5 comments about Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush.

1. This book is a well researched and documented examination of the excesses of the Bush/Cheney presidency and how this came to be. In the book, Dean looks at the issues of secrecy within the White House, lying and dirty tricks. And, if there is anyone, anywhere who knows more about this subject I would love to see who they are.
   
   Dean does a wonderful job of comparing and contrasting the current regime with the Nixon presidency and writes in a clear, concise and easy to read manner. I look forward to reading his other 2 books, as to learn more about what has gone wrong with the current Republican Party.
   
   This is a must read for any American who wants to see this country remain free!



2. Worse Than Watergate by John Dean is worth reading just because of the title and who he is. John Dean, counsel to the Nixon White House, says that the Bush/Cheney White House is "worse than Watergate" -- that is like Jesse Ventura calling someone an obnoxious loudmouth! The book was published in 2004, ahead of the presidential election, so by the time I found it on the bargain table, it was somewhat dated. However, Bush/Cheney are STILL in power, and while the country has largely turned against them because of the war in Iraq and the slumping economy, Dean's real case against them describes the more subtle ways that the Bush II administration has weakened our democracy.
   
   The main beef that Dean has with Bush and Cheney is their secrecy. True, this is definitely a politically motivated treatise written by neither a scholar nor journalist, but it is also true that Dean has researched his topic well and that he has some first-hand experience in the matter of damage caused by a secretive executive branch. Worse Than Watergate is not going to sway Bush supporters -- if they haven't lost their confidence in his leadership by now, they are never going to budge. But, Dean has an interesting perspective, and if you are capable of separating the facts from the commentary, this short book is definitely worth the read.



3. This book is a bit dated as it was originally written before the 2004 elections but it has been updated a bit past that point so it still has relevancy today. Any impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney and their minions should use this book for talking points. Mr. Dean points out all the horrific and illegal things this White House has done that are far and above what President Nixon ever did. It also makes the "impeachment" of Bill Clinton look even sillier than the total farce it was. These two (and others in the administration) should be in jail.



4. While the book is old (written prior to the 2004 election) and politics tends to change very rapidly, there is still quite a lot of relevant information. Dean dissects the Bush regime and compares it to Nixon's. He points out what Nixon did wrong and how Bush is following the same path. He does so in an intellectual manner and doesn't resort to Bush bashing or name calling like some books I have read. All of Deans points are well thought out and backed with evidence from sources from across the political spectrum. Overall, even though this is an old book, it is still a very good and worthwhile read.



5. I've read most of John Dean's books and enjoy them. This was a good book, very interesting and informative about the evil tenure of Bush/Cheney. I'm sure it's dead on with what went on behind the scenes and how we got into the sorry mess of a country that we are today largely due to these 2 idiots.

5 comments about Cover Up: What the Government Is Still Hiding About the War on Terror.

1. I read "Cover Up" because I heard the author (PL) on a very popular
   nationally-syndicated radio show. He was part of a panel discussing
   9-11, of course. I really couldn't decide whether PL thought that 9-11
   was a govt. conspiracy, but he was very critical of a very "strident"
   conspiracy radio host/film maker. PL claimed that he wrote only what
   he could prove, and that the "powers that be" actually want people to
   believe in vague, high-level conspiracies rather than getting at the "real"
   facts. Having read many books on 9/11 that indeed point to a high-level
   govt. conspiracy, I wanted to read "Cover Up" to get another point of
   view about 9-11, this despite the scoffs from my friends!
   
   I found "Cover Up" interesting for the most part, also quite
   informative, as if a short primer on domestic terrorism (I will assume
   that PL got his facts straight), though as I'll discuss below, I am still
   not certain what PL really thinks about 9-11.
   
   "Cover Up" depicts shocking, outrageous corruption, perhaps the most
   egregious corruption is the FBI/Justice Dept.'s cover up of the relationship
   between a fairly high-level agent and a Mafia hitman who killed many people
   in a war among "families." While a large element of organized crime is
   apparently eliminated, laws are broken at every turn, and when the FBI
   man is prosecuted, he answers "I can't remember" 44 times, and is allowed
   to retire on full pension, and to make sure the corruption is never revealed,
   an honest cop's reputation is ruined, and he is stripped of his pension.
   
   If you read "Cover Up," and I recommend that you do, you will get the
   tie-in between the son of the Mafia hitman and Ramzi Yousef, whom PL
   claims devised the bomb that killed a young engineer in the so-called
   "Bojinka" plane bombing, which the author connects to the TWA 800 disaster,
   in a convincing way. PL also connects all of this, along with incredible
   negligence on the FBI's part, with terrorism and 9-11, and the details are
   quite Interesting.
   
   PL clearly spent a great deal of time interviewing the wives of the
   9-11 victims, who pressed for a very long time before the govt. agreed to
   have a commission, and he shows many aspects of blatant, deliberate
   suppression of evidence by the commission, many members of which were very
   compromised, and had much to lose by getting at the real truth.
   
   Yet I found the book lacking in certain aspects of 9-11, esp.
   the lack of a deeper analysis of what exactly happened on 9-11. PL asks
   exactly the same questions that those who think that the govt. at the very
   least knew in advance of the attacks, yet he makes no attempt to answer
   them, and cites not one of the "conspiracy" books that do try to answer
   the difficult questions.
   
   A very key part of 9-11, as discussed in "Cover Up," is simply reported
   and nothing more. Repeatedly we are told that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Yousef's
   uncle, is the mastermind beind 9-11, yet I remember no evidence or further
   details in the book, just a reference to PL's prior book on 9-11. Also KSM's
   arrest and interrogation are kept secret, yet again we are not told anything
   beyond this, and conspiracy researchers would obviously wonder what the real
   story is?!
   
   So what we get is an interesting read but I was left wondering if what
   is presented in "Cover Up" is just a shadow of the deeper truth. Still, I
   recommend reading the book.



2. I really like Peter Lance. I enjoy his writing style and he has researched his topics well. However, I thought 1000 Years for Revenge was better. He seemed a little stressed and frustrated while writing this book. However, I would still recommend Cover Up. Without this book and 1000 Years for Revenge I would have been clueless as to the flaws of the 9/11 Commission.



3. I agree with the reviewer who said that this is half a book. The first half of this book matters; the second half, not so much.
   
