5 comments about Never Again: Securing America and Restoring Justice.

1. Never Again is very badly written, meaning that Ashcroft probably wrote it himself, as ghost writers are more experienced. The bad writing does its best to support nonsensical ideas. Worst of all, much of the book consists of Ashcroft whining and crying about how anything that doesn't go 100% his way is the fault of various other people such as the media, democrats, "liberal" groups, etc., while avoiding all personal responsibility. This is a terrible book, thats probably why i found it at a 99cent store.



2. My first impression on reading the book is that John Ashcroft is a true American hero. A man of insight, good judgment and integrity.
   
   My second impression is that the book is unusually well written and edited. In just 294 pages (hardbook edition), he tells the story of his time as Attorney General, and makes very powerful points about steps that he took (that were not previously taken) to improve our internal security. Especially impressive (and clear) is his description of the problem of the "wall" between criminal and subversive surveillance operations, which he fought to tear down.
   
   I recommend you read the other reviews here to get a fuller flavor of the book and Mr. Ashcroft (which include less favorable views of both), then I recommend that you buy the book, read it, and decide for yourself.



3. Please don't wear your political hat when you judge this book. Whether or not you agree with Mr Ashcroft, you must agree this book provides insider details that are intriguing. Ashcroft spends much of the book vigorously defending the PATRIOT act, with numerous success stories of its use in the war on terror. I think many of these stories have escaped the proper attention that the press should have given them. Mr Ashcroft also provides interesting accounts of his interactions with political enemies in the senate. I found it amusing that some senators would be so vicious in front of the TV cameras, yet cordial with Ashcroft off camera. One thing missing in this book is Ashcroft's views on the war in Iraq, although I would be surprised if he isn't 100% behind the President.
   
   One final thought... Mr Ashcroft comes across as an old fashioned gentleman with good character. I suppose he would value that more than any political accomplishment over his lifetime.



4. In this highly informative and fact-filled chronicle, Ashcroft details how his deeply held faith in Christ, his involvement in crafting the historic Patriot Act and his extraordinary talent for writing inspirational songs about freedom and eagles led to the restoration of justice and prevented further terrorist acts on the U.S..
   
   Although Ashcroft is the only man ever to have been defeated by a dead man in a U.S. Senate race, his faith in soaring eagles and his deep commitment to the Patriot Act make him one of the greatest Americans in history.
   
   Ashcroft is often criticized by many for evading military service (he applied for and received six student draft deferments during the VietNam war). But one must not forget that Ashcroft is the author of one of the most inspiring songs ever written about America, "Let The Eagle Soar." This majestic anthem is no doubt one of America's greatest weapons against the terrorists who hate our freedoms. Ashcroft's glorious love song to our great nation makes it clear that his blessed gift of patriotic tune-smithing more than makes up for his draft dodging. His participation in the senate barbershop quartet with that other great proponent of American family values and Christian morality Larry Craig is also a testament to his patriotism. Even though the people of Missouri decided it would be better to elect a dead man as their senator than Ashcroft, it must be noted that he is the most patriotic of Americans.
   
   His work as Bush's Attorney General will be remembered by historians as restoring a sense of security to the country by providing comfort to Americans by singing "Let the Eagles Soar" at every public gathering he attended.



5. I really enjoyed John Ashcroft's account of what he did, and why. It is an easy, informative, and enjoyable read. In my mind I had rated the book very highly, and told my wife that the mainstream news media had not done him or the Patriot Act justice. But then I decided to look into the Patriot Act for myself -- because Ashcroft's accounting of what the Act does is so different than what the news media has claimed. My conclusion is that the news media was as shallow as usual, worthy of little attention as a source of real information; and John Ashcroft was a bit strong in some of his own assertions. I rated the book down a bit because of this overassertion, but it is still a book well worth reading.
   
   Here is what I found on two key points:
   
   1.) Ashcroft spends considerable time describing the problem of the "wall" between criminal and subversive surveillance operations, which he fought to tear down. However, that this wall even existed was found by the Federal Surveillance Court of Review to have actually been a long-held misinterpretation by government agencies. I don't see this new insight as either pro-Ashcroft or anti-Ashcroft. I was in Government long enough to know that such misinterpretations indeed happen.
   
   It is a bit humorous (or not so humorous from another perspective) that the Attorney General of the United States can't get clear interpretations of the law from his scores of government attorneys!
   
