5 comments about The American Prophecies: Ancient Scriptures Reveal Our Nation's Future.

1. This is full of facts you would have to search hard for in other means. Excellent history; old and newer. Well written and an easy read.



2. After reading this book, I was curious as to what other readers had to say on Amazon. I was surprised to see that the overall rating is close to 5 stars. After reading some of the reviews, this is probably because most of the reviewers can be lumped into the category of "Christian literalist" who believe in a fundamentalist view of the Bible and Christianity in general. Well, I'm not one of those and I'm here to tell you that this book is more dangerous than it is helpful. While it was interesting to get the authors views of the players and motivations behind the founding of the modern state of Israel, I absolutely diagree with the foundations of his arguments. Simply put, his Christian biases are too much to take seriously and will do nothing but widen the gulf between Western and Middle Eastern ideology, be it religious, political or social. For those readers who have an open mind, don't waste your time with this book. For those of you with a fundamentalist outlook, do yourself (and the rest of us) a favor and open your eyes to a new way of thinking.



3. George Bush has a heart attack and dies. Obviously he goes to hell, where the Devil is waiting for him ....
   
   "I'm not sure what to do," says the Devil. "You're on my list, but I have no room for you. As you definitely have to stay here, I'm going to have to let someone else go. I've got three folks here who weren't quite as bad as you. I'll let one of them go, but you have to take their place. I'll even let you decide who leaves."
   
   George thought that sounded pretty good, so he agreed. The Devil opened the first room. In it were Richard Nixon and a large pool of hot water. He kept diving in and climbing out, over and over.Such was his fate in hell.
   No!" said George. "I don't think so, I'm not a good swimmer and don't think I could stay in hot water all day."
   
   The Devil led him to the next room. In it was Tony Blair with a sledgehammer and a room full of rocks. All he did was swing the hammer time after time. "No! I've got this problem with my shoulder. I would be in constant agony if all I could do was break rocks all day." commented George.
   
   The Devil opened the third door. In it, George saw Bill Clinton lying on the floor with his arms staked over his head, and his legs staked in a spread-eagle pose. Bent over him was Monica Lewinsky, doing what she does best. George Bush looked at this in disbelief for a while, and finally said "Yeah, I can handle this."
   
   The Devil smiled and said, "OK, Monica, you're free to go!"



4. It explained some of the things in the past that I was too young to be interested in. It helped explain why we are in some of the predictments that we are in because of past leaders decisions.



5. Not a real page turner at first ,but, the information in this book is most interesting!
   
   I would recommend for anyone who likes to study prophecy. OR is just a History buff...

5 comments about Enemies: How America's Foes Steal Our Vital Secrets--and How We Let It Happen.

1. The title should be "The Enemy Within" as we seem to be our own worse enemy.
   
   The priority always seemed to be telling the powers to be what they wanted to hear in order to preserve job security and personal career growth.
   
   If we continue to keep the "head in the sand" attitude we will be in real trouble.
   
   I urge anyone who works for a defense contractor or a government agency to read this book.
   
   Dave C
   Nashua , NH



2. This book brings to light the extent our enemies will go to get information they want. It also tells how often international agreements on arms and nuclear material are violated for money. While the United States has to try to work with many nations to broker some form of peace, the book shows there is no Nation we can fully trust. A good read for anyone interested in espionage and counterintelligence.



3. It will never happen, of course. Real investigative reporters who don't disguise their love and concern for the United States, folks like Bill Gertz and Bill Sammon will never gain the respect and votes of the Pulitzer Prize committee. They preserve their votes for people like Walter Duranty, who denied there was famine in the Ukraine and won a Lenin Prize in addition to his Pulitzer.
   
   Gertz is concerned for America's safety. As he puts it "[u]ntil we fix the gaping holes in our defenses, America will remain highly vulnerable to our enemies." And after reading this book, if you weren't already worried, you will be.
   
   Anyone who has visited a government office, whether to renew their driver's license, pay their property taxes, mail a package or whatever, knows that governments do not hire the cream of the crop. What happens when second, third and fourth rate people are hired by the CIA, the FBI and other security agencies?
   
   Uh, you get second, third or fourth rate performance in situations where the stakes are very, very high: like the preservation of the nation's secrets.
   
   Gertz details scandals resulting from the incompetence of the CIA and FBI. A Chinese woman has two lovers, both FBI agents. She's one of their prized informants - and a spy for the Chinese government. The investigation of her is muddled and she walks.
   
   The FBI spends years persecuting a CIA agent suspected of being a spy. They have no real evidence, but the harassment is non-stop. Their big clue is the CIA employee's proximity to a partiular park. After three years, after a KGB defector is paid $7 million for information, the FBI learns that the spy indeed lives near the park in question: his name is Robert Hanssen, an FBI agent who has spied for the Soviets for years.
   
   Gertz points out that literally every nation is spying on the United States - and that our agencies are horribly grossly incompetent to detect the spies and catch them.
   
   This is a frightening book, but one that every concerned American should read.
   
   Jerry



4. I think this book is excellent for one who likes to write essays or research paper about national security. There are a lot of information I haven't even known before from other information sources. the content of the book is well organized, so easy to collect information what I need for my writing. The stories were real happened, so it made me be interested. I'm sure this book is good for you to achieve your goals to write essays or researchpaper as well as you enjoy reading many interesting real stories.



5. Gertz took a critical issue and turns it into a litany of anecdotal stories about people who betray the trust their government put in them. Yes, there are spies in our government and something needs to be done with them. But Gertz is short on answers other than blaming the political correctness crowd and liberal democrats. Although they are deserving of much of the blame they are not the only ones guilty of the gaps in our counter-espionage efforts.
   