   While the bad news is that you are getting half a book for the price of a full book, the good news is that the half a book that you are getting is a bomb - well worth the read. If what Lance reports is true - and Lance's story is documented well enough to believe it is true - the pre-9/11 failings of our government, especially the FBI, are abhorrent. Incompetence is one thing; cover-ups of painful truths are quite another.



4. Since 9/11, I have watched our leaders expend human and material resources in an obviously wasteful and non-productive manner. It is clear that they did not take adequate measures to insure our national security. We have and continue to pay a dear price for their negligence. Appropriate, necessary action can only be taken if we know the truth about what happened and who the players were and are. Official government channels have not been forthcoming with this information. We have been left misinformed and vulnerable. We must know the truth in order to plan intelligently. Peter Lance has provided us with a great resource. He has presented us with chilling new information in a well documented, dispationate, non-partisan manner. We are all in his debt. I urge you to read this book and become active in getting you elected leaders to do the same.



5. This is an extremely well-written and documented book. I especially liked the foot-noted references that allow the reader to check the facts for themselves. If the average citizen thinks the FBI and CIA are providing meaningful security to the USA, this book will make one think again. After reading this book, I also read "1000 Years for Revenge". That book finished filling in the blanks. I suggest they both be read to get the whole picture. There is no doubt in my mind that the US will be attacked again, and that government agencies have been put under so many constraints that they will never be able to stop it. Read these two books. Your hair will stand on end.

5 comments about The Great and Terrible Fury & Light.

1. My only complaint is that it was too short. I guess that is a pretty good sign that I enjoyed the book.
   
   Stewart ties up several threads of the story, yet leaves enough room for a 5th in the series. The characters progress, new ones are introduced, and the action increases. The end foreshadowed that the "bad guys" would soon get their due.
   
   If you like the concept of the first books, you'll enjoy this one. It has the military end-of-the-world excitement of a Clancy but unabashedly interweaves core LDS theology.
   
   I highly recommend.



2. I loved this 4th book in the Great and Terrible Series! I couldn't put it down until I had finished it, and can't wait until the next book comes out. I have read all 4 books and each one gets better and better. The story is realisticly scarey. Not to be dooms-dayish, but I am ready to go out and make sure I have a good food and water storage supply (and maybe even buy a gun for self defense) for my family just in case something like this comes about someday. Intense and well worth the read - but start at the begiining of the series because each book is essential to the plot.



3. Chris Stewart's ideas of how things could quickly come to an end are eerily true-to-life. He seems to get better and better with each new novel. We (my whole family) can't wait for the next one!



4. I was just given all five of the books in Chris Stewart's "The Great & Terrible" series. Riveted doesn't quite describe my reaction! I devoured them all in a matter of weeks. Thought provoking, entertaining, and above average writing!



5. Wow, what a page turner! Chris Stewart has written another thought provoking, action packed, well written novel that is eerily realistic. I have recommended this series to my book club members.

5 comments about American Extremists: Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Communists & Others.

1. This fact filled tome will aggravate those with a fixed set of assumptions whether from the Left or the Right. The reason? They view themselves as exceptionally virtuous, morally superior, and they're convinced they are middle-of-the-road as to their beliefs. It doesn't take very long to see that this point of view leads to a distorted perception of reality i.e. if Dan Rather sees himself as middle of the road then moderate Libertarians would be far Right in the pantheon of his worldview. It's the same story with the abortion issue, particularly from the Right.

   John George, a professor of Political Science and Sociology at Central Oklahoma University and Laird Wilcox, founder of the Wilcox Collection of Contemporary Political Movements, are the book's authors. Wilcox has the largest collection of extremist literature in America and it can be found at the University of Kansas, home of copious fields of wheat, endless horizons and a highly successful basketball program.

   They cover every facet of extreme political movements including what radical groups exist, who joins up and why, what do they want to accomplish, how far are they willing to go to achieve those ends, and the degree of danger we face should they achieve their ends. They begin by summarizing pre-60's movements, then morph into the makeup of conspiracy theories and what motivates extremists. They thoroughly document and detail a listing of contemporary groups in addition to adding an in-depth appendix of fake quotes and fabricated documents.

   If you've ever wondered how the far-Left in America could fawn at the feet of a butcher like Fidel Castro or lap up the distorted and inaccurate screeds of a false intellectual like Noam Chomsky then go no further, it's all here. I'll share with you some insights in the book.

   For the alienated and "ideologically prone", identification with a power figure or someone held up as an intellectual guru can serve as a mechanism to free them from anxieties and doubt. A failed ideology such as Socialism can thus continue to embody all their fantasies, utopian ideals, and hopes for the future. This phenomenon is repeated over and over throughout history from the heaven-on-earth promises of Communism to the heaven-hereafter central to the teachings of radical Christianity as well as radical Islamicism.

   The "true believer" tends to believe in theories with little or no evidence to support his conclusions or predictions. Eric Hoffer addresses this condition in his book by the same name. Put another way "true believers" tend to believe what they tend to believe, a form of "petito pricipii", where dogma is presented which assumes the truth of the premise. It assumes that the thesis speaks for itself.

   After pounding home this theme with his followers the guru uses selected facts, working backwards from his addled assumptions, to support his flawed thesis. Rituals are often invoked to soothe the listener by incorporating what amounts to the elements commonly found in the practice of hypnosis.

   There is much, much more and it's all worthwhile if you're a student of people and how they come to believe what they do. This is the best book of its kind I've read, and I wish to say thanks to the authors, "I needed that". It was getting just too difficult to understand my Libertarian-Socialist-Communist friends let alone my friends of strong religious conviction. And, these are my friends! they're not even trying to kill me! We're a lucky bunch here in the USA.




2. When future American historians and political scientists look back at political extremism in the last half of the twentieth century, this is the book to which they will turn. It is thoroughly detailed and meticulously researched; in short the definitive work on this subject.

   The following groups, along with their leaders, are covered.