   2.) Ashcroft claimed that the Patriot Act still does not allow any undisclosed surveillance without FISA judicial consent. This claim is so counter to the news media's claims, I paid it special attention. It turns out that Ashcroft's claim is too strong in two particular areas:
   
   a.) The Patriot Act expanded use of National Security Letters, which allows the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records without any court order, and places a national-security gag on the companies holding those records -- so that they may not inform those whose records have been accessed by the FBI. In fairness, Wikipedia provides an example of a National Security Letter demanded email header information from an Internet Service Provider, and the information they demanded specifically excluded the subject line and the text of the email; that is, they were seeking only the routing information -- that is, where the emails were originating and going. You can draw your own conclusions as to whether this is unreasonable governmental data mining; for the record, I personally don't object to this level of surveillance without court oversight.
   
   b.) There seems to be a loophole clause built into the Patriot Act that I've heard nothing about before. The Patriot Act specifies that those who operate or own a "protected computer" can give permission for authorities to intercept communications carried out on their machine. This permission bypasses the requirements of the Wiretap statute. The
   definition of a "protected computer" broadly encompasses those computers used in interstate or foreign commerce or communication. In my way of thinking, any email or web server connected to the Internet meets this definition. The Internet allows worldwide communication, so any PC connected to the Internet is used in interstate and foreign communication -- if any packets routed through it are to/from another state or oountry. So, all the government needs to do is find several server owners who will (for free or for a fee?) give them permission to intercept traffic through their servers, and the requirements of the Wiretap statute are bypassed. Some lawyer may prove me wrong on this, but it seems pretty clear to me.
   
   Ashcroft may have been a bit over the top with his zealotry for his particular brand of religion, but he has earned the respect of several liberals for doing what he thought was right, instead of politically expedient. Marty Peretz, in The New Republic (a liberal magazine), says: "I know it's difficult for some people to understand that Ashcroft tried to stand between public liberties and the president's minions. But he did." The truth about Ashcroft's legacy is far more complex than "I hate him because he flaunts his religion" or "I love him because he is a strong Christian."
   
   To me he seems to be a man of high personal integrity -- according to the standards he ascribes to, which are high, if perhaps misguided. He sees the world too much in black and white, without sufficient shades of gray. The world needs protection from terrorism, but the world also needs protection from overzealous governments. You can choose one or the
   other (black or white), but you are choosing between Charybdis and Scylla. We need to steer a narrow course between these two monsters. Time will tell if his policies get tweaked to set us on that narrow course, or if the legal loopholes have headed us towards Scylla. But never forget that he did nothing in the Patriot Act that Congress has not okayed. We seem to forget that they are the ones we should hold responsible.
   
   Read the book. It will give you Ashcroft's side of his story. Then, read the Patriot Act for yourself. You'll come away understanding more about the man and the issues, and you won't be able to paint him "all bad" or "all good." As for me, I think he was of about the same caliber as the rest of Bush's staff; well below the best and brightest the Republican Party has offered the country in my lifetime. But he is still a man who believes that personal integrity is a valuable attribute and that there is such a thing as personal honor. He measures up well above Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz in my mind.

5 comments about The Outlaw Sea: A World of Freedom, Chaos, and Crime.

1. Considering that the subject matter of this book is shipwrecks, smuggling, castaways, piracy, and a host of other lurid ocean-related themes, I was surprised to find it on the tedious side.
   
   Langewiesche's basic strategy is to discuss shipwreck after shipwreck, and then investigate the seamy underworld of the shipping companies lurking behind the disasters, and the laws that have helped to engender the situation.
   
   But the book is poorly organized and Langewiesche gets distracted easily: for example, after going on and on about the wreck of the Estonia, he continues for a couple of dozen pages about the various conspiracy theories surrounding its sinking. Digressions like this are common.
   
   The book also has no logical beginning or ending, and I can't see why Langewiesche even divides the work into chapters. A glimpse at the titles of the chapters (e.g., "To the Ramparts," "On a Captive Sea," "The Ocean's Way") is enough to suggest that there is no progression of thought being realized in the book, and other than a general lament on the rough and shady nature of international shipping, the book ends up having little to offer.
   
   Certainly not in the way of entertainment!



2. I could not put this book down. Some other reviewers' complaints (too many digressions, no central theme) are precisely what I like about it. Great stuff!
   
   Best of all, Langewiesche is a great writer. It was a joy to read poetic sentences that were not poetic for their own sake. Langewiesche is a good writer who does not write good sentences merely to dazzle but to actually tell us something.
   
   If this book is any indication, I'm ordering all of his others and look forward to reading them.



3. This is one scary book. Pirates, murders, breakups at sea, the loss of the huge ferry Estonia with many innocent passengers and so on. It is well written, but it is sort of like if somebody wrote a book about all the people who had been horribly murdered in public restrooms. I don't know how many of those there have been in the last 100 years, but let's say there were fifty and suppose I were to gruesomely describe ten of those. After reading that book you'd never be able to walk into the men's (or ladies) room again without getting the shudders. You'd likely be buying adult Huggies to avoid the whole possiblity of having to take the chance.
   
   Well, that's the way this book is. It's scary, and after you read it you will have to think twice about getting within a hundred miles of any large body of water. That's you, of course. Now I live on an island, so what the hell am I supposed to do.