   One thing that really jumped out at me is his choice of sources. One individual -- whose name escapes me as I do not have the book in front of me -- is a counter-espionage expert at the FBI who is described in several chapters as part of the problem in terms of covering for people who probably do not deserve cover and is then cited as an expert in other chapters. Which is it Bill? Either this source is part of the problem or part of the solution?
   
   All in all, the book was big on rehashing stories of spies within the government but short on solutions.

5 comments about Report from Ground Zero.

1. "Report from Ground Zero: The Story of the Rescue Efforts at the World Trade Center" by Dennis Smith provides a poetic-journalistic look at a tragedy which still continues to shake America. You'll find the book stronger in intensity than many of the photographic collections of September 11, 2001.
   
   Why? Dennis Smith was a fireman who understood tragedy from an experienced viewpoint. Like all of us, he saw the worst of humankind crash into the World Trade Center. Then, he saw the best of humankind enter those same buildings to save the victims.
   
   Now, three years later, after many in America have preferred to see terrorism as a political event and not one of evil and hate, it is important to remember the violent images, and the tender responses to the hurting and scared. America was in one its greatest moments in those torrid days, and we should never forget.
   
   Smith's descriptions are more than photo-realistic versions of what he saw, but brings forth the anguish and passion, and the smell of wet ash and burning debris. Smith manages to connect with the reader beyond the hype and politics. You will not be able to read this unaffected.
   
   The people in the high-rises, on the planes, and the policemen and fireman all were real people. Even the foolish young men who hijacked the planes, the ones who believe Bin Laden -- all real people who died for another man's lie. Smith draws out the real, draws out the essence as well as the actual accounts of the awful events.
   
   I fully recommend "Report from Ground Zero: The Story of the Rescue Efforts at the World Trade Center" by Dennis Smith.
   
   Anthony Trendl
   editor, HungarianBookstore.com



2. A very readable, moving book that adds still more to the memory-bank of September 11, 2001. The book is divided into two sections: 9/11 itself and the first months afterward, recounted day by day. Most of the second section is Smith's own experiences, with fewer "interviews" with others; however, this doesn't take away from the power of the work.
   
   One peeve is that Smith too often refers to his previous work "Report from Engine Co. 82" in terms of whether or not people were aware of it--including incredulity that a police officer guarding the crime scene a few days afterwards didn't know. However, he writes some of the best descriptions of a profession, any profession, that I have ever read: "...to me it was always the best responsibility to have in a fire--to be on my stomach and to have the officer and the men shouting, 'That's it, you got it, move in, a little more, get the ceiling, get the ceiling, watch the windows, you got it now...".
   
   One quote from an Assistant Chief of Department captures how quickly people forget--from November 5, 2001: "They came down to the World Trade Center in fire trucks and we should not let them leave in dump trucks." Five years later, don't forget all of those who did not leave that day the way they started it.



3. This is absolutely a great book, probably the best one for getting you into ground zero and feeling what they felt, to as great of an extent as you can. I don't quite understand all of the [---] he uses, for example, "the [firefighters] started down Vessey". Is he just trying something new? I don't care though, I have never read a book that is as honest and makes you feel like your fighting the fires with dennis more then his series of books. Great job!



4. It's hard to not give this book a 5-star rating because I was moved in many places and I'm so grateful for the sacrifice of the firemen on 9/11. This book opened my eyes in many ways to their ultimate sacrifice and their continued efforts to honor their own.
   
   I do think, however, that this could have been edited a bit better. The aftermath section (which is about half of the book) seems repetitive to me and thus, not quite as powerful as the earlier section. Also, I found it strange that there was no mention of the crash of flight 587 on November 12th, 2001. Mr. Smith records that on that day he was in a meeting with Mayor Guilliani and other firemen about their role at ground zero. He focused on this day for several pages and failed to mention that 250+ people perished in a NY neighborhood aboard that flight and everyone initially suspected terrorism as the cause of the crash. This omission, perhaps, would have been more understandable had he not mentioned 11/12/01 at all, but there is a whole section for that day and certainly this crash was on his mind, since it did indeed involve firemen.
   
   Overall, I recommend this book.



5. I used to work in WTC building #7 until I moved to LA about a year before 9/11. I never felt so out of place as I did for a few weeks after 9/11 as I watched the recovery and clean-up efforts from Ground Zero from California. I wanted to know everything I could which is of course impossible unless you were there. This book gives you incredible insight to the bravery, courage, strength and gut-wrenching horrors of those who were there to find, clean-up and recover.

5 comments about Outlaws of America: The Weather Underground and the Politics of Solidarity.

1. Berger's history of the Weather Underground is meticulously researched, and his writing is straightforward and clear. Weatherman is portrayed in a compassionate but unromanticized light. This important book is a must-read for everyone with an interest in 20th century social justice movements.



2. The Politics of the Weather Underground
   Volunteers of America
   By RON JACOBS
   
   In 1997 Verso published my history of the Weather Underground, The Way the Wind Blew: a History of the Weather Underground. Weather Underground member Bill Ayers' memoir Fugitive Days, published by Beacon Press in 2001, followed. Two years later, the film The Weather Underground, directed by Sam Green and Bill Siegel, was released. The film probably received the greatest amount of coverage in the mainstream media, although the unfortunate timing of Weather Underground member Bill Ayers' memoir (September 11, 2001) certainly provided his book with its own share, most of it negative.
   