   THE FAR LEFT

   Communist Party USA
   Socialist Workers Party
   Black Panther Party
   Students for a Democratic Society
   Progressive Labor Party
   Revolutionary Action Movement
   Revoluntionary Communist Party
   Communist Workers Party

   THE FAR RIGHT

   Reverend Billy James Hargis and his Christian Crusade
   The John Birch Society
   The Christian Right
   Willis Cato and Liberty Lobby
   Robert Bolivar DePugh and the Minutemen
   The Militias
   Gerald L. K. Smith and Christian Nationalist Crusade
   The LaRouche Network
   Jewish Defense League
   The Nation of Islam
   Assorted Neo-Nazis
   National States Rights Party
   Ku Klux Klans

   Appendix 1 contains 36 pages of fake quotes and forged documents extremists are fond of using.

   Appendix 2 contains a handy guide for extremist watchers and lists their common characteristics and differences. It also lists some mainstream organizations which are sometimes considered extreme, but really are not.

   A sample paragraph, from page 48 of American Extremists:

   "McCarthyism existed on a half-truth. There were Communists in the United States and some of them were entirely anti-American and would like to do in our system of government. For the most part, however, the Communists, real or imagined, were of no significant security threat to our country. What was a greater threat was the witch-hunting and official and unofficial persecution of these people as heretics. One of the worst things extremists can do to a society, usually without intending to, is to cause it to overreact and burn down the barn to catch the rat, so to speak. The net effect of domestic extremism has been negligible. The net effect of attempts to exterminate it have been quite telling, a legacy that haunts us to this day."

   "American Extremists" is the favorite book in my library, and, outside of the dictionary, the most useful.




3. This book is the definitive work for anyone who wants to know about extremists in this country. I notice that one reviewer described the book as "tedious." I cannot agree. The book was extremely well researched, well written, and fascinating from one end to the other. A must read.



4. To be sure, the authors have done quite a bit of research, looking into the histories of various groups which they deem to be "extremist" in nature. Many of these facts are unknown to all but those who are familiar with groups which -- like the ones covered in this book -- are hardly covered at all in the so-called mainstream press. Despite citing various documents from said "extremist" groups and admitting that the U.S. state has no business infiltrating them and attempting to destroy them, this book is pretty poor. Despite the authors' attempts to pose as "objective" in their scholarship they thesmelves are propagandists for a particular ideology -- lets call it "centrism."
   The authors suggest repeatedly that anyone who identifies with these so-called extremist groups -- be they on the far-left or the far-right -- have some kind of psychological problems. There you have it -- anyone who disagrees strongly with the way the political system "works" (or, in actuality, doesn't) in America have personal problems; they have some kind of personality disorder, and their criticism of the system is thus without merit.
   The authors are thus "establishment scholars" in the sense that what they write can only please the powers-that-be. But in posing as "neutral defenders of democracy" the authors ignore a critical point: the political agenda pushed by the power-brokers is not now the same as it was 20-30 years ago. Thus, to continue to be a "centrist" means to adapt oneself continually to the ideological/policy shifts embraced by the political elite; an example of this is that a good argument could be made that Bill Clinton was farther to the right than Richard Nixon. Clinton bombed Bosnia in 1995, the former Yugoslavia in 1999, Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, Iraq continually throughout his two terms in office, invaded Somalia in 1993, Haiti in 1994, etc. eliminated welfare, advanced so-called free trade agreements which enhanced the ability of corporations to undercut the wages and conditions of workers all over the world and pushed budgetary austerity in the US and abroad. To be sure Nixon was himself responsible for the horrific bombing of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos (not to mention the coup d'etat in Chile), but he pronounced that "we are all Keynesians" now, while Clinton stated that "the era of big government is over." Thus, the political establishment moved further to the right from the 70s to the 90s, and this shift logically meant that people who regarded themselves as centrists had to do the same. In my opinion (being unashamedly a socialist and a revolutionary) to not be outraged at the types of things which I mentioned marks one as a vile reactionary.
   Finally, it deserves to be said that arguing that far-right and far-left groups have quite a bit in common with one another -- as these authors do -- is cliche as well as false. While many of the far-left groups mentioned in this book were led by profoundly confused people, it goes without saying that it is dubious to lump those opposed to US imperialism, inequality and discrimination with those who felt that such things are actually in too-short supply.
   Political conflicts are based, in the final analysis, on class, and not psychological phenomena on the individual level. This book is based on fundamentally false premises, and thus, while at least containing facts about groups little known to the public at large, should be regarded as propaganda in defense of the capitalist status quo.



5. John George and Laird Wilcox present an extensive and surprisingly non-biased look at movements considered extreme compared to the standard liberal-conservative spectrum. The book examines the histories and personalities behind a host of marxist-leninist, religious fundamentalist and white supremacist organizations.
   
   While the actual descriptions of the organizations are interesting, the book's real strength is in its analysis of the history of extremist movements and looks at what motivates people to join. Various theories explaining the attractiveness of extremist movements to certain types of people are explored. Perhaps best of all, the authors recognize that extremism is a matter of "style and tactics more than goals." The kinds of emotionally laden thinking, logical falicies and argumentative tactics that extremists tend to employ are analyzed. Yet the tone of the authors is generally non judgemental and they are quick to recognize the dangers of dismissing or worse, suppressing the rights of extremists. Repeatedly throughout the book the authors defend the rights of people to hold controversial views and warn of the dangers of violating the rights of those who hold unpopular opinions. Furthermore, in a day and age marked by liberal dominance over academic discourse, the authors are pleasantly centrist and without dogma or agenda. They are both equally hard and equally gentle with both left and right wing beliefs.
   
   Yet the book is incomplete, especially in its treatment of the far left. The vast majority of leftist organizations looked at are Marxist-Leninist groups, which are quite dated in modern progressive thought. The authors concede that "Extreme radical feminists or environmentalists, for example, may be as "extreme" in their behaviors as the most dedicated Marxist Leninist" but do not look at a single such organization. Militant Minorities, Deep Ecology, Anti-War, Radical Feminism, Gay Pride, Postmodernism and Anarchism each command far more intellectual and activist vigor than Marxist Leninism, yet the only groups promoting any of the above discussed are the Black Panthers and possibly the Students for a Democratic Society. The omission of such groups as Earth First! or the Radical Feminist "Off Our Backs" collective makes their study of the political left incomplete.
   
   On the subject of ideologies, there is a surprising lack of information about the precise beliefs of the groups studied. Far more is said about the histories and personalities of the groups, and some inclusion of each group's doctrine or "statement of principles" would have been nice. While any half way educated person probobly knows what a nazi or a communist believes, some inclusion of the doctrines of the groups examined would have rounded off the study rather nicely.
   