4. Wm. Langewiesche is a favorite author of mine, having produced several previous delicious reading experiences for me, most recently his book about the Sahara. He is a skillful wordsmith and travel raconteur with an eye for detail almost as keen as Paul Theroux's. So I leapt at the chance to read The Outlaw Sea, thinking it would help explain the piracy issue in great detail. (How is it the world's strongest navies can't stop a few Somalis in outboards from highjacking yachts in 2008?) Instead, while devoting a chapter on South China sea pirates, he devotes two very lengthy chapters on the Baltic Sea ferry disaster that was so regrettable but presented by the author in such detail one leaves the book thinking he has seen every rivet and chain link of the Estonia, the ship that sunk--this book. I'll continue to seek out Mr. Langewiesche's work, but with skepticism and a little less enthusiasm.



5. This book covers a wide range of subjects related to shipping and explains that many aspects of life at sea are unregulated, or regulated only on a voluntary or theoretical level, and that consequently, maritime life is just as dangerous as it has ever been. The book discusses flags of convenience, negligence in maintenance and inspections, piracy, and shipbreaking. Most of these topics stand alone as decent essays. However, Langewiesche tries to tie them together with vague lines in each chapter about the uncontrollable quality of the sea and anything having to do with it, a device that looks like a last-minute, unconvincing way of binding a collection of essays into a book. The longest essay is the excessive, 94-page treatment (out of a total of 239 pages) of the 1994 wreck of the Baltic ferry Estonia. Much of this section concerns media vampires and conspiracy theorists drawn to the tragedy. In this section, it is easy to forget that one is reading a book about the sea.

5 comments about The Secret Terrorists.

1. This book (pamphlet?) is merely anti-catholicism propaganda. Premise? That the Jesuits caused all evil, from every assassinated US President to the sinking of the Titanic.
   
   It reads like every other conspiratorial book. Simply replace the Jesuits with the Jews, the Arabs, International Bankers, the Rothschilds, or the Rockefellers.
   
   The story is the same in each case, just the main character changes.



2. This book is the most eye opening book I have ever read, only to a business as usual person would this come off as conspiracy, this guy has
   referenced proof and even history books back all of his theories, Plus anyone who was brought up as Catholic will know it's TRUE, I lived it
   so I saw how they deceived us and tried their best to control. This is also the best True American History book ever published, explaining how this Criminal Fed Reserve bank has taken over our govt and how they tie in with the Other 2 Great Satan's in the US, The AMA & The Church.



3. This is one of the few very informative books I have ever read. It gets strait to the heart of the matter. No smoke and mirrors like our so called news today. EVERYONE who wants to know the ugly TRUTH should read this book.



4. I'M A FORMER CATHOLIC - NOW A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN = WHO HAS STUDY FOR 45 YEARS THIS INFORMATION OF BOTH WORLD HISTORY AND US HISTORY =THIS BOOK SPELLS OUT THE REAL TRUTH - THAT THE POWERS THAT WILL BE, OR ARE, JUST WANT THE GENERAL PUBLIC, TO THINK, - OH YAH THIS IS JUST ANOTHER BS CONSPIRACY THEORY! =THE PROBLEM IS THE DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE, BY THOSE WHO PAID DEARLY TO OPPOSE ITS REALITY IS VALIDATED, IN THEIR STATEMENTS, AND LETTERS. THINK FOR YOURSELF- STUDY, AND RESEARCH ITS CONTENTS. JUST LOOK AROUND YOU. THESE SO CALLED EXPERTS = ARE IDOITS, AND FOOLS,-SOME KNOW THE TRUTH, OTHERS DONT HAVE A DAMN CLUE! = DENY THIS, BOOK, AND WAKE UP LIKE THE IKE VICTIMS; WHO ALSO WERE IN DENIAL = I'M TELLING EVERYONE McCAIN AND ALL TBN CHRISTIAN SPOKES PERSONS = CALLING FOR ITS EXPOSURE. READ IT, THEN ASK YOURSELF, = BASED ON WHAT IS GOING ON, = WHAT OTHER REASON COULD, HAVE CREATED ALL OF THIS? THIS BOOK DAREST TO EXPOSE ALL! GO BACK TO THE INQUISITIONS OF THE POPE AND CHARLES V OF SPAIN - AGAINST EUROPEAN PROTESTANTS - READ THE BOOK OF REVELATION - AND FINDOUT THE DEMISE OF THE POPE AND ALL HIS FOLLOWERS-SHARE THE GOSPLE OF JESUS CHRIST ALONE - THE LORD IS STILL IN CONTROL EVEN IN THE STORMS OF LIFE - A VET USMC - A BROTHER IN CHRIST/ RAYMOND A. HEDLEY