   There have also been novels written where the WUO figured prominently (most notably The Company You Keep by Neil Gordon Viking 2003), a pamphlet written by political prisoner David Gilbert (SDS/WUO, Students For A Democratic Society And The Weather Underground Organization, Arm the Spirit 2002) and the comparative study of the Weather Underground and the German leftist armed organization, the Red Army Fraction, by Jeremy Varon (Bringing the War Home: The Weather Underground, the Red Army Faction, and Revolutionary Violence in the Sixties and Seventies; UC Press 2004).
   
   AK Press of Oakland, California is adding another book to this growing library of Weather Underground literature. The book, titled Outlaws of America and written by up-and-coming radical author Dan Berger, is an important complement to the earlier works. The first history of the Weather Underground Organization(WUO) to be written by someone whose age parallels the ages of the children of WUO members and many other "sixties" activists (Berger is 24), this well-researched and detailed work provides a perspective on the most well-known group in the militant wing of the anti-racist and antiwar movement. The book is essential to understanding the history of the 1960s, as well as the present movements against racism and imperialist war.
   
   Two things make this book different than the one I got published 8 years ago. The first, and probably the greatest, is that Berger had access to the research and work that went into Green's film and my book. In addition, he also had much greater access to many of the personalities involved in the Weather organization. Green had a similar access. Things were a bit different when I was writing my book (1990-1997). Queries I sent to those members in prison were returned to me by prison officials, never having reached their intended recipient. Only a few individuals who had been in Weatherman/WUO were willing to talk with me and only two were willing to go on record. Others were willing to tell me if my story was accurate or not, but refused to discuss any specifics. One reason for this was the timing of my queries. After all, many Weather members were still unsure of their legal status and, politically, the US Left was still reeling from the effects of the incredibly reactionary Reagan era--a period that saw many members of the militant US left imprisoned and its infrastructure destroyed. In addition, hardly anyone that I approached knew my politics--which were a cross between the countercultural anarchism of the Yippies and the new communist movement of the 1970s. Berger and others have mentioned that my book helped to make it okay for WUO to be discussed as a force in US radical history. I was sent dozens of emails and letters from people telling me their stories as members of WUO or other militant groups after my book was published verifying this impression.
   
   The other major difference between my work and Outlaws of America is that Berger writes from the perspective of today's generation of radical activists. (Indeed, Berger is co-editor of the recently released collection Letters From Young Activists.) His perspective is that of an anti-imperialist who came of age in the 1990s, not the 1960s and 1970s. This obviously provides a different perspective simply because the face of US imperialism has changed, with the end of the Soviet Union and its allies, and the rise of two worldwide movements against Western capitalism--the anti-global capitalism surge and the Islamic movement against the west. Both of these movements have varied strains and are only semi-consciously aware of the connections they share. Besides providing a different perspective on the WUO because of the difference in the historical situation, Berger's viewpoint is one that is not laden with the personality conflicts and ego battles that are part and parcel of every "Sixties" activist's recollection of the WUO. On top of that, Berger's historical distance means that he sometimes places his emphasis on words and actions that have more importance now than they did when they occurred. This tends to provide a more congruous history. At times, his words may seem too uncritical, but as another historian who was accused of the same thing, it is my belief that most of those who make this criticism are either fundamentally opposed to WUO's politics and analysis or are still stuck in a past that most Weather members have apologized for over and over.
   
   Outlaws of America begins with a gripping description of Berger's first visit to Attica State Prison to interview/converse with former weather Underground member David Gilbert, who has been in the New York prison system since a conviction for his involvement in the tragic failure popularly known as the Nyack Brink's robbery. Berger obviously has a tremendous amount of respect for Gilbert's commitment while simultaneously understanding the tragedy of his position. In fact, each chapter begins with a quote from Gilbert--a technique that provides the reader with a glimpse of Berger's general perspective while never merely repeating Gilbert's take on things.
   
   Much of the book's beginning is a general history of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and the dissipation of that organization into Weatherman, Revolutionary Youth Movement 2, and SDS/Progressive Labor. Using an academically-trained critical eye, Berger analyzes key documents published in the SDS newspaper New Left Notes and explicates the role these writings had in the political development of Weather. His generational removal from the times allows for an analysis that accepts the fervent anti-racism and struggle against white privilege that would become Weather's theoretical backbone at face value. This is important to Berger's history. Once he establishes these elements as the basis for Weather's politics, Berger is able to provide the reader with a history of the Weatherman/Weather Underground Organization that would make its former members critically proud.
   
   Given this, one might argue that while Outlaws of America might make former WUO members proud, it certainly couldn't be a good history if it accepts their political premise. After all, how could such a history be at all critical? To Berger's credit, it is the very fact that he uses the yardstick of Weather's essential political stance as the measure by which they should be judged that this history works as well as it does. It is apparent from his writing that his interviews with former members caused them to look at their actions and political words in relation to how well they measured up to their emotional and intellectual commitment to fighting racism, imperialism, and the white privilege these isms provide to white folks in the US.
   
   As an activist who sees things differently than Weather did in terms of emphasis on fighting white privilege, I am more than willing to admit that it was their focus on this element of US society that made me aware of the phenomenon of white privilege and reminded me to fight it in myself and the larger world. On the other hand, my relationships with workers who also happened to be white led me to draw different conclusions about the way the phenomena of racism, white privilege, and economic exploitation interact in modern capitalist society. Of course, I was (and am) but one of hundreds of thousands pondering these questions. And they are important questions, to be sure.
   
