumanity from all sides, Rosenberg sums up each country's recent history in a brief and concise two or three pages. As a student of, and journalist in, Latin America, "Children of Cain" remains my most worn and dog-eared reference book. I see the faces Tina painted everywhere I go. Neophytes who yearn for a basic understanding of Latin America and seasoned scholars alike will come away with a better understanding of these national histories that seem so foreign. Reading "Children of Cain" will put everything you read afterward into context.



2. Not only has Ms. Rosenburg done a spectacular gob in writing an extremely readable book, she provides her audience vivid decriptions using a very personal approach that employs the use of specific people, their experiences and dilemmas. She also provides her audience with the neccessary historical and enviromental (social, politial and economic) information to put these personal and organizational accouts into the cotexts neccessary for reader to truely appriecate the psychology of the forces driving these extaordinary historical events.

   Moreover, Ms. Rosenburg provides the reader with six different cases from six differnet countries. From Escobar's Medellin to Argentina's "Dirty War", she examines and analyzes different types of violence motivated by unique sets of circumstances.

   I COULD NOT PUT THIS BOOK DOWN; A MUST READ FOR ANYONE INTERESTED IN LATIN AMERICA!




3. GREAT BOOK, the best at capturing the feel of what it is like living in many of the Latin American countries. I do wish she had gotten the opinion of teh peasants more thought. She seems to interview ONLY those in power, while it makes sense since many poor people are scared to talk about the real situation due to the consequences it might bring. A must read for all those who think the Monroe Doctrine and US intervention are a good thing. A bit disheartning thought, leaves you with a bit of a feeling that many of these countrie are without help.



4. I'm so glad someone recommended this book to me because I will never forget it, It's wonderful insight into latin America and it's societies. Great interviews and vivid desriptions of life in a place where life means so little to so many people.



5. This is the second book by Tina Rosenberg I have read. The first one was Haunted Land about Eastern Europe after the fall of communism, which I also highly recommend. I'm so pleased with Rosenberg's style that I'm after her book on South Africa as well.

   For almost a decade Rosenberg traveled through Latin America not shying away from really messy situations trying to make sense of a history of violence and very little respect for human rights. Tina experienced many of the situations herself such as being soaked with diluted acid by the police in the streets of Santiago, Chile, during marches against Pinochet or taking a nightmarish truck bed trip through guerrilla infested Peru. The Latin American economic, political and military elites also had their points of view captured by Rosenberg resulting, as far as I can tell, in a very well balanced collection of personal perspectives on the problem - violence in Latin America - intermingled with background historical information.

   Rosenberg is very competent in summarizing the recent history and the roots of violence in Latin America. The author brings the historical review to life by interviewing perpetrators and victims. Violence in Latin America as viewed by Rosenberg emanates from a history of inequality. The native populations and the unwillingly imported black slaves and their descendants have been for five centuries exploited and victimized by greedy white Europeans. The resulting instable societies in turn fall prey of guerrilla groups, organized crime, drug lords, or the old fashioned military economic and political elites. The victimized population looses faith in the state and became passive or takes matters on their own hands solving social problems or even threatening or overthrowing governments. To tip the balance back the oligarchies can inevitably count on the CIA for supposedly counter insurgency help.

   It's a chilling book with no solution on sight and Rosenberg didn't even include some remarkable facets of violence in Latin America such as domestic violence in a notably sexist society and the petit and not so petit common crime. Colombia is the first market worldwide for bulletproof cars - Brazil is the second.

   It's an important book mainly for American readers since it shows the impact of American interference. Sadly it offers no solution - maybe there isn't.

   Leonardo Alves - Tucson, Arizona - June 2002

5 comments about Barn Burning Barn Building: Tales of a Political Life, From LBJ to George W. Bush and Beyond.

1. Why would anyone read a book about a Texas politician whose political career, which never reached higher than lieutenant governor, spanned a total of twelve years from 1960 to 1972?
   First, Ben Barnes is a Texan, which means he can spin a hell of a good yarn. Second, his friendships with national political leaders during one of the most dramatic periods of political change in the nation's history put him at the center of the controversy. Third, he continues to be active in the political arena--former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle once called him the "51st Democratic Senator." And, finally, in a manner similar to that described in J. Brian Smith's John Rhodes, Man of the House, Barnes practiced the true spirit of the bipartisanship before it became just another rhetorical tool to undermine one's opponents.
   