5. Aladino & Sonia Collazo;
   This is a colossal discovery. Every one who has an interest and wants to seek reality should read this book. Not only is an eye opener but also CT Scant of the real brains of who is running the World Finances. God only knows, how many, have paid with their precious lives, by opposing and exposing this monster "The Federal Reserve Bank) which is neither federal nor is a reserve. It is a mere laundry for the Vatican and their goons (the Jesuits, Read and find out their Sworn Oath as far back as the 15th Century). Like the Emperor's new clothes. This book will open the eyes of the blind and sooner or later Truth will surface and the Lies will be put to rest, along with those who originated it. We were also blinded by the lock of knowledge. As we both were born and raised Roman Catholics, from Puerto Rico, one day we both saw the light of Jesus that free us. Now we are both believers of his word and also of the enlightenment of the facts addressed in this book. All this is prophesied in the book of Revelations, as others have conveyed in their reviews. The Great Babylon, the Woman riding the Beast (read and see what the Lord is saying).

5 comments about U.s. Armed Forces Nuclear, Biological And Chemical Survival Manual.

1. I received this for Christmas from a cousin who is in the National Guard who told me his unit used it for training. I can see why. This is essential stuff...



2. My New Year's resolution was to read this book - and I'm glad that I did. It took hearing about the exploits of Special Forces in Afghanistan and Iraq to make me pick up and read this book by former Navy SEAL Captain Couch. He knows what he's talking about and has given us something straight from military training manuals.



3. As a former SEAL I have read several of Captain Couch's novels and liked them all. I thought that I would take a chance on this book because of his reputation. I am glad I did and have bought several more copies through you all for relatives. There is a wealth of great material here and I'll give the sequel five stars instead of four if it's longer!



4. We assigned writer prepared this recommendation on a lovely, though warm summer day, while butterflies fluttered over a stand of purple thistles. Until he read this book, it seemed like a peaceful scene. Then, it seemed full of threats and hidden perils. He wondered if his building is strong enough to protect against a nuclear attack. What will his family do if someone sprays anthrax spores from a crop duster? Is there a clear spot in the basement to store enough gas masks, and which ones? This book will make you paranoid, too. It says that the threat of an attack is real and growing. You could laugh that off, except that the police just busted an arms dealer for trying to bring missiles into the U.S., except that someone mailed anthrax to strangers, except that there used to be towers at the World Trade Center. Are recommendation - buy this book, read it, then decide whether it is better to prepare or to take your chances. Feeling lucky? At least go buy some flashlight batteries



5. As someone who served in the Army, I have had plenty of NBC training and can say that this book is something that everyone should take the time to read. In fact I learned even more from this book because it is presented in a way that anyone can understand, and it is targeted for use by the civilian population. READ IT, it may save your life one day.

No comments about Justice at War: The Men and Ideas that Shaped America's War on Terror (New York Review Books Collection).

5 comments about The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the War, Losing the Peace.

1. Recommended by my son who is in the U.S. Dept of State. Found it interesting and well written. Thought it might be somewhat biased as the author was part of the post occupation phase in Iraq.Arrived in good time, in very good condition.



2. Books about the Iraq war are plentiful to say the least and unfortunately, many of them add little to the debate. Even so, there are many books that do and it can be a bit intimidating to dive into the subject. There isn't a single definitive book on the subject and if you really want to understand the war and its aftermath, you'll need to devote quite a bit of time to that end. Ali Allawi's book is definitely worth the read, but it's hard to tell exactly where this book fits into the overall picture from the title alone. What you'll find in The Occupation of Iraq is primarily a narrative (from an Iraqi perspective) of the political process in Iraq after the U.S. invasion. Although Allawi is at times critical of the U.S., what you won't find in this book is a rant against the Bush administration or the U.S. in general, even though many people reviewing books like this like to say that it's somehow incontrovertible proof that Bush is a lying criminal etc.
   
   As an Iraqi, Allawi provides a number of important insights that normally get left out of the discussion by American writers. One important piece of conventional wisdom is that Saddam Hussein's regime was secular and that the rise of Islamic extremism in Iraq is somehow America's fault, but Allawi correctly points out that in 1994, Hussein launched a faith campaign in order to enhance its authority and credibility. This more than anything the U.S. did planted the seeds of Sunni extremism. Another important, but often overlooked point involves the looting of the country that happened after the invasion. Allawi draws attention to the fact that the systematic looting of government buildings was not the work of random criminals, but rather by regime elements determined to dismantle as much of the state's infrastructure as possible, making in more difficult for the Americans and successive Iraqi governments and also to destroy as much incriminating evidence as possible. This never really gets discussed in other books on the subject, but it's an important point that makes a lot of sense when you think about it. As far as the criticism goes that Allawi was an exile, and therefore unqualified to really write about Iraq, the vast majority of the book is concerned with the post-invasion period, when he was part of the government. There is very little about Iraq before the war. These types of criticisms against Allawi carry little, if any weight.
   