   Yet the flaws are minor and the strengths are far more considerable. This book is essential for anyone seriously interested in radical thought in America today.

5 comments about The Red Roots of Terrorism.

1. Definently written from a conservative perspective, Hartwright focuses on communism, and more specifically the governmental influences within this societal structure that perpetuate terrorism and their attempts in further inoculate the free world's beuracracies (i.e. academia, politics, and the church). Inarguably written from a more conservative perspective, this is one of those books that tries to push the reader into the extreme, in hopes of at least swaying the reader to acknowledge the continued ills of communism that continue to lurk within America.



2. If you are stuck in the Red Scare and looking for self-affirming, right wing, anti-semitic entertainment, this is the book for you.
   
   I was required to purchase this for a post-graduate terrorism course and will be demanding an explanation. The book - which never does define 'terrorism' - is mostly useless, ill-cited name calling, complete with grammatical errors. A quick look at the references in the back reveals what sort of drivel this is.
   
   Nearly one third of the references (96 of 310 in a hasty count) are from the Wall Street Journal. Other news sources include the Chicago Tribune, US News & World Report, The New Yorker, and Parade Magazine (!). WSJ is a perfectly good newspaper and these sources are fine for news or for the occasional factual citation (better to cite the source, like AP or Reuters), but to base any book that purports to be remotely academic on news sources like this is weak at best. The reason for this is that these sources are focused on printing daily or weekly news, corroborated or not, and are NOT subject to any sort of expert review like an academic journal is. Not only that, but plenty of the articles are from the Op-Ed page, including LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
   
   Some of the articles from scientific sources may be legitimate, and plenty of books are cited (though plenty of text remains wanting for citation). However, there is nothing from ANY terrorism journal (of which there are several well-respected journals in fields of terrorism studies, counterterrorism, and security), post-communist studies journal, or social science journal, conservative or otherwise. There is also probably not much by anyone you have ever heard of, if you happen to study terrorism or communism.
   
   While www.jeffsarchive.com (also cited) is no longer available, the author Ian McKinney (cited) can still be found at www.theunjustmedia.com alongside other winners who promote ideas like "Timothy McVeigh may have unknowningly been an Army/CIA guinea pig involved in a classified telemetric/mind-control project," in compelling articles like "Brain Zapping - Electronic Mind Control - Part One."
   
   Hmm... vaguely reminiscent of a technique I used in Jr. High to gain credibility in research papers: cite a lot of stuff, no matter where it came from. (Citing newspapers was ok back then, but by undergrad I would have gotten blasted if my bibliography looked ANYTHING like this. And I attended a military academy, not exactly a liberal university haven that Hartwright would probably deem full of godless pinko fags).
   
   Additionally, what information is available on the publisher should put the academic value of the book into question. Cui Bono Books, after cursory internet research, appears to be a side project of Pan-Tech International, which publishes reference books on baking technology. Cui Bono only has a handful of tomes: those by Hartwright and those written under a pseudonym (F.X. Foulke-ffeinberg) on biblical topics and the virtual campus (also cited in Red Roots of Terrorism, incidentally). Hartwright's other 2 books are on the JFK assassination (has a nice Amazon review) and on the Vincent Foster death.
   
   All evidence points to this book being academically worthless, and Cui Bono books being a recreational endeavor by Hartwright, who would do us all a service by sticking to baking technology studies.
   
   For some excellent books on actual terrorism, try these:
   Root Causes of Terrorism, by Tore Bjorgo (ed)
   Inside Terrorism, by Bruce Hoffman
   Seeds of Terror, by Maria Ressa (southeast Asia focus)
   Al Qaeda, by Jason Burke (Al Qaeda focus)



3. Theories put forth in this book are so far-fetched that it is hard to believe they can be found in print. Conspiracy theory has been taken to its ultimate right wing conclusions, and all those theories linked into one unbelievable piece of propaganda. Of course that makes it entertaining, at times, until you realize that this author is serious about it. There is plenty of logic used here, but you have to accept his evidence at face value to believe. It doesn't work if you have ever read deeply in the subjects he covers. The author is so far removed from society he should be living in a utopian commune, like the Amish, if he really practices what he preaches. But his attempt here to convince the world of his view is fraught with logical inconsistency, incomplete perspectives, and extreme bias.



4. The way the book is written tends to be irritating because of the prejudicial rhetoric the author uses for communist references. However, I am using the book for a class I am taking and find the details and background that Hartwright includes to be a big help. I would recommend it to people studying terrorism for a look beyond the Muslim Extremist perspective.



5. Having read a dozen books on terrorism, scores of articles from professional journals and think tank studies, "Red Roots of Terrorism" is easily the worst book I have ever read on the topic. The author makes a desperate attempt to attribute hundreds of years of terrorist attacks to socialist tendencies. The end result is a volume that reads more like a third rate conspiracy publication, mixing partial truth with fantasy. Perhaps the most appalling section of the book is the author's recommendations for counterterrorism, which can only be classified as neurotic. For a better read, try Bruce Hoffman's "Inside Terrorism or Marc Sageman's Understanding Terror Networks.

5 comments about Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden.

1. Bruce Lawrence (the compiler) points out that while occasional fragments of bin Laden's words are cited, official pressures have ensured that, for the most part, his voice has been tacitly censured - as though too dangerous to hear. This collection of 24 items include interviews with Arab and Western journalists, handwritten letters, and video recordings.
   
   Lawrence also helps one to understand why bin Laden is a heroic figure for millions of Muslims, including many with no sympathy for terrorism. This is based not just on his success in eluding Americans and their allies, but because his personal reputation for probity, austerity, dignity, and courage - contrasting starkly with the mismanagement, lavishness, and arrogance of most Arab regimes.
   
   Bin Laden points out that his terrorism acts are only retaliation, and that the West has killed far larger numbers in the region within living memory - poison gas and strafing of Iraqi villages by Britain in the 1920s, crushing the Palestinian uprising of the 1930s, France's colonial war in algeria in the 1950s-60s, and deaths through malnutrition and disease of Iraqi children in the 1990s due to the U.N. sanctions. Bin Laden estimates 1.5 million were killed in the preceding - Lawrence estimates it as 300,000.
   