   Outlaws of America explores the final years of Weather in greater detail than its predecessors. In addition, Berger provides considerably more detail about the law enforcement activities arrayed against the WUO and its allies. This is one important part of the text where the element of time works in the author's favor. Not only is there more information regarding the law enforcement activities against the 1960s and 1970s popular leftist and anti-racist organizations, it is also much more accessible. This fact combined with Weather members willingness to discuss their years underground helps Berger flesh out the facts of State repression against the New Left, Black, Latino and Native American organizations, and especially the WUO. As regards the final years of Weather, the fact that many more former members feel safe in discussing the activities and politics of the group provided Berger with an opportunity to uncover the material. Of course, unless he asked the right questions, he would not have discovered what he did. Fortunately, Berger not only asked the right questions, he found enough former members willing to discuss their answers with him. Consequently, the reader is provided with the most complete explanation to date of how and why the Weather Underground Organization fell apart. Like every other aspect of its existence, the fundamental reasons were political. The stories and discussions in this section are instructive for today's movements as they struggle with questions of class, race, and gender.
   
   Berger's best writing occurs when he weaves the modern-day reflections of former WUO members into his narrative text. He does this so skillfully that those reminiscences never come off sounding awkward or irrelevant. Sometimes these reflections merely add a bit of physical detail, while more often they provide a contextual insight into what these women and men were thinking while they lived and took political action underground. This is what makes this book different and useful to the historian, the "sixties" buff, and the political activist of today. These people lived the life of clandestine revolutionaries and this book proves that they made the choices they made because of their politics. It wasn't because of some guilt due to class privilege, nor was their choice related to some psychological occurrence of their childhood. Even more than the previous works about Weatherman/WUO, Outlaws of America brings it home, especially to the US reader, that people do make choices (life-changing choices) based on their politics. This in itself is revelatory in a culture that thinks politics begins with the Republicans and ends with the Democrats.
   
   There's some criticism in these pages, too. To be sure, it's criticism from a left perspective, and that's a good thing. Those to the right of the US Left--and there are many--will read this book only under duress and rarely with an open mind. The reviews of the aforementioned works on the subject attest to that. Although I hope that Outlaws of America is read by people of all political persuasions, it's clear that it is intended for the growing left/anarchist movements of today and the New Left with its roots in yesterday. If those of us in that readership are to learn from history, it's very important that we critique that history. It's even better when that criticism comes from a variety of viewpoints. I hope this book, besides being an excellent read, sparks a new element in that conversation.
   
   (Reviewer's note: March 6 marks the 36th anniversary of the deaths of Weathermembers Diana Oughton, Terry Robbins, and Ted Gold in the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion.)
   
   Ron Jacobs is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs' essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch's new collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. He can be reached at: rjacobs3625@charter.net



3. This was a thorough history, drawing on a number of sources and directions; but Berger keeps it rather readable. Casual? No. But approachable. Scholarly? Yes. But not egg-headed. It furnishes the reader with an overarching historical narrative, as well as dipping back and forth with another, contemporary narrative involving the interviews and friendship between a former Weatherman and the author. Few of my questions are left hanging by the text, with one particular exception: I would very much have had an appendix reproducing the texts of the WUO communiques and published works. Berger refers heavily and excerpts some, as I recall, but I would very much liked to have been able to flip to the back and read a whole communique.
   
   This is an engaging read that manages to strip back propaganda from both sides of the line and tells the story both in the WUO's own words and through the mouth of an historian.



4. a fascinating recounting of one of the more exciting, fresh, and daring movements of individuals known as the weather underground. This book recounts the early history, motivations, and background of social struggle taking place during this period of social struggle.
   
   Particularly interesting was the authors discussion of racism and the role it played (and plays) in American society. As well as the very deep analytical attention towards class and priviledge and the role it plays in a class seperated society.
   
   The individuals in this story are real with all their strengths and weaknesses intact. The author leaves us, the reader, to make our own conclusions about what the movement known as the Weather Underground means to our current reality.



5. Right from the acknowledgement --"David [Gilbert] has been a close friend . . ." we learn the author has a pro-radical viewpoint. Who is Gilbert? From Wikipedia -- "After eleven years underground, he was arrested in 1981, along with members of the Black Liberation Army and other radicals, after they killed three people in an armored car robbery. He is now a well-known prisoner in upstate New York, serving a 75 years-to-life sentence for his role in the robbery."
   
   Gilbert in the book is quoted as saying he is a "political prisoner." I wonder how the families of the dead Brinks workers feel about that statement.
   
   I've read many negative things during the 2008 election race about William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. You will not find them in this book.
   
   An example of the bias. During the Days of Rage, a Chicago city lawyer named Richard Elrod ended up paralyzed. See page 112 of this book and you will be told that Elrod missed a flying tackle against a running protester, injuring himself. This is a one-sided and cursory explanation. Elrod, now an Illinois judge, has an entirely different story. The alleged perpetrator of the stomping on a prone Elrod maintains his innocence, and a jury acquitted that person. But thorough discussions of the incident are available on the web that discuss the case in detail; I came away with the feeling from independent reading that the prosecution botched the case by allowing a biased witness to take the stand. I suggest the reader interested in the issue should do some internet research if he/she wants to properly evaluate the case.
   
   Unless I missed it, I did not see any of the eloquent statements attributed to Dohrn over the years. The book discusses the "Flint War Council" and says that Dohrn "praised the recent murders" committed by the Manson family. That's all. Why did the author not note her infamous quote: "Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson." As others have noted, those victims were Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, a middle-aged couple -- Leno was stabbed 12 times with a knife, and 14 times with a carving fork. Rosemary was stabbed 41 times. Perhaps a more careful researcher can verify the internet allegation that Dohrn also once led a celebration of Elrod's paralysis by leading her comrades in a parody of a Bob Dylan song -- "Lay, Elrod, Lay."
   
   The author, Dan Berger, is said to be a PhD candidate at the University of Pennsylvania. I hope his dissertation committee scrutinizes the work he presents there. This is a book with only one view, and apologia for the Weathermen. This book has limited usefulness.