   Some things that stood out to me as odd though. One was that the preface was obviously written by someone whose first language isn't English, but the rest of the book doesn't come across this way at all. Maybe it was that the rest of the book was subject to careful editing while the preface was left alone. In any case, it seems like one person wrote the preface while a different person wrote the rest of the book. Also, there are severl times in the book where Allawi refers to himself, but it's in the third person. This adds to the impression that someone else wrote the bulk of the book. In most narrative accounts like this, a person involved in the story itself uses 1st person, not 3rd. Another odd thing about this book is that Allawi never capitalizes the words West or Western. Normally when writing about "the" West or "the" East, the words are capitalized. A subtle jab at the West by Allawi perhaps? Hard to tell, but odd nonetheless.
   
   At 460 pages, The Occupation of Iraq is a lengthy and sometimes difficult read, but ultimately rewarding. To my knowledge, this is the only work of such depth written by an Iraqi involved in the work of rebuilding Iraq at the governmental level. Fiasco and Cobra II cover the story from the American military perspective, The Assassins' Gate and the Foreigner's Gift are more of an investigative journalism/extensive travel diary, and State of Denial is the ultimate insider's look at the Bush administration. These are all important angles and necessary ones to fully understand what's happened in Iraq. Allawi's contribution provides a much needed Iraqi government perspective and in many ways, he's just as critical of the Iraqi government's failures as most are of the Bush administration. This probably shouldn't be the first book about Iraq that someone reads, because I think it requires at least some prior knowledge about the country. Someone with no background will likely have a difficult time here, but the book is certainly rewarding for those well-versed in the subject.



3. I just finished reading this book. It is the sixth book I have read on the war in Iraq, and the first by an Iraqi. It is not an easy read, but it is worth the effort. The only reason that I didn't give it 5 stars is that it is kind of a chore to grind through the whole thing, but I am glad I made the effort.
   
   Compared to the other books on Iraq which I have read, this painted a much more complex picture of Iraq. It helped me to understand the complexities of Iraq, and how hard it is to govern it. The identification of Iraqis with Iraq seems pretty thin compared to identification with their religion, their ethnicity, their tribe, clan, family, etc.
   
   Allawi complements some and reproves others. The failure of the occupation is due to mistakes both by the U.S. and by the Iraqis. And he lays it all out quite well. One comment on the U.S. administration really stood out: He cited cheery quotes by both President Bush and General Petraeus in the midst of explaining the then current situation, which was anything but cheery. So I am even less inclined to believe anything said in the future by these two men. I had an idea there was corruption, but the scale of it is mind-boggling. Where other books, by Americans, detail the corruption on the American side, Allawi explains it on the Iraqi side.
   
   If you want to be informed, read this book. If you don't want to be depressed, pass it up.
   
   Dennis Veith



4. If you read just one book about Iraq you need it to be this one. This book is the most comprehensive book out there. It provides a very in depth explanation of Iraq. The book focuses on the political angle of Iraq. He has a lot of inside information that the American press just misses. He has some good insight on American policy that is interesting. The author is Iraqi so he has such an insight that is amazing. You can't find this anywhere else.



5. Title The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the War, Losing the Peace
   Author: Ali A. Allawi
   Rating *****
   Tags iraq, occupation, war, george w bush, dick cheney, middle east, politics, government, achmed chalabi, ali allawi
   
   Excellent book, indispensible for any Westerner seeking to understand Iraq. Ali Allawi is an Iraqi who spent much of his life in exile from the Ba'ath regime, and was well-connected to the opposition who were influential once Saddam was overthrown, being a nephew of Ahmed Chalabi and a cousin of Ayed Allawi. He held various positions in post-Saddam Iraq.
   
   All of which prepares one for a biased telling of the story of Iraq, from the viewpoint of a partisan with a particular view. What one gets instead is a stunningly broad and deep look at all the strands that go into creating the Iraq of today. Allawi discusses the politics, religion, and economy of Iraq, showing the major players and their complex viewpoints, the interaction of all the persons, events, and influences in a remarkably dispassionate and balanced way. Yet he writes with an insider's knowledge and access to people in positions of influence.
   
   Moreover Allawi is competent in discussing the influences that drove the American invasion, and provides an excellent analysis of a theorist the Americans SHOULD have paid attention to , Robert Merton, and his theories of the law of unintended consequences. By the end of the book one is well aware of how difficult and multi-faceted a job is nation building, not something that should be attempted lightly or in ignorance.
   
   Allawi includes brief but important analyses of the views of the other regional powers, including Iran and Saudi Arabia. Their views are complex and multi-layered.
   