   This is a tale of the fall of the Texas Democrats from almost complete control of the state to the status of a minor party and links that to the fall of the national Democratic party. "Where once the names Johnson, Rayburn, and Connally were synonymous with political power, the 21st century brought us Bush, Rove, and DeLay."
   
   Democrats are still asking, "'How did we get to this point?' and "Where do we go from here'?" In response, Barnes begins when Democrats ruled the roost and shows how events, large and small, created cracks in what was once thought an unshakable foundation. The value of the book is that he largely succeeds. (Ironically, many of the cracks in the Democrat's apparently invulnerable foundation seem to be appearing today in the Republican Party.)
   
   The Democratic rise to power began with Franklin Roosevelt's first presidential victory in 1932, and Texans were in power virtually everywhere--including getting one of their own, John Nance "Cactus Jack" garner, elected VP. It also didn't hurt that Texans headed eight of the major House Committees. Sam Rayburn emerged as one of the most powerful Democrats in the country, starting his run as the longest-serving Speaker of the House in 1940. When Lyndon Johnson took over the leadership of the Senate in the 1950s, it was hard to imagine how the Texas or national Republicans could ever recover.
   
   Barnes came somewhat late to the game in 1959, at 22 winning a seat in the Texas State Legislature. Born on a central Texas farm in Comanche county, he grew up thinking long hours and hard work were simply the way everyone lived. His first experience with the power of government came during the depression, when Roosevelt forced through the Rural Electrification Administration which brought electricity to the farms in rural Texas.
   
   "From then on," he writes, "I thought of government as something that helped make people's lives better." He also cites Sam Rayburn who said, "Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one....These days there's a lot more barn burning in politics than barn building." Barnes was determined to be a barn builder.
   
   He was brilliant, pragmatic, and, most of all, driven to succeed. "That first year I made it my goal to visit every single of the other 149 members of the house." He'd shake their hands, admit to being young and wet behind the ears, and told each how much he'd appreciate them letting him know if he screwed anything up. He asked for advice and offered help on their legislative programs.
   
   However, the Democratic dominance in Texas had long carried the seeds of its own destruction, dating back to the early 20th century and the battle over prohibition with liberals against it and conservatives--mostly from dry counties--for it. Over time, the conservatives gained the advantage by positioning themselves as pro-business as the oil, gas, aviation, and other industries flowed into the state, and, as is almost always the case, with money comes power and influence. The liberals focused more on social issues.
   
   The irony is that the same seeds that were growing into thick weeds in Texas were also affecting the national party.
   Barnes had a knack for making powerful friends, including John Connally (who as governor was riding in the car and injured when John Kennedy was assassinated,) Sam Rayburn, Lyndon Johnson, Robert Strauss, Barbara Jordan, and a host of other powerful D.C. pols. But by 1960, when there was no external enemy against whom to rally the troops, the internal dissention flared. The two factions--liberals versus moderate/conservatives--had maintained an uneasy alliance, "but absolute power is a dangerous thing."
   
   A major rift occurred in 1952 when conservative Texas Democrats suddenly found themselves more in alignment with Republicans than their own party. Then Texas Governor Allan Shivers, furious over the Truman's administration's position on mineral rights issues in the Gulf Of Mexico, started "Democrats for Eisenhower in 1952 and '56." The state twice voted for a Republican president.
   
   As the dissention continued, the potential for healing it came in 1960 with Lyndon Johnson's presidential run. It wasn't to be, and Johnson accepting the number two slot turned out to be "so divisive, in fact, that some have argued that the downfall of the Texas Democratic party can be traced to that moment." Johnson's allies as well as many others couldn't believe that he would support someone perceived as so liberal; in addition, they didn't think Kennedy had a chance of success.
   
   The Kennedy/Johnson victory didn't help, although it temporarily covered over problems as the Democrats nationally and in Texas dominated the political landscape. But the underlying issues were growing more divisive. "This was the essential mistake the Texas Democratic party made during these years....They'd start to devour each other in fits of spite, allowing the Republicans to gain vital footholds in the state," such as the election of Republican John Tower as a Texas Senator and the beginning of the exodus of Texas conservative Democrats to the enemy.
   