2 comments about Faith in the Fog of War: Let us Die to Make Men Free.

1. Once again Capt. Chistopher Plekenpol reaches down deep to stir your heart with more stories from war with Christ at the center. Writing with the ability to bring you face to face with the battles in your own life, Chris challenges you to look closely at your faith. Through the stories of life in war and the opportunity for personal reflection, you can't help but be changed.



2. After finishing Cpt. Plekenpol's first book, I immediately picked up the second, and was instantly captured again by his stories of war and God. This sequel has more intense stories of his time in Iraq, which makes it a real page turner. The applications from the stories will meet you where you are, and encourage you to keep fighting through whatever life is throwng at you! I would recommend this book to anyone who would like to get a firsthand account of what Iraq is REALLY like, or who needs some inspiration in their day to day life.

2 comments about Visions for Change: Crime and Justice in the Twenty-First Century (4th Edition).

1. As a Criminal Justice instructor who has reviewed this text (and almost had to use it) I cannot recommend this book. It portends to be a book about solutions, when in fact it essentially attacks every aspect of policing and the criminal justice system as it exists today, and the only solutions it provides are from the left to far left. There is no balance of opinion, no counter-point, and absolutely no effort on the part of the authors to inform students that they are in fact only getting one side of the issue. Far too often do I see this approach by liberal writers and educators: attempting to pass off their out of the mainstream ideas as fact. College is a marketplace of ideas, discussion, and debate. However, this book turns the debate into a one sided discussion on how awful and wholly without merit the current system is. I am not one as a CJ educator that believes we are to be cheerleaders for law enforcement. However, we do need to present the good with the bad, and this book would do nothing but discourage would-be law enforcement professionals. If the goal is to make such persons believe the profession they are about to enter into is completely corrupt and without merit, this is the "test" to use. If forced to use this book, I would suggest supplementing it with articles or texts that offer a counterpoint. That is, if you are interested in giving your students both sides of the issue - which I believe we as educators are charged to do, not just simply indoctrinate them with the opinions of those with whom you might agree. This book is nothing more than an attempt to indoctrinate, not foster intelligent debate and discussion on the topics contained therein. A candidate for zero stars, if that choice were available.



2. The authors of this book are truely using this "text" as a platform to preach their ideals. The authors about how unfair the U.S. system is and how it is going to change to conform to their views (this will never happen)is sickening.
   
   It is not a good "text" book and professors should never subject their students to this mess of a "learning tool."

2 comments about Root Causes of Terrorism: Myths, Reality and Ways Forward.

1. What this well written academic book does, is that it gives the reader insight into the broad spectrum of the phenomena of terrorism and the theories behind its roots causes--utilizing several international academics whom incorporate, overall, sound methodologies that support and challenge various terrorism theories that have emerged over the last several decades. The only negative critique I propose is that its contributing scholars are predominantly liberal in orientation (which is not necessarily inaccurate in and of itself)--but the contributions of such leading American experts, the likes of Brian Jenkins and Bruce Hoffman, are missing.



2. Bjorgo's collection is an excellent one. It covers most of the major topics that are important for terrorism today. The contributors to the volume are generally experts in the field. To its credit the book does not focus overly much on either the Middle East or Islam; it considers other types of terrorism in other geographical regions. The book is nicely balanced in this regard.

5 comments about Koba the Dread: Laughter and the Twenty Million.

1. British novelist Martin Amis ponders the question, `why is it that one never laughs about Hitler's Holocaust which claimed the lives of 11 million, while members of the left are able to laugh about Stalin's rule, which claimed the lives of over 20 million?' This is an examination of the socio-historical-political facets that underlie Soviet style communism, and seeks to provide explanation for its broad support among the European intellectual elite of the 1950's, including Amis' father Kingsley. It is also a fairly rigorous, though often unoriginal forensic portrait of Stalin's particular breed of tyranny, which Amis attributes both to his insanity as well as the totalitarian nature of the Marxist-Leninist system which he inherited.
   
   This book might be though of as a letter to those of the old left such as Christopher Hitchens, who continue to derive a fair amount of laughter and enjoyment for their past follies. Amis breaks from his historiography in these moments, and he imposes his own anti-communism on Hitchens' work; he contrives dicey judgments such as,
   
   "although I always liked Christopher's journalism, there seemed to me to be something wrong with it, something faintly but pervasively self-defeating: the sense that the truth could be postponed. This flaw disappeared in 1989, and his prose made immense gains in burnish and authority. I used to attribute the change to the death of Christopher's father, late in 1988, and to subsequent convulsions in his life. It had little or nothing to do with that, I now see. It had to do with the collapse of Communism" (pg. 47).
   
   This is painting with a broad brush; one could easily make the case that Hitchens' journalistic authority diminished after his stance on Iraq in 2003. Still, Amis does a competent job of presenting the facts to the members of the hard left such as Hitchens, who have always taken a flippant tone in evaluating the USSR.
   
   Amis' historical work is fine, though it is generally unvaried and unoriginal; he relies mostly on Alexander Solzhenitsyn's standard historical accounts in the Gulag Archipelago Volumes, which are more than competent and standard. There are also some interesting looks at the correspondence between Nabokov and Edmund Wilson during this period. However, Amis' occasionally bizarre political oversimplifications, i.e. "[a]s in Germany, this was the birth of mass-media propaganda; people were unaware, then, that propaganda was propaganda-and propaganda worked" (pg. 213). Such declarations are less then insightful, and fail to provide adequate explanations as to Stalin's popularity. Koba the Dread is still a fairly competent evaluation of Stalin's life and politics, and it provides a fair and brief overview of the Soviet Union for readers who desire a quick blow-by-blow, even if it is derivative of Solzhenitsyn.