   One item was particularly interesting to me. I just read the book _Century of War, Century of Media_ which was particularly horrifying in describing the use of phosphorus by US troops in Fallujah. Allawi's book confirms that account on p. 339, "The MNF [multinational force] was accused of using banned chemical weapons such as white phosphorus and incendiary bombs, a charge denied by the State Department but subsequently indirectly confirmed by the Department of Defense."
   
   The book does not end on a hopeful note. The situation in Iraq is dire, with few good solutions. But after reading this book one has a much better idea of how the situation became what it is, which is a necessary condition to finding solution
   
   Publication Yale University Press (2007), Edition: 1, Hardcover, 544 pages
   Publication date 2007
   ISBN 0300110154 / 9780300110159

5 comments about The Big U.

1. Not his best, but a darn good read. Neal Stephenson, Boston U class of '81, made the most of his time at B.U. by writing his first partly sci fi novel. University life starts out as ordered chaos and gradually builds to a wild crescendo of open warfare in the lunatic asylum. Nothing is held sacred, well except for the Big Wheel Oil sign, in reality the Citgo sign in Kenmore square. Interestingly, it was actually turned off from 1979 to 1983, by Governor Ed King to save electricity. The book is full of gems such as an attempt to pie President Krupp (John Silber?), a brilliant computer nerd battling it out with an immortal computer virus, dungeons and dragons played in the sewers under B.U. infested with giant rats, and an incredibly bizarre method to raise money for the University (Silber again?). Laced with humor, some scares, but never a dull moment.



2. What a great book! I don't know about 80s college parody or whatever, but Stephenson writes some great characters and the style of narration is great. This book is great because of the exaggeration and because while I was reading it, Stephenson made the extreme stuff make sense. It's like watching a movie where the acting is so good you don't even go "She's a great actor" because the performance has got you. He sets the tone of the craziness right from the start, establishing the rules where this book takes place. Sure college kids can relate to this book but that's not what makes it great. Actually I read this book and didn't think about college too much at all and I was in a FRAT! hohoho. I definitely liked this more than his later books the whole Baroque Cycle, I barely got through cryptonomicon. I like his sense of humor so Zodiac, Snowcrash, and some of Diamond Age was more my style, along with the big U. So anyways check this book out especially if you liked snowcrash. It's pretty solid.



3. What's really fascinating about The Big U is how early Neal Stephenson hit upon so many of the themes that he follows through so much of his more recent fiction. Others have commented about the interest in computers, programming, and worms--these come in as plot points here, but Stephenson hadn't figured out how to use them in detail without losing the reader, as he did later in Cryptonomicon. The fascinating blend between absolutely ludicrous plot twists, believable detail, and weird, geeky heros is here already. And I noticed some more incidental ideas germinating here; I was struck by how the decaying University, once the epitome of higher education, resembled the decaying palace of Louis XIV, complete with bats and rats and crumbling ceilings and walls. Also, the dumping of cement into the hole occupied by the "B-men" in the Big U was surely a forerunner of two scenes in Cryptonomicon--if you haven't read it, I don't want to spoil it for you here. We are missing a red-headed immortal, but Stephenson was just getting warmed up. Fans should not miss this; but if you haven't gotten bitten by the Stephenson bug, you might want to start elsewhere.



4. Although the writing tends to be a bit undisciplined and even unrestrained, I greatly enjoyed this book. It's little more than a funny story, but a funny story it is (at least from the point of view of a college junior). It provides a view of college that is exaggerated in a most comical way. It's a great read for anyone in college or anyone who has been to an American university.
   
   It's also an interesting read that provides a look at Stephenson's early roots. I'm a huge Stephenson fan, and this novel is a good deal different from this later writer. It does, however, provide a look at some of his early ideas, especially ones that came out in his groundbreaking novel "Snow Crash". Many reviewers have made the obvious computer/technology connections, but I was much more surprised by the discussion of Julian Jaynes' "The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" that was found in "The Big U". Fans of "Snow Crash" will know that Jaynes' work is a fundamental part of "Snow Crash", and it's interesting to see Stephenson talk about the research in "The Big U", if only on a much smaller scale than in "Snow Crash". Many of Stephenson's later ideas are touched upon in "The Big U", although it's clear that in 1984 he wasn't as adept at weaving them into a coherent, compelling story. Still, "The Big U" is worth reading for both entertainment and historical reasons.



5. The Big U is the first and least of Stephenson's novels. But if it ultimately fails to cohere, that's only because it was an ambitious attempt--with themes and a voice that Stephenson's fans will recognize from his later work.

2 comments about Class 11: My Story Inside the CIA's First Post-9/11 Spy Class.

1. For those that wonder what it might be like to enter training for the CIA'a Clandestine Service, this is your book. The author, otherwise an average American citizen, volunteered for the CIA soon after 9/11 in his mid-thirties. Along with a host of other men and women from all walks of life, Waters entered the training program for the Directorate of Operations to become a field operative in the war on terror. His depiction of training is fascinating, particularly with his perspective not as a gung-ho, wanted-to-be-a-spy-from-birth kind of guy, but as an average guy who was inspired to make a sacrifice to protect the country. I'm about halfway through the book now, but I can hardly put it down. Well-written and very interesting.