   Barnes' climb up the political ladder was as impressive as it is instructive. Taking bipartisanship to heart, he got along with almost everyone, although not without making a few costly mistakes along the way. He also treated every event as a learning opportunity. After the assassination of John Kennedy, a meeting with now President Johnson and Connolly, where they fought over what to do about Bobby Kennedy, "pointed up the continuing problem...of ill feeling between the liberals and moderates."
   
   The tragedy is that, even though Johnson took up Kennedy's legislative agenda--in particular, civil rights--and succeeded where the latter had failed, that did nothing to ease the intense dislike between Johnson and Bobby Kennedy and their respective camps.
   
   Soon after the 1965 Voting Rights Act was signed into law, Johnson told Barnes, "' Ben, I'm proud of these Civil Rights bills, but they're going to hurt the party in the long run'." This anecdote is just one of many that make this book so valuable: Johnson, the consummate power-hungry politician, sacrificing his party for a nobler cause.
   
   He was right. Southern conservative Democrats began a shift that eventually turned the south into a Republican stronghold, when, despite Johnson's landslide victory over Barry Goldwater in 1964, Goldwater carried five deep-south states.
   
   Throughout the `60s, Barnes gives credit to Governor Connally for holding the Texas Democrats together despite the ongoing feuds. By then Barnes was the 26-year-old Speaker of the House and supported both Johnson and Connally in their progressive agendas to build bridges between the business community and the progressive side of the party. "This is another element of the party's strength that we've lost today; we need to find and cultivate business leaders who care about more than just profit, and who'll work with us to improve the state." The same applies nationally.
   
   On March 31, 1968, Lyndon Johnson announced that he would not run for president, and that "immediately changed everything about the game, both nationwide and in Texas [which] for the first time in decades, lack a national leader in Washington." Connally had already announced he wasn't running for governor again. Texas Democrats were on the verge of meltdown. And when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated just over two months later, on June 5th, there was no national Democratic leader of his stature to take over.
   
   The Vietnam War was tearing the country apart, Martin Luther King's assassination just four days after Johnson's announcement, inflamed both blacks and whites, and the Democratic Convention in Chicago that year was a disaster for the party.
   
   Nixon's campaign created the new Republican playbook that's still in use today: "Divide and conquer, using the rawest, most emotional issues in American life as a bludgeon and wedge." While the Texas Democrats did well in the 1970 elections, they didn't know that Nixon had already targeted them. Securities and Exchange Commission investigations, illegal IRS audits, and Justice Department investigations not only took down Barnes, but, as he says, "Nixon had orchestrated the destruction of Texas Democrats." The infamous Nixon tapes verify Barnes' claim.
   
   Nationally and in Texas, the Democrats were in freefall. Connally became a Republican, partially to run for president but also because of his disgust with the '72 convention that nominated George McGovern.
   
   Barnes concludes with an analysis of the difference between Texas and the country under Republicans and Democrats, and, given what he'd gone through, one can excuse excesses such as when he says of the 1988 Bush/Dukakis race, "For the first time in American politics, a candidate ran primarily on a platform of tearing down his opponent."
   
   But he is right that, "Today, that kind of negative politicking is everywhere you look." Both sides have demonized the other, and "political discourse...has turned into little more than name-calling." As a politician with the ability to skillfully maneuver the shark-infested waters of government, he also believed that government had a responsibility to the people, and he demonstrated that over and over.
   
   "Today's politicians too often govern with an eye on the next election, rather than on the future, and the people they represent are suffering as a result."
   
   "Barn Burning, Barn Building" is an important book. In an era of cynicism and distrust, it reminds us of a time when government and politicians believed in more than their own self-aggrandizement.



2. Damned good book about a time not too long ago, when there were gentlemen of integrity leading us; men and women who cared deeply about the future of their state and country.
   
   They walked the talk ....