   Bin Laden began his massive undertaking against the U.S. after seeing the mujahidin victory over the Red Army in Afghanistan, and the withdrawal of American forces from Somalia in '93. Unfortunately, bin Laden greatly underestimated the special circumstances associated with both - the U.S. and Pakistani support in Afghanistan, and the inconsequentialness of the U.S. landings in Somalia.
   
   Bin Laden on 9/11 (10/21 interview): ". . . they have done this . . . in self-defense, defense of our brothers and sons in Palestine, and in order to free our holy sanctuaries." "the defeat of America . . . is easier for us . . . than the defeat of the Soviet Empire previously. We have already fought them . . . as in Somalia. We have not yet found a significant force of note." ". . . America, has lost its values and appeal . . . Freedom, Human Rights, and Equality . . . were revealed as a total mockery."
   
   On Surviving Tora Bora: Bin Laden reports that bombing was around the clock, every second. There were about 300 mujahidin dug into 100 trenches, spread over one square mile in ten degree below zero temperatures - only about 18 were killed by the combination of ground and air attacks. Certainly this had to have been an easy opportunity for American ground forces if they had been deployed at that time, instead of outsourcing the job to Afghans!
   
   Bin Laden also speaks of how Iraqis should resist the U.S., describing a guerilla campaign like that actually waged.
   
   "Messages to the World" is essential to understanding bin Laden, America's "Public Enemy #1" - especially for counteracting the incomplete and misleading statements provided by our own government.



2. This collection of translated and annotated statements by Osama bin Laden is the sort of primary source collection I had begun to fear would never be published.
   
   In order to understand the "War on Terror" environment in which we currently live, it is imperative to understand the rhetoric of both sides. Regardless of which viewpoint one supports, it is important to know exactly what the other side is fighting for. This knowledge is abundant on the non-terrorist side, but has so far been available on the terrorist side purely through analyses by expert commentators. Thus, being able to read the actual words of the major ideologue of world terrorism at the moment is a considerable boon.
   
   I say "ideologue" for very good reason. As these statements and their accompanying (and copious) notes and introductions demonstrate, there is a distinct ideology involved in this movement. It may be an ideology directed against everything the West holds dear, but it is an ideology nonetheless. Osama bin Laden has clearly thought about a great many issues prior to initiating the campaigns of violence he has.
   As case in point, the significance of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often debated by academics and policymakers: Is it central to the globalisation of terrorism, or is it merely a convenient justification to use when asked? As even the earliest statements here demonstrate, this is a key plank in al-Qa'ida's ideology - perhaps even more so than many writers have realised.
   
   While one particular statement (the "Declaration of Jihad against the Jews and Crusaders") will be familiar to any reader interested in this conflict as it has been included in a great many works (Gunaratna's "Inside Al-Qaeda" being the most well-known), many of these statements appear never to have been translated fully into English before. In this case, the team involved in this collection deserve even more praise for enabling those with an interest in understanding these issues to do so - particularly when, as they frequently note, the websites originally hosting these messages have been shut down.
   
   The scope of these statements will probably be debated for many years to come. One review here makes the dogmatic assertion that these are not all of the statements made by bin Laden, for example. While this may be true - and bear in mind that many of these statements have been excerpted by various news outlets at various times, which may create the impression of there being more than there are - it seems rather immaterial. Far from only presenting a reasoned side of the man, these statements present his ideas in a clear form. Those translated from audio and video tapes, for example, never make mention of any gestures or tones of voice, since to do so would be rather pointless in my opinion.
   
   Taken as a whole, these statements tend to appear rather repetitive - the only notable change from one to the next being a slightly different emphasis on particular events as they've changed. That said, reading the book cover to cover is probably not the best way to go about it anyway.
   
   The copious amounts of footnotes and introductory matter are also a great strength of this collection. While it is possible to criticise the scholars involved (and it's almost a hobby for some of the reviewers here already), they have at least attempted the difficult task of placing Osama bin Laden in context. He's not a representative of all Muslims, but neither is he the "monster under the bed" for the new millennium.
   The footnotes, too, provide a wealth of Qur'anic and Hadith references - including remarks on when the verse or tradition has been taken out of context or deprived of a section of text. Similarly, key figures and events (both past and present) referenced in the text are explained concisely in the notes.
   Unfortunately, the sheer volume of these notes has presumably caused the poor proofreading which some statements suffer from. There are a number of words and phrases footnoted which do not have an accompanying note below, and some of these are germane to the text.
   Further, one of the introductory notes makes the comment that Yemen is a "military dictatorship" (along with Pakistan and Nigeria). In reality, Yemen is a multi-party democracy (the only such in the Arabian Peninsula) and was so both at the time the book was written and at the time the statement was made. Admittedly, the country may not have a stable and entrenched tradition of democracy, but it is far from the military dictatorship described in this note.
   
   In conclusion, "Messages to the World" is an invaluable aid to those who want to understand the current conflicts "from the source" as it were. It is somewhat heavy reading in places and will remain a controversial book for much of the foreseeable future. Its publication, however, represents a great step forward for much of the world.



3. As someone who has been critical of US foreign policy through a variety of administrations, it may seem inevitable that I would be drawn to someone like bin Laden. Having read my share of writings by sociopaths such as Hitler, Mao, and even Kaczynski, my only compliment for bin Laden would be that his thoughts aren't nearly as fractured and self-contradictory as others I've read. In a sense, I agree with the commentary provided in the foreword -- whatever his faults, he is very likely a true believer and not merely a charlatan.
   
   On to the book. It enlightens on several fronts. It provides small glimpses into the world of Islamic expression -- I was never aware of the existence of Arabic literary forms such as the juridicial decree. It made me wonder how an American analog to bin Laden might communicate with the masses -- the newsletter, the Shakespearean sonnet, the folk song in 4/4 time, iambic pentameter, maybe even a film documentary. Could one man besides Bob Dylan be able to flow between media and literary forms with the ease of bin Laden?
   
   Also interesting were some of the Arabic social trivia such as the uses of bin/ibn and Abu in Arabic names.
   