2. This is a depressing yet brilliantly written book that jumps in your face from page 1 as the brutal history of misery and suffering inflicted on the USSR by Stalin, Lenin and their company of Bolsheviks is laid before the reader. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn explores and describes the soviet system brilliantly in his Gulag Archipelago books, so too Amis explores deep into the psyche of a despotic, hopeless system of government and its deadly effect on the lives of the people it dictated to.
   
   One can only wonder at what kind of bitter, unlucky chance could come upon a people who enjoyed a brief period of inter revolutionary freedom after the overthrow of the imperial system, and with a large range of alternative parties to choose from, ended up with the despotic, psychotic Bolsheviks led by Lenin and co as top dogs at the pinnacle of the pack. Vasily Grossman's words as quoted page 251 is an excellent summation of what freedom is supposed to be. There are so many examples of countless lives destroyed physically, mentally and spiritually in this book that it hits you like a sledgehammer as you wonder thank god l was never born into this insanity. Yet at the beginning the system was built on lies, dictatorship of the proletariat meant dictatorship of all by a handful and if you did not like it then the Soviet govt would say stuff you, you are surplus and you can rot in a concentration camp or be dispatched physically.
   
   Amis maintains his white hot rage against the Bolsheviks, the USSR and of course Stalin for the whole book. The reputations of Lenin and Trotsky also sizzle like sausages on a barbeque on a hot summer's day in the Antipodes as Amis applies his blowtorch of a pen to their revolution and the system of repressive government they created which fell into Stalin's lap. As for Stalin himself, well Amis lays cudgel blows in all directions upon him and leaves no stone unturned in his description of the evil, misery and suffering he created and inflicted upon the Soviet Union. Essentially the book is about Stalin, and Amis is able to capture the evil essence of the man in his personal and public life and lay it all before the reader.



3. This book was my introduction to Soviet history when it came out (a role I suspect it played for many readers) and I thought highly of it at the time. The most memorable moment in the book, for me, was Amis's epiphany that even an achieved socialist utopia would be a kind of "hell." But rereading it recently, I didn't think it had aged well. Amis's tone is relentlessly sour, smug, and soggily self-important in the way that a certain type of Nabokov fan is (I like Nabokov, but his airy pomposity is insufferable in the hands of almost any imitator). I couldn't help but think that a more straightforward style would have suited his subject better. For that matter, the book could have been considerably shorter; as is, it's too long to be a good essay and too short to be a good history book. And despite his boast that he combed through "yards" of books on the Soviet Union to write the book, he makes countless errors. For instance, Lenin's brother is listed in the index as "Alexander Lenin." Did none of the yards of books Amis read tell him that Lenin's real name was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov? He also makes commonsensical errors that are downright comical: He devotes a paragraph to a sentence of Trotsky's which he finds to be appallingly phrased, apparently unaware that Trotsky didn't originally write that sentence in English.
   
   His utter refusal to cite even the simplest sources is also annoying; it's as if he thinks he's writing a "better" type of book than a simple history text. Perhaps he feared that citations would make it too obvious that he's basically ripped off every major historian in the field. His open letter to Christopher Hitchens (an incredibly embarrassing concept) lectures his Trotsky-worshiping friend in such condescending tones that I can almost imagine the letter's recipient cringing on his behalf.
   
   That said, the book is a decent, readable introduction to Stalin's Russia (Amis appears to know next to nothing of Russia prior to 1917), but this emphasis makes the book's thesis seem lopsided. Surely the majority of Western leftists don't need to be told that Stalin was a wicked tyrant. If Amis actually took his own thesis seriously, he'd devote his book to tearing apart Lenin and Trotsky. I couldn't help but think that Amis simply didn't have the intellectual stomach for this task - much easier to regurgitate large chunks of Solzhenitsyn and Conquest and smugly imply that Hitchens is some kind of apologist for the Gulag. At one point he implies that the February Revolution was the "real" revolution, but at another point he brusquely dismisses Kerensky as a fool. Most of his judgments seem filched from other historians. This isn't a bad place to start, but don't let this be the last book you read on the subject.



4. Amis applies his mastery of language to the soviet "experiment", recounting his own story of discovery.
   Horrific and brilliant



5. There are a number of good negative reviews already, with which I agree for the most part, especially the one that asks: Why was this written in the first place?
   
   The book attempts to stand on the shoulders of much more serious and lengthy works by Conquest, Pipes, Solzhenitsyn, Mandelstam and many others, and might serve as a good, well-written synopsis of their work, but Amis wanted to make it more pesonal than that and took up some very odd, rather remote contingent themes, such was why Soviet history is regarded with laughter, whereas Nazi history is not. Maybe this is more of a problem in Great Britain. I think we Americans are guilty of not knowing as much about Soviet atrocities as we should, but not of undue levity.
   
   Anyway, there is much for sensitive souls to consider in the story of Russia in the 20th century, some of it is hinted at and evoked here - that maybe there is such a thing as conscious evil in the world, for example. And I think that maybe Amis wanted to provide a picture that included both the horror of the millions of civilian murders inflicted in varying degrees of maliciousness and the intellectual (me, him) sitting in his chair reading about it. But if he did, it doesn't really come across, interesting as they might have been. I think it's a intriguing illusion we have that memorializing people whose lives have been unjustly tormented and cut short somehow influences the deceased favorably.
   
   The oddest thing are the juxtapositions of historical (and outrageous) fact with his personal activities, friendships, pre-occupations, which as I say, don't jell. Ingredients are poured together but they don't make anything.
   