3. I thoroughly enjoyed this book by Ben Barnes, even as a diehard Republican and former Republican congressional aide. It is well written, concise, and tells a story that moves along quickly and keeps the reader's attention since there are no extraneous details to bog one down. The story is one of Barnes's meteoric rise through the ranks of Texas Democrat politics, after graduating fron the University of Texas, as state house member, Lieutenant Governor, and candidate for Governor - all the while serving as a sounding board and kitchen cabinet member for President Lyndon Baines Johnson and Governor John Connally. It is also the story of how the LBJ and Connally Democrat machine in Texas ultimately gave way to the John Tower/George H.W. Bush/George W. Bush/Karl Rove Republican machine. Barnes also tells the interesting story of his part in the controversial placement of George W. Bush in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.
   
   There is very little Democrat partisan posturing, and such occurs only at the very end of the book, where I think Barnes could do a better job of admitting, reporting, and codemning (despite his experience as a target of the Richard Nixon enemies list) the politics of personal destruction that both parties have practiced. I would have also liked to see Barnes report more about the conversion of John Connally from LBJ Democrat to Richard Nixon Republican given how much time he spent with Connally as a political crony and business partner.
   
   It seems to me that Barnes tells some wise political lessons that national politicians of all stripes can learn from - keeping discourse and debate civil, reaching out to those on both flanks, building individual relationships, establishing personal trust and integrity, and choosing policies from both conservative and progressive spectrums in order to attract the broadest possible coalition - especially in an era where an undeclared war (in Iraq) threatens to undermine current Republicans much as it did the Democrats and LBJ in the 1960s.
   
   I can understand why LBJ thought and spoke so highly of Barnes, who clearly has a gift and passion for politics. His stories are fascinating and include many sagacious political observations that those interested in history and public policy can learn a lot from.



4. Ben Barnes, together with Lisa Dickey, produces a whirlwind political autobiography covering Barnes’s twelve years in elected office. In a quick, engaging style Barnes tells of the events that inspired him to contemplate the political life, and how he, an unknown 21-year-old, defeated a popular local war hero to win a seat in the Texas house. The narrative flows in a modest, vernacular style, providing an insider’s account into some of the most pivotal moments of the twentieth century. Barnes, through his roles as associate to Jim Connolly, governor of Texas, and leading member of the planning committee, reveals details of the incidents that led up to President Kennedy’s tragic trip to Dallas. The only other person in the room when Gov. Connolly let loose on Hubert Humphrey, he provides an inside account of the dramatic Democratic convention of 1968. Later, Barnes witnesses Connolly browbeat Pres. Nixon into resurrecting the political career of George H.W. Bush. And finally Barnes provides a first-hand account of the dirty politics of Nixon, who used all the power at his command to end his political career, defeating LBJs confident predictions that Barnes would become President.
   
   Among these historical events, Barnes provides an entertaining and eye-opening account of his political life as member of the Texas house, then Speaker, and finally as lieutenant governor. Through it all, he emphasizes his observations of what works in politics, and what doesn’t. He shares his wisdom about the need of Democrats to engage business leaders to join in the efforts of creating progressive policy in response to social needs. Barnes stresses the necessity that politicians think not just of their immediate needs and projects, but to think of the people’s long-term needs and goals, and what must be done to reach them. His prime example of this is LBJ, who wounded his own Democratic party for the greater good of advancing civil rights. Finally, Barnes laments today’s incivility and breakdown in communication between parties, a hostility which results in policies detrimental to our long-term, and even short-term, interest.



5. I was drawn to this book when I read in the obituaries for Lady Bird Johnson that the blurb she wrote for Barnes' book was the last thing the talented former First Lady wrote for publication and that, oddly enough, the blurb he has on the back of the book from Ann Richards was the last thing SHE wrote as well. It shows you, don't write blurbs for Ben Barnes I guess! Now I'll be waiting for the other blurbers to kick off, a new version of the internet "Death Pool," and I'll tell you, neither of them are spring chickens and one of them--Walter Cronkite--is already in the top 75 of the Death Pool list.
   
   Oh well, in any case the book is a good read, particularly for those of you who, like me, don't know much about Texas politics. Barnes was a mere boy when he was elected to the Texas Legislature, when he quickly became the pet of aging speaker Sam Rayburn, the man they called "Mr Everything," and befriended Governor John Connally and President Lyndon Johnson. Ben came from the hill country, in the days before electricity came in and changed everything, and in this book he gives us a quick glimpse of what Camelot was like for a really young man with a lot on the ball and a lot of ambition. Texas Democrats were riding high back then, but within ten years it was all to change, and this story, which of course mirrors the larger political story of the bigger US, is sobering indeed. Barnes doesn't hesitate to name names, and he blames LBJ for pushing civil rights issues so hard that he alienated the conservative element that might have given in with more grace if given more leeway. At the same time he knows that it was the right thing to do, just a path that led to unfortunate developments which the Democrats' traditional enemy found a way to exploit and overturn.
   