   The sign of a good book (as with good research) is that it generates more questions than answers. For instance, why did bin Laden wait until 10/2004 to fully (or at least convincingly) accept responsibility for 9/11? Obfuscation? Maybe. The book itself does not hazard any speculation. My take is that he's reluctant to accept credit for something in which he did not personally participate. Once it was obvious he was going to get the rap anyway, he probably decided it was best politically to accept the credit. After all, he has to compete for resources with other jihadis, and "Mastermind of 9/11" is the jahidi equivalent to membership in the CFR or Trilateral Commission. We've seen recent (if less credible) examples of self-incrimination in the Moussaoui case.
   
   That being said, I wish bin Laden much ill. If anything, he has given America an excuse to shed any vestige of self-reflection about its' past. What we've done to the Muslim world is a drop in the bucket of blood compared to what the Cherokee nation or African-Americans have suffered. If he has come to collect damages, the line forms in the WAY BACK.



4. Osama Bin Laden's statements have been widely covered in TV and radio in bits and pieces; but they haven't been gathered together under one cover before; so to receive a unified presentation of all his admonitions, turn to MESSAGES TO THE WORLD: THE STATEMENTS OF OSAMA BIN LADEN. Statements issued in his name over the last ten years are here newly translated from the Arabic and annotated with a critical introduction by editor Lawrence, an Islamic scholar, which adds historical, political and religious context to the statements. Any who want insights on Bin Laden's thoughts and viewpoint must have MESSAGES TO THE WORLD.
   
   Diane C. Donovan
   California Bookwatch



5. Many of these messages have been printed in whole or in part in other sources, however this book is unique and valuable in offering a very comprehensive collection of his statements and rationale. Osama bin Laden wages jihad against the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, and those wishing to comprehend Bin Laden's actions should read this book. It is accompanied by excellent explanatory footnotes, offering concise factual context for Bin Laden's statements. While Bin Laden's thought rates only "one star" - he operates on the primitive logic of tit-for-tat violent retaliation - the book as a source for understanding his thought rates at least four stars. It is a good read for those wishing to understand his motivation for violent jihad.

5 comments about Wars of Blood and Faith: The Conflicts That Will Shape the 21st Century.

1. What time is it???
   
   Depends on where you are these days.
   
   Some days I wish I still had Boston's libraries nearby. I got this book through inter-library loan and this book came from south Georgia. There's not one single book in the greater Atlanta metropolitan area???
   
   For shame!!! This book should be read before anyone in America makes a comment about Iraq or whether our troops should stay or go. Should be required reading for every literate, breathing person in my country!!!
   
   This book is a compilation of newspaper and journal articles that Ralph Peters has written since 2006. You'll find his articles in the New York Post, USA Today, The Weekly Standard, Armchair General, and Armed Forces Journal.
   
   His articles challenge accepted dogmas fed by the media like Iraq will be our next Vietnam, President Bush's policies in Iraq are all bad, Islam is a threat to only western civilization, and we're losing this war. He will convince you that Iraq will be Al Qaeda's Vietnam, not ours, President Bush was right to oust Saddam Hussein, Islam is a threat to itself, Iraq is not in the midst of a civil war, we and others, like the Ethiopians in Somalia, have scored significant victories against Al Qaeda!!!! Hallelujah!!! And I'm sure there must be muslims out there who are silently rejoicing at that fact.
   
   We should never have our withdrawal, whenever it transpires, to be publicly trumpeted. Does our congress want to exterminate our army??? They're a rat pack of idiots if they do. (Yo, and it's an election year, another Hallelu!!!) Peters argues that if Iraq was in a civil war, we'd have to choose sides, but problem is, there's too many equally bad to choose from. We should withdraw, Peters says, "intelligently", if the Iraqi government and security forces continue persistently to not enforce the rule of law and mayhem prevails. Muslims kill muslims mostly in Iraq and elsewhere in the world.
   
   "We'll get you. No matter how long it takes, we'll get you.", Peters writes in a January 10, 2007 New York Post article entitled Terrorizing Terrorists describing the latest victory against Al Qaeda in Somalia.
   
   At home we have peace, in Iraq and elsewhere our troops are fighting a war against Al Qaeda and terrorists and countries harboring our troops welcome them. We have a professional military. We will not have another Vietnam as long as Congress will listen to our well informed, well educated, baptized in battle officers in uniform. Who am I to tell General Petraeus what to do in Iraq or Afghanistan? The world is a dangerous place what with Iranian centifuges spinning and enriching Uranium and dictators blossoming all over the globe in South East Asia, South America, Africa, and Asia. We should listen to Ralph Peters and other military experts who have served our country in uniform.
   
   I can't tell you enough how good this book is. It informs, it enlightens, and it is prophetic in the sense that prophecy can anticipate what is likely to happen given current patterns and circumstances. The book is global in scale as its title suggests and speaks of many issues besides the Iraq War. I found out about this book from watching Bill O'Reilly on Fox News. Great book O'Reilly!!!



2. I'm a fan of Ralph Peters, but this "book" was disappointing. All this is is a bunch of his New York Post columns reprinted. That's not a book by my definition. Not worth buying.



3. This is not a book that has a beginning and then an end. It's full of author's original articles that have appeared in different print media across the world. Good compilation and great points. I liked the book.



4. Starting with the 1999 "Fighting For The Future: Will America Triumph?" compendium, Peters has published non-fiction, fiction and a series of other compendiums taken from his daily columns - totally revelent to why we're in our current situation worldwide.
   
   He forcasted the difficulty of urban combat in 1995 - no secret going all the way back to WWII - but WHY we were equipped to fight on the plains of EUROPE 10 years after the cold war was over - ? What worked in Desert Storm in 1991 because we 'failed' to take Baghdad - did not work in 2003 when we occupied it. What worked in Afghanistan failed in Iraq ... and Peters tells us why.
   
   General Patraius was on the right track when commanding the 'surge' - and Peters was correct in his forcasts. What completely threw me was his repeated statement that the Shi'a - minus Iran - and Iran minus the mullahs - are the better bet than the compliant Sunni in us having any friends in the region.
   
   As a retired Intelligence Officer of 27 years myself - I can relate to why Peters retired when he did - and challenge the 'wisdom' of 'experts' on either side of the aisle.
   