   Another theme hinted at but not developed that interests me very much is that Stalin and his brothers in hatred are symptoms of our soulless, inwardly dead age, in the way that alcoholism is a symptom of inner imbalance in an individual. How does a person like Stalin come about? How does an individual gain power enough over other people to get them to murder? Most people can hardly get someone else to bring them a glass of water. What are the inner dynamics of someone who gets millions to murder other millions?
   
   So all in all, it was a disappointment, though it began well.

5 comments about When You Ride Alone You Ride with Bin Laden.

1. I will preface this review with the fact that I come from a perspective extremely critical of U.S. foreign policy and of its constant wars ("low-intensity" conflict, the "war on drugs," the wars on oil-containing nations, and the War o[f] Terrorism). Now you know where I'm coming from. That said:
   
   It appears Mr. Maher was stung quite painfully when Ari Fleischer, Bush's then-press-secretary, singled him out for denunciation after Maher said on his talk show, Politically Incorrect, that, whatever the 9/11 hijackers were, they were not cowards. As a result, the stricken Mr. Maher lost his show.
   
   He appears to have decided to respond to this downturn with a frothing-at-the-mouth, wrapped-in-the-flag nationalist rant, curiously intermingled with a platterful of liberal (and sometimes even radical) argumentation in regard to the injustices and inanities in U.S. foreign and domestic policy. Inbetween his rants, he makes excellent points in terms of "why they hate us," and in our (the people's) complicity with the crimes of empire. But, without fail, he returns to anti-enemies-of-the-state and anti-Islam polemics, eerily reminiscent of the "Hate Week" histrionics against Goldstein, Orwell's official enemy of the state in _1984_.
   
   It is apparent that he is trying to vindicate himself by criticizing the "war on terrorism" from an ardent pro-war and pro-empire position.
   
   But Maher, in this book, did not just fall into line in response to his chastening. He decided to attempt to be one of the ideological drill instructors of the punditry, calling for his critics (and, of course, the rest of us) to fall into line as well -- but be nicer about it. In essence, it seems as if he is trying to bark as loudly as his avowedly-right-wing counterparts as he co-opts their position.
   
   It's an extremely ambivalent book -- he makes many excellent points and raises many important issues not raised by mainstream pundits (as other reviewers here have indicated). I recognize this, and it is indeed good. But, the problem is that the overall message undermines these arguments and smothers them in soothing generalities that, in turn, smother critical thought.
   
   In his conclusion, he denounces all critics of American foreign policy and empire, self-righteously reaffirming the conservative line that America's is the gentlest bloody-handed empire (my not-so-complimentary interpretation) in history, and therefore is praiseworthy. Of course, Chileans, Nicaraguans, Salvadorans, Vietnamese, Haitians, Iraqis, Venezuelans, Grenadans, Cubans, the Timorese, and so on, would disagree. His quasi-historical concluding polemic, naturally, fails to substantiate itself, but rather speaks in sweeping, comfortable generalizations that pamper our traditional self-image and, in effect, reaffirm the conservative line. In the end, he becomes one of the best assets the neoconservatives could ask for -- an impassioned "liberal" who, in effect, argues their case but merely whines about methodology. A splendid example of false consciousness in action.
   
   (Incidentally, this friendliness to the conservative worldview is confirmed by the praise received from self-avowed "conservatives" and rightists in these reviews, and from none other than Ann Coulter in her glowing comment quoted on the back cover of the book. If you ever hear conservatives call someone a "reasonable liberal," that should raise some flags.)
   
   When it comes down to it, he is a privileged member of the upper echelons of the corporate media establishment, and he responded hysterically to an outright threat to his ability to stay there. Rather pathetic to observe, really. However, the neocons and "regular" cons can surely enjoy the thrust of his book.



2. I got introduced to Bill Maher through his HBO show. That is a mixture of no-nonsense political spiel with comedy mixed in. I then purchased his book "New Rules" which basically expands on the portion of the show where Bill says some really funny things about stupid things (both mundane and political). I really loved that book. This book is very different in that it only gives Bill's spin on how the current administration has "butchered" everything post 09/11 (minus the comedy). If you are an ultra conservative you will be put off by everything Bill says. Being in the middle I find that what Bill says in this book seems to be supported more by logic or common sense rather than digging up supposed "facts" that many of the political pundits seem to load in their books.
   
   What always bothers me about what they claim in those books as "fact" can never really be verified as the sources can be tainted too. Though I agree with Bill on many of his subjects, many others I don't. I appreciate a good argument though (I loved being on the debating team in school).
   
   Whether you agree with Bill or not he has an amazing presentation style that makes me enjoy his TV program even more.



3. I purchased the hardcover first and found it to be pretty slim on actual content for the price--the posters really didn't add a whole lot to Maher's commentary. The audio book, narrated by Maher, is delivered in his dry comedic style and as such is much funnier. Maher is, first and foremost, a comedian, and this book has to be heard to be enjoyed.



4. Excellent Book. Short and to the point. A great level of intelligence - about what is wrong with out system!



5. When You Ride Alone You Ride with Bin Laden: What the Government Should Be Telling Us to Help Fight the War on Terrorism - And Still Isn't is a parody of a World War II propaganda poster that read "When you ride ALONE you ride with Hitler !", which suggested that automobile owners carpool to conserve gasoline for the war effort. This isn't just ironic today - it is a complete epiphany for those of us who understand History really repeats itself.
   
   I must applaud HBO's host of Real Time with Bill Maher because he has the courage to speak his mind on topics most Americans staunchly are ignorant of. Like Maher points out - the United States is full of people who are wasteful when it comes to everything from oil, food, and the things we should be conserving and happy to have ready access to. FREEDOM!
   