   At the beginning of the book, Rayburn whispers to Barnes that the significant event of the 1960 election was not that JFK won the thing, but that "Richard Nixon got hisass beat." Like a phoenix however, Nixon was to rise again and by the end of the book he had destroyed the Democratic hegemony of Texas and it has never really recovered. Barnes outlines the incredible "dirty tricks" campaign that brought him down. Strange to think that this rising young star, a young man whom LBJ said he would support "money, marbles, and chalk" became a hasbeen by the time he was 33--sort of like a rock star. He had red hair, sort of like Opie, but that crinkly kind so that in black and white newsphotos of the 1960s his head looks like it was topped with a waffle cone, the kind they sell at Carvels. He pleads with us to return our nation to the spirit of generosity and non partisanship that led to the creation of the Peace Corps. He has a whole "back to good government" program which will not please the Bush family, but so be it.

4 comments about Quiller Solitaire (Quiller series).

1. There is a lot more info on the Quiller series at www.quiller.net, a fan site.



2. Elleston Trevor honored me with a rare author's proof and I have a particularly soft spot for this Q caper, not least because it demonstrates his nom-de-plume Adam Hall's absolute determination to give readers full value, starting with each story sending Q down an even more suicidal hole than the one before.
   
   Of all the adventures, 'Solitaire' is the one that most resoundingly drives home a lesson taught by 9/11, namely that you can wire and bureaucratise your spook setup all you like, but it counts for naught unless you have the requisite 'ferrets' working the dark side and able to deliver the right intelligence for the automatons to crunch.
   
   This is an assignment Q wants - badly. He owes a man a death and he'll get it. Mission: thwart a terrorist group, for which (as so often) Q needs to be drawn into the opposition's den.
   
   The 9/11 connection takes the form of Quiller aboard a jetliner with only seconds to defuse a bomb.
   
   My opinion is neither here nor there: everything this spymaster poet delivered was exquisite and brutal and this is one of his best. With book trade heros like Otto Penzler doing their thing, we'll perhaps see Hall recognized for the master he is, and a new generation of readers flock to the Quilliad.
   
   Full marks to Amazon's editors of these reviews to permit the link to the fine homage page to Trevor's work.
   
   Anyone who enjoys top-rate thrillers and hasn't yet discovered Quiller is in for a major treat.



3. ...this author did to the spy thriller--don't be put off by the number of pages, each is fast-paced and the writing style is both accessible as well as being completely original--with all the hoopla over Brosnan quitting the Bond series, Broccoli and co. could do no wrong using this character and series as a template--HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!



4. This was the first "Quiller" novel I have read and I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys a "thinking persons" book. It read a chapter at a time only to be put down to absorb the logic and planning of Quiller. I won't give anything away, but reading Robert Littel's endorsement was chilling...if the CIA didn't read this book, perhaps some others did. This is a good read and I hope you enjoy it as I did.

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

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



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

No comments about The Roots of Terrorism (Democracy and Terrorism).

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

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



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

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




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

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

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

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

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

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

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




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



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

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

5 comments about It's a Free Country: Personal Freedom in America After September 11 (Nation Books).

1. ...... is what this country is supposed to stand for. This book clearly shows how these ideals as well as the democracy which made this country great have all been swept under the carpet in the name of 'safety". This book contains numerous articles written by liberals AND conservatives alike, many which review what terrors have resulted in the name of 'tyranny over democracy' throughout history, in this country and in other countries. Terror is a fitting word because there we can see a more subtle yet ultimately just as dangerous form of 'terrorism'. Not only does it effect the thousands of people who have their lives destroyed by injustice, it also jeopardizes all our lives, since we have relinquished our power as Americans to one individual. America IS Americans (remember "by the people, for the people"?), and this book beautifully encompasses this theme. It isn't a question of left-wing or right-wing. Over three thousand people of all political persuasions, all religions, and all ethnic backgrounds died together in the terrible incident on 9/11. Most but not all were Americans. This book enables us to see the myriad ways in which the terror of 9/11 is still continuing. If the America of 'liberty freedom and justice for all' is destroyed, then Bin Laden and his followers have won. What we stand for means nothing if we sweep it under the carpet when it is most needed.