   His continued reference to John McCain and Joe Lieberman as perhaps the only two politicians who "get it" among all the talking heads in Washington is food for thought in our upcoming election. Unfortunately he fails to tell us why. AFTER the book was published - the success of the surge - backed by Lieberman and McCain explains why ... but those who disagree on this success and those who have no background on either candidate are left in the dark...
   
   Peters - like many others was critical of Prime Minister Olmert's failure to correctly utilize the Israeli Defense Force against Hezbollah in 2006 Lebanon and gives the IDF CLEAR WARNING ON THE WEAKNESSES of its Reserve Military forces and over reliance on technology against a trained Transnational Army.
   
   Why buy or read the book? It's an eye opener. It shatters even my cynical 'conventional wisdom' ... and agree or disagree - Ralph Peters takes you down some foreign policy back alleys where you've never been and may never want to go back to. Put in context - and by subject - his prolific writing - in a multitude of publications can be focused in a single place and what emerges is a better policy statement than most of what Washington is currently blathering about.
   
   Currently working as an Army Contract employee in computer simulations and modeling for BN/BDE Staff Training - I can see why Peters brings into focus the "Why We Fight" for all disaffected peoples of the world.
   
   Read the book - if it doesn't change your mind on a multitude of issues - it will at least make you a more knowledgable dissenter ...



5. This book was advertised as a large print edition. I am 77 years old have small cataracs and need the large print to enjoy reading. The copy I received is printed in a font size of about 8 or 10. Thus reading the book is very slow and unenjoyable for me.
   
   The book consists of reprints of newspaper oped pieces by the author. They are sometimes thoughtful, but he has a tendency to rant. I,too, am a retired military officer (USMC) and appreciate his gripes as well as his truism that war is all about killing the enemy and destroying his capacity to wage war. He points out how "rules f engagement" and our dread of "collateral damage" unnecessarily restrict our Armies from achieving the objective of winning conflicts with the least damage to ourselves.
   
   I believe I would have rated this book higher if it had been in large print.

5 comments about Welcome to the Desert of the Real: Five Essays on September 11 and Related Dates.

1. To people who come to this book looking for an analysis of the attacks on the World Trade Center this book will appear to be peculiar and eccentric, and therefore in questionable taste. Slavoj Zisek is a Marxist philosopher from the formerly Yugoslav republic of Slovenia. (At the same time he is quite caustic against those who think that Milosevic's horrors could have been avoided by an appeal to the cosmopolitan virtues of Titoism. Not within the party framework, at any rate.) He has a special interest in the French psychoanalyst Lacan, which does not stop him from discussing other imposing figures such as Hegel, Adorno, Foucault and, suprisingly in this book, G.K. Chesterton. At the same time he discusses popular movies from "Unbreakable" to "Shrek." Like Terry Eagleton he has a fondness, and a weakness, for paradox and contradiction. A person examining this book will note that the five essays are not as concise and straightforward as they may appear. (They will also note that this book has six chapters.) The unsympathetic reader may wonder how we get from the events of September 11th to sado-masochism and "The Piano Teacher," to Judith Butler and Antigone. Given the bottomless malice of Al Qaidya towards any concept of freedom, surely, one might state, it is irresponsible to say that freedom of thought is the surest way of ensuring submission and control (as Zisek suggests in his introduction)?

   In fact, Zisek is a stimulating and important writer and the reader should take the effort to appreciate him. To the extent that this book has a thesis it is expressed on the cover. Instead of the attacks forcing the United States to rethink its attitude towards the rest of the world, it has allowed itself to view itself solely as a victim. By contrast "That is the true lesson of the attacks: the only way to ensure that it will not happen here again is to prevent it happening anywhere else." At the same time Zisek is vehement against those who showed a certain schaudenfreude at American suffering, or those tempted to euphemize Palestianian suicide bombers. On the Islamists themselves, Zisek makes an interesting point against those who wish for a "Protestant" reformation for Islam. There already has been one. Like Protestantism, the Wahabbi sect that rules Saudi Arabia rejects the accretions and growths of Islam over the previous centuries as so much quasi-pagan superstition. Like Protestantism it emphasizes holy scripture and even offers suggestions for a more practical bible interpretation. Clearly, this is not enough. Elsewhere Zisek points out that in a way political Islam is Islamic fascism, in the sense that it seeks a capitalism without capitalism, or a capitalism with its destabilizing effects.

   Elsewhere Zisek has stimulating things to say about "The Matrix" from which he extracts his title, and about the way that movie and others like "The Truman Show," reflect a nervous anxiety that "our" suburban life is something unreal. At the same time, one cannot unproblematically search for the real, a la Orwell, a certain harmony with fantasy is crucial to Lacanian good health. There are interesting comments on suicide as the expression not of certainty, but of doubt, not as sacrifice, but as evasion. His comments on "Shrek" will be of great comfort to all those who think that film over-rated: it is a movie which overturns all conventions yet at the same time only reaffirms them. Zisek cautions against the use of "proto-fascist": not all criticisms of decadence or invocations of discipline are fascist--consider the example of Schoenberg. He also notes that the private sphere is becoming a commodified space. The only way, he suggests, for true love to exist is not for the lovers to stare into each others eyes but at some sort of collectivity outside them. He is especially angry at Jonathan Alter and Alan Dershowitz for suggesting the torture of terrorists. As he quite properly points out, if torturing terrorists could save lives, then the torturing of prisoners of wars would saveeven more. Although at one point he argues that anti-Americanism is most common in countries that have lost their influence, like France and Germany, he argues that it is vitally necessary for a European response to provide an alternative to American diplomacy. On this point, I fully agree.




2. In my opinion,Zizek is the most profound cultural analyst writing today, and this short collection of several contemplative essays on 9/11 succeeds in truly saying something new and important about the scope of the events that transpired. Zizek's writing style is famous for achieving a mixture between abstruse, Lacanian psycho-analysis and popular culture. This makes him perhaps one of the most difficult but most enjoyable reads out there in the cultural criticism market. Certainly, this stands out from the the sentimental fluff and proganda rubbish that flies off the shelves. Zizek challenges us to think outside the canard of 'fundamentalism' vs. American hegemony and capitalism.