2. This book was previously reviewed numerous times by various people who gave it very poor reviews. None of those negative reviews, however, is still posted. Bad for sales I guess. This author is a clown. The book is weak. He left the CIA after only a few years. Therefore, his knowledge is super limited and the patriotism he so loudly proclaims is greatly undermined. Anybody in the intelligence or law enforcement community will tell you this book is weak, poorly written, and self serving. He joined the CIA, got out, and wrote a weak book which will make him a quick buck. Save yours!!

4 comments about Fighting the War of Ideas like a Real War.

1. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in fighting terrorism and extremism. With so much of the focus these days on the military and political equation in Iraq, Waller provides an important reminder that this is, at the end of the day, a battle over IDEAS, very important ideas. Here's hoping this gets a good read in Washington.



2. Michael Waller has pulled together the kind of thinking that must influence the way free nations deal with militant extremism. Mike tells it like it is and attempts to guide our nation's policy-makers, diplomats, and military towards a new path to understand the conflict in which are now engaged.



3. The U.S. Government needs to make this mandatory reading for all intelligence analysts, military, consultants/advisors, and policy makers. We should be using more soft power to combat ideas and maximize that aspect of U.S. power. Dr. Waller gets it all right. I just hope we listen.



4. Fighting the War of Ideas like a Real War is a stunningly concise and incisive work about the propaganda and public diplomacy side of fighting a "small war." It is written specifically for our current war against Islamic Fascism and is geared towards just scratching the surface of how the US can mobilize its communications resources in a strategy to literally divide and isolate the enemy while winning the hearts and minds of allies and neutrals.
   
   Despite its short size this book is dense with illuminating ideas and challenging new thoughts. My copy is practically entirely hi-lighted (admittedly probably defeating the whole purpose of highlighting) and every page has at least one note written in the margin.
   
   The author argues for a basic strategy and simple actions that the US government -as well as the private sector- can adopt to start fighthing this war on all fronts. He also cogently argues that the US message strategy in this war should generally be shifted from the State Department to a military combatant command. (If you have read Shadow Warriors by Kenneth Timmerman you will probably have even more reason to agree with this assessment.) I will not delve into the authors many points as they should be read in their entirety to be fully understood and appreciated.
   
   However as the author admits this book is not at all comprehensive. It lacked a lot of specifics on how to actually implement his basic strategy. This of course is probably not necessary for the public at large to worry itself about, but will have to be decided by those actually in charge of executing it. As a book about a communications strategy though it also lacks the most key element of any strategy: it doesn't consider how the enemy would react and adapt to our actions on the message front. Again, though, that can be left up to those actually doing the fighting and doesn't detract from the intent and hoped for effect of this boook.
   
   This needs to be widely read by senior US diplomats, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, military public affairs officers and people involved in psychological operations, and then acted upon. The general public will also behoove themselves by reading it as well. Here's to hoping this book is the spark that lights a fire of debate and action geared towards winning the propaganda front of the War on Islamo-fascism.

5 comments about The Eight O'Clock Ferry to the Windward Side: Fighting the Lawless World of Guantanamo Bay.

1. From various newspaper articles, I had heard that many of the people in Guantanamo Bay were innocent and that torture happens there. But all of that seemed very abstract until I read this book. I was frequently upset by the things I read in this book. It is difficult to read about torture, as well as your own goverment's ability to waste time, tax-payer money and other people's lives for information that bears no fruit, or worse, fruit that meets their pre-conceived notions. I think that is the saddest aspect of reading this book. Why is the government still detaining people for which there is hard evidence of their innocence? How can we be spending bllions of $$ on the war on terror, yet not get the detainees' ages and names correct?
   
   Highlights of the book:
   
   - How politically-charged the words 'terror' and 'torture' are.
   - The account of Binyam Mohamed's 18-month torture abroad and his military trial.
   - The discussion of the 'ticking time bomb' scenario, which is often used to justify torture, and why the detention and torture of people held longer than a day, let alone 3+ years, will likely give obsolete or false information.
   - The discussion of how the US has given far more dangerous enemies of the past the benefit of a public trial, and our part in ensuring fair trials for Nazi war crime criminals.
   - Portraits of people in Guantanamo, both detainess and Americans stationed there.
   - Arguments for fair trials and open society versus the current policy of secrecy, torture and secret prisons, even for the baddest of the bad.
   
   The last chapter, where Mr. Smith talks about the effect of the US's decisions on terrorism recruitment, reads more like political rant. I am sympathetic to the argument, but it is speculation. And frankly, not needed. The preceding chapters are powerful on their own. I would encourage people to read this book.