2. A wide variety of contributors make this book a useful counter to the rush towards war abroad and away from civil liberties in this country. Some are funny, some tragic, but all the pieces are thoughtful and thought-provoking.



3. Three more copies en route because we vote with our money.
   Applauding those who dare to speak when Newspeak
   (and goldbergism via scarboroughbot) prevails and reagan
   movies are censored by rove-rush-religious-reich-robots
   is the least we can do in these times before the pendulum
   swings back toward equilibrium of some sort..;>

   May the public's awakening, evidenced by book sales
   and righteous reactions to lying war-makers, occur in
   our lifetimes. May more notice who is on first, who

   benefits and where the money comes from and goes to
   make media fear its own shadow. These contributors are
   a brave lot. Castigated and cartooned by minions of
   the rush-on-drugs-daily, they act and speak as if our
   beloved country is not already lost. They restore hope.




4. Every dictator recognises the power of fear. It's the chief rationale for controlling dissent. Justice for minorities can be shelved. The most blatant acts of government can be excused in the name of "security". This collection of essays by a wide spectrum of lawyers, writers, observers demonstrates how the Bush regime is using fear to consolidate power and undermine the democratic traditions of the United States. It has happened in the past, several of the writers note - the Alien and Sedition Acts of John Adams' administration, the Palmer Raids of World War I and the Japanese herded into concentration camps under the Roosevelt administration. While these events set a precedent, none reached the intensity nor had the far-reaching social impact the current regime has instituted since 2001-09-11.

   The various authors examine the historical roots of stifling dissent in the USA. They explain what prompted governmental repressive acts and how these were implemented. Public reaction was usually swift and expressive, if not originally successful. Ultimately, protest and legal action led to disavowal or rejection of the acts or policies. With the Bush regime having declared the "war on terror" to be long-term, if not indefinite, note several authors, the new repression will endure and likely intensify. This presents the public with a new challenge. Even the normal, traditional mechanisms of countering repression have been curtailed, almost without the public noticing. This book, incorporating a variety of political orientations, points up the fact that democracy is more fundamental than party. Rights, the authors stress, are an issue of law, not campaigns. In particular, these essayists note, restricting freedoms to improve security is a false idea.

   It is clear from this book that the barrage of unconstitutional declarations by the regime are not instrumental in defeating or preventing "terrorist" activities in North America. These directives and policy statements are designed to impose a reactionary, even dictatorial, social and political structure in the United States. The collection is a warning signal both to residents and citizens of that nation and elsewhere to scrunitise carefully any pronouncements deemed to "increase security". Reference to the "porous Northern border" of the United States in the Introduction is a clarion call to Canadians to read this book and follow events here and in the US closely. With the Bush regime applying pressure on various countries to conform to its methods and accept his dictums, we must maintain a wary eye on our neighbour's intrusions.

   While the attempt to gain the widest political and social spectrum of writers and commentators to expose the legal terrorism by Bush and Rumsfeld is laudable, the message here is blurred by repetition. We all agree the WTC attacks were "horrific" but the editors might have applied a thesaurus to reduce the number of times the word is used. The incarcerated men and children at Camp X in Guantanamo have no civil rights, and their legal rights have been curtailed by illegal declarations by the Bush regime. One solidly researched and well-written essay on that topic would have sufficed, even if multiple-authored. The same standard might have been applied to some of the other topics. While it's essential to the survival of democracy to be aware of how Bush, Rumsfeld and the rest are shredding the American Constitution, this collection stumbles slightly in the effort. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]




5. This is quite a good book filled with a large number of articles about the political freedoms in the USA a year after 9/11.
   
   As would be expected with the contributors, there is not a great deal of love to the Bush Administration or its handling of the nation in this time period.
   
   The articles (as the editors state) tend to get repetitious after a while, so the second half of the book is more of a speed read in certain sections.
   
   I found this book to be thought-provoking.