3. ~~~I truly enjoyed this book, which provides great insight while analyzing the current situation of the States. Not "with us or against us," as Bush constantly stated,but we are against them, since both military leaders in the US and Bin Laden's terrorists are following the same logic. What happend in September 11 had happened in third world countries everywhere, but we Americans watched them as virtual reality until this has become real in our territory. Nothing can justify what happened in~~ September 11, just as nothing could~~ justify what happened in third world countries, which had appeared as spectatles until that point. It's stupid to exchange one terror against another, because this will entail endless circle of violence. What one must do is to be awake from this rosy dream, to realize the existence of the desert of the real, and resist "them", who have been making such terrible spectacles happen everywhere,Mid-East, Africa, Asia, but not simly in the US, which has~~ become part of the desert of reel.~



4. I am overwhelmed by Zizek's judgment of the political situation he presents in this book. It concerns world politics after 9/11 and is still very actual. What makes this book so interesting, is that Zizek distances himself from a simplifying (left-wing) critique of American foreign politics and gives at the same time a compelling interpretation of the complexity of the "clash of cultures" that haunt still our Tv-News today.
   Against a cynical attitude towards politics Zizek's defends what he calls a "political act" of truth. This is not the slogan of a new philosophical ideology but a defence of a truth that can't be "relativiced" by post-modern Philosophy. Zizek thus revives political philosophy by overcoming philosophical patterns that dominated the second half of the 20th century.



5. Well there are few people on this earth who have an understanding on what's going on in just about every corner of the planet, Zizek is one of those few and far in-between people. In short: you need to read this book to try and set yourself straight on what is real and what is not. It's just straight talk..... no no nonsense!

5 comments about Triple Cross: How bin Laden's Master Spy Penetrated the CIA, the Green Berets, and the FBI--and Why Patrick Fitzgerald Failed to Stop Him.

1. Peter Lance has produced a magnificent book. His work needs to be followed up by multiple congessional committees and numerous on air investigative reports. Patrick Fitzgerald, Jack Cloonan, Dietrick Snell, and other highranking DOJ and FBI officials must testify under oath in primetime on national television. Peter Lance should be the lead investigator for the hearing. Americans have no idea the scope of the war against alqaeda. this is much older than 9/11. We have been at war with them since 1989.
   
   I-49, Alec Station and Able Danger need to throughly examined for their inability to connect the dots before 9/11. I-49 was the FBI-DOJ BinLaden taskforce run by Patrick Fitzgerald. Alec Station was the CIA's BinLaden group. Able Danger was the Pentagons data-mining operation that linked Ali Mohammed (top alqeada spy linked with all major cells in the world and the US), Mohammed Atta (lead hijacker on 9/11), Ramzi Yousef (1st WTC bomber and, airliner bombing plots), Egyptian Islamic Jihad Cleric Sheik Abdul Rahman, and Osama BinLaden.
   
   This book proves that the FBI cannot fight terrorism
   we need to copy the british domestic intelligence service, MI5.
   
   WE NEED TO HAVE ANSWERS. THIS BOOK IS A GREAT FIRST STEP... MUCH MORE WORK NEEDS TO BE DONE. HIGH RANKING OFFICIALS HAVE A LOT OF EXPLAINING TO DO...



2. Triple Cross is scary when you realize the government
   cover ups which could have stopped 9/11. The work done
   by Peter Lance to uncover these facts is amazing.



3. A lot, actually an amazing amount, of original hard work went into making Triple Cross. Peter Lance is one of the true remaining gumshoe investigative reporters. Lance talked to so many people directly. This is a landmark, maybe THE landmark, original work of research on September 11. The scope of the effort does not cover everything unanswered about September 11, but where Lance goes, he goes DEEP, very deep, and leaves out nothing. There is so much information, with full references and bibliography of sources, that it is work to even read it all, forget how much work Lance put into getting all this original information in the first place and then writing this book from it. It is almost encyclopedic, and this is a good thing, because we need the facts where there were few facts being shared otherwise.
   
   This book has got to be regarded as one of the key works of REAL investigation of September 11.
   
   Just the fact, ma'am. No bull.
   
   Keep going Lance, keep going. We need this information. We need your help.



4. Triple Cross: How bin Laden's Master Spy Penetrated the CIA, the Green Berets, and the FBI--and Why Patrick Fitzgerald Failed to Stop Him
   The author has written a very disturbing book that proves the management theory about how incompetents seem to rise to the surface in some management positions.
   "I'm in charge, you aren't, don't question my abilities or insult me with your suggestions or offer me any of your 'obviously substandard' opinions."
   Unfortunately, the management discussed here involves people our government has hired to oversee the safety of our country and its citizens. The author provides us with solid resource documentation for his findings and conclusions. It will both anger as well as frighten you with the examples of government incompetence and collusion designed to cover up the incompetence. This is demonstrated at the field and supervisory levels of action. The Congress and oversight agenciies it creates and the appointees of those agencies aren't interested in finding faults and causing corrections so that future mistakes can be avoided. Instead they use appointees who are actually part of the problem and have selfish personal interests in covering up and shifting blame away from themselves.



5. I'd read (and just re-read) "Cover Up" and thought that made one of the most compelling cases for showing what the "official story" completely ignored, whitewashed or didn't go near.
   
   I'm only halfway into this and my jaw is on the floor. The first reviewer was spot-on when they wrote this is the "Woodward and Bernstein" report that one of the Jersey Girls was openly hoping for, but didn't get.
   
   Using this book and the information in Paul Thompson's 9/11 timeline, we finally get at least a CLEARER picture of what led to 9/11, but with more questions unanswered still. And that picture bears no resemblance to that of the official 9/11 report.
   
   This is a MUST-READ for 9/11 historians. I've read dozens of books on the subject but at this point I'd tell people to read this FIRST.

2 comments about Where Angels Fall: The Great and Terrible, Vol. 2 (Stewart, Chris, Great and the Terrible, V. 2.).

1. I have been a member of the LDS Church since I was 8, making my way on others testimonies, having a blind faith on all that was being taught to me, and never really living my faith. I am now 48 and after having listened to this series, my soul literally awoke, and sang with joy. This has been a spiritual guide to strengthing mine own testimony.
   
   I am waiting for the next book in this series.



2. I have read both of the books in the Great and the Terrible (i hope) seriers. I loved this author's interpertation of what and how we were before we came to earth and how we ourselves have picked how we were going to live here. I personally could not put either book down until I was done it.