   Maher critiques of the war in Iraq are right on. He pulls no punches and he shouldn't. Bill Maher is intelligent, funny, and has written another fine book for anyone interested in discovering real truth in real time that may change the way they view our government's practices.
   
   I am a father, a veteran, an author, and a concerned citizen. We need more people like Bill Maher, John Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Ron Paul in this world who know what they are talking about when they choose to be serious.
   
   Oh yeah - Bill - if you need me to come participate in the panel, I think I can silence Christopher Hitchens for you when he gets too pompous and contrived.

4 comments about Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues.

1. Martin's book is a very detailed review, with examples, of alternative motivations and ideological orientation of 20th and 21st century terrorists. The web links and details about terrorist organizations are very good but the later chapters are a bit redundant. It is a fine primer on terrorism but his attempt to create typologies for all manner of information is less-than-successful because categories in later chapters are either overlapping or describe fairly minor points.



2. The second updated edition of UNDERSTANDING TERRORISM: CHALLENGES, PERSPECTIVES, AND ISSUES is an excellent purchase for both college-level reference holdings and for assigned reading for college-level courses on social issues. Added here is a new chapter on religious terrorism, reviews of new material on gender terrorism and criminal businesses, updates on pedagogy, and a format which includes test questions, amps from the book, and more on both a CD-ROM and an accompanying web site. Plenty of examples from events around the world pepper surveys which cover the politics, economics, and social foundations of international terrorist experiences.
   
   Diane C. Donovan, Editor
   California Bookwatch



3. This book is a terrific intro to terrorism and its history, but more than that it really depends on what you hope to achieve by reading this book. If this book has been assigned by a professor, you are on your way to a fundamental understanding of terrorism and its consequences, root causes, etc. If you are reading this book for leisure, with no lecture/seminar accompanying it, then it is a good read but not as worthwhile. I would recommend books by the pre-eminent scholars of terrorism like Bruce Hoffman, and his mentor Walter Lacquer.



4. "Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues," Second Edition, by C. Augustus "Gus" Martin, over 14 Chapters, addresses terrorism from multiple perspectives: the political right and left, state and non-state, religious and secular, criminal and non-criminal. Each chapter is supported by end notes and the book contains an appendix for maps, one for historical examples, and a glossary/index. There is no bibliography.
   
   Chapter 6, "Violence in the Name of Faith: Religious Terrorism," pages 182-217 devotes a section to "Understanding Jihad as a Primary Religious Motive: An Observation and Caveat" which is covered on pages 187-188. Martin makes the following observations:
   
   (1) "One such misunderstanding is the common belief that the concept of "holy war" is an underlying principle of the Islamic Faith. Another misunderstanding is that Muslims are united in supporting jihad. This is simplistic and fundamentally incorrect. Although the term "jihad" is widely presumed in the West to refer exclusively to waging war against nonbelievers, an Islamic jihad is not the equivalent to a Christian Crusade" p. 187.
   
   (2) "It is permissible - and even a duty - to wage war to defend the faith against aggressors. Under this type of jihad warfare is conceptually defensive in nature; in contrast the Christian Crusades were conceptually offensive in nature" p. 188.
   
   "Holy war" is not an underlying principle of Islam, but as a strategic theme within Islam, "jihad" is. Within the Koran, the Haddiths, and the Sunna, less than ten percent of the discussion is on the greater jihad (personal striving) while the remaining 90 percent is on the lesser jihad (warfighting). Martin fails to identify or discuss the combat, combat support and combat service support obligations of jihad contained in Islamic Law (the Koran, the Haddiths, and the Sunna) and clarified in Islamic legal texts such as "Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law" p. 599-605, "The Distinguished Jurist's Primer" (Vol 1 and 2) p. 454-487, and "Riyad-us-Saliheen" p. 976-1016.
   
   Martin states that jihad is defensive while the Crusades were offensive. A reading of the above legal texts gives insight to the term "defensive." In war, unbelievers are offered three alternatives: Conversion, subjugation and payment of the jizya, or war. A refusal to submit is an offensive act and the resulting combat is, from the Islamic perspective, defensive. Martin fails to inform the reader of this key distinction and its implications.
   
   With regard to the Crusades, Martin fails to tell the reader that the First Crusade was a delayed response to Islamic expansion and the capture by Islam of 1/3 of the Christian lands. Islam's strategic offense triggered Christianity's strategic defense: the First Crusade.
   
   Martin states that "The Five Pillars are faith, prayer, zakat (alms or charity), fasting during the month of Ramadan, and the hajj (pilgrimage) to the holy city of Mecca, Saudi Arabia, for those who are able" p. 202. A check of the index fails to reveal a more substantive discussion on zakat that should have told the reader that there are eight categories of disbursement in zakat, three of which support jihad: Those fighting in the way of Allah; those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and travelers needing money. Of these three obligatory categories of disbursement, the most significant is "Those Fighting For Allah" which is defined by "Reliance of the Traveller", p.272, as "Those engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster; Given enough to suffice them for the operation even if affluent of: weapons, mounts, clothing, expenses, and for the duration of the journey, round trip, and the time they spend there. Current interpretation and practice has been to provide expenses in supporting such person's family during this period." Martin fails to explain to the reader that zakat (almsgiving in Islam) is an asymmetrical warfare funding mechanism.
   
   The failure to more fully develop the discussion on jihad outlining the combat, combat support and combat service support obligations Islamic Law imposes on Muslims, the failure to carefully characterize and define the term "defensive" in the context of "defensive jihad", the failure to articulate the offensive expansion triggering the First Crusade, and the failure to fully explain the true nature of zakat (almsgiving) seriously undermine the value of "Understanding Terrorism" as a credible reference.