2. Imagine that you have been swept away to a prison, kept in solitary confinement and when taken out for questioning you are continually asked about the tomatoes you were carrying ( the translators don't always have a full command of dialects )and you have no idea what your interrogators want or if they are totally insane. Because this book is written from a lawyer's point of view and lays out only the facts ( only what he has been able to ascertain and what he is allowed to make known ) it takes some reflection and imagination to put yourself in the place of the detainees and savour the experience that they have had and continue to have.
   In other words this isn't "Midnight Express", but a look at guantanamo, its rules, the U.S. military, the stories of a few of the detainees and the constitutional and humanitarian issues involved.



3. If you haven't read Robert Conquest's seminal work The Great Terror about the purges, the show trials, law, and justice under Stalin, you might want to consider reading that first. Perhaps visit the Amazon site which has a quote from Harrison Salisbury saying the book is "an odyssey of madness, tragedy, and sadism". Then read Smith's eloquent book. Much is different, of course, but there is a lot that seems eerily similar. In Russia it was a crime to be suspected of anti-Soviet activities. This did not mean that you were actually guilty of such activities--it just meant that someone thought you might possibly be guilty, and being thought possibly guilty was a crime in itself, worthy of torture, a one-way trip to the cellars, or death in the labor camps. Evidence of guilt seemed to take a back seat to suspicion of guilt. Then read Smith's book.
   
   The Russian show trials were carefully scripted, and designed to give the mostly leftist press in attendance and the rest of the world through media coverage the impression that the rules of law were being followed and that justice was indeed being carried out. Much of the world wanted to believe that the deviationist wreckers were truly guilty and deserved the ultimate punishment for trying to sabotage the workers' paradise. Reading Smith's book will show that the Stalinists were not the only ones who loved carefully scripted show trials before handpicked judges.
   
   There is, as I've said, much that is different. In Russia, a popular sentence was "exile, without right of communication", a hypocritical euphemism for being shot in the cellars. In Guantanamo, as you'll see in the book, "detention, without right of communication", is not a sentence from a judge at a two-minute hearing, as in Russia. The criminal isn't taken to the cellars and shot, at least not at Guantanamo. Prior to some Supreme Court decisions, a prisoner could be held without right of communication for the duration of the war on terror, and since terrorism has been going on for thousands of years, there is no reason to think that many of the prisoners would have ever had a hearing or seen a lawyer for the rest of their life.
   
   In Russia, family members could wait in long lines outside the Butyrka and other prisons with packages of food and clothing for their loved ones: if the package was accepted, it meant the spouse, brother, etc, was still alive there. If refused, they had been taken to the cellars or sent to a labor camp. No such bleeding-heart tenderness at Guantanamo.
   
   Smith's book shows that there are some truly dangerous prisoners at Guantanamo--but there are too many who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. 11-year-old boys, 93-year-old men, goatherders (how do you prove that while herding goats you didn't meet with Bin Laden?),etc. Pakistan was happy to show it was doing its part in the war on terror by turning in Arabs and collecting nice bounties no questions asked. Kafka's novel The Trial is appropriate reading here. In Russia, the populace, as a whole, heartily endorsed Stalin's war on the wrecker saboteurs: someone, after all, must be to blame for all the problems, and an alternative obvious source to blame was not conducive to good health and long life. The people were not concerned about the rights of the accused, or legal niceties. In America, there is not widespread concern about legal niceties for a bunch of Moslems in Guantanamo and other places of detention. So if you read Smith's book, you'll find it quite depressing, especially if you've read The Great Terror. There's too much in Smith's book that most of us would prefer not to hear about or think about: we'd rather turn on the TV and see Happy News or a nice patriotic CSI TV show or something. It's a fine book, but not a fun one.



4. In vivid, engaging prose uncommon among attorney authors, Clive Stafford Smith offers a startling first-hand account of America's most well-known gulag: the prison camps at Guantanamo Bay. Smith's volume places the U.S. Government's hypocrisy in the Bush II era on full display, with the prisoners there -- very few of whom, it appears, guilty of any crime at all (let alone legitimate involvement in Islamist terrorism) -- tragic protagonists in a prolonged tour through hell. Despite assiduous compliance with strict military classification and censorship requirements, Smith gives a stark account of torture, rendition, legal tricks, and a relentless war on due process -- by the same folks supposedly spreading "democracy" to the Middle East. With new precision details and personal prisoner histories, Smith's book is shocking even to those who never believed the news coverage. Read it with anger; the outrage is still going on.



5. Tragic book, very well written. I suspect all of it is true. If 10% is true, people who care about America need to tell our leaders that things must change now. We must respect the rights of people we have in custody, whether they are Americans, Iraqis, or people without a country. Our leaders have embarrassed our country by doing the things outlined here. Respect for human rights should be our starting point.