No comments about Climate of Fear: The Quest for Dignity in a Dehumanized World (Reith Lectures).

5 comments about Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission (Vintage).

1. Millions of words have been written about the personal devastation of the attacks on our country on 9-11-01. We've been inudated with pictures, books, accounts of suffering, and the coverup by the Pentagon. It's been almost five years, and we all remember where we were and what we were doing on that terrible day, as we did when John Kennedy was killed. Now, with the publication of this 20-month investigation by Congress, we learn of the inaccurate information, confidentiality claims, and repeated misstatements by the pentagon and FAA.
   
   Personally, I am familiar with the name of Lee Hamilton as he has been instrumental in airing the facts on other tragedies. None were quite as devastating as this tragic day in September. I was at the hospital waiting for a test on my liver, and could not believe that America (the land of the brave) would have a suicide bomber. After my test, when I learned that I was not going to die so soon, I was made cognizant of that fact that it was not just one, but three flights of passengers who lost their lives on the day mine was given back to me. It was a scary aspect of this whole terrorist business.
   
   The new movie is mostly about two rescuers who get trapped in the rubble and have to work hard to survive, but it gives a quick montage of people around the world, including the Arabs, watching t.v. reports in stunned disbelief. It is impossible to understand another's sorrow, but this indepth official report can help us to understand what happened on that fatal day, and why they happened in three different places simultaneously. It was well planned. Thank God, the fourth plane did not work out.
   
   A panel of five Republicans and five Democrats were assigned to work out this report. We all know that the two parties are not exactly compatible and will automatically have opposing opinions on any subject. They were directed to investigate government missteps, but were thwarted from the presidency on down. They wrote: "We did not get all the information we needed to put on the public record." That's typical of the government's need to hide relavent facts from the public -- always has and always will. They were given access to government documents and worked from there to make it understandable for the general populace. We're not all geniuses but most can smell a coverup of a large porportion. After all, we don't want the same group to know what we know, as they will (and have) try again and again. They obviously have no respect for life, even their own, and use ploys to die in their places. Such is the way of a barbaric society.
   
   This finding shows no collaborative relationship between Hussein and al-Quida, so let the man go. They will deal with him their own way. This trial has been a farce and he lost all his respectability and humanity by having to hide in a bunker underground and then be treated as he was in the courtroom. He was the leader of a country. How would we feel if our president was treated thusly!
   
   The New York firefighters were indeed heroes, but so were the victims who were brave enough to fight back. Their rancor has caused a setback on the amount of evidence and public accessibilty to all the facts. We never will know the full story because some had to made such an issue. My town even bought and took a brand new, special fire truck and presented it to Mayor Guilani, a bad mistake. He just wanted the attention and adulation to cover up his messy divorce. Some people in politics will always take advantage to make show a false image of themselves. Mr. Hamilton and Thomas Kean did a remarkable job of correlating the mass of information they were given. It could have taken another year or so if they had been able to obtain more relevant reasons why it happened in the first place. We will always wonder.



2. I found this book fascinating. There are rarely Washington insiders with the narrative talent and an appreciation for process, and in this case, we have a book that provides both. The careful negotiations, resistance and calculations by federal agencies, the push and pull of partisan politics and the unique friendly-adversarial role of the 911 families provide for absorbing reading. If nothing else, the use of careful diplomacy by the authors in knowing when to wheedle and when to subpoena is a lesson unto itself. The delicacy of diplomacy and the ham-handedness of security considerations provide a rare insight into the difficulties of maneuvering inside the beltway, and the differences amongst and amidst the commission itself are more than simple sniping -- they are in many ways a laboratory for American political struggles. Recommended for policy wonks and aspiring diplomats, and for those, like me, who'd rather get the inside scoop on the White House than Hollywood.



3. untill Kean was involved the ABC 9/11 show. The absolute lies involved in the film and Keans explaination of them is an insult to any intelligent people left in America. Blame Clinton? I never voted for him but try googling executive order 12947 or CNN july 30 1996 bill waters down terrorist bill. Or August 22 1998 Clinton freezes bin laden assets. ABC is backpeddling like crazy but Kean who was intrusted by the people of The United States of America to give the truth about 9/11 thru the 9/11 commission, gives us this. Have you no shame, sir?



4. To best judge the 911 commission it is logical to look at the commissioners themselves. As chief executive Philip Zelikow was the chief architect of the report. Zelikow is a personal friend of Condoleeza Rice one of the chief witnesses called to testify. He is also a rabid neo con who worked under Bush at the National Security council.
   
   The families of victims wanted him removed. One of the commissioners Max Cleland resigned calling the commission a 'scam' and a 'disgrace.' Only Zelikow and Jamie Gorelick were allowed to see all the documents and then had to get clearance to even consider them within the confines of the 'investigation.' There is no mention of WTC7 ; a 47 story building that came down without being struck by a plane.
   
   The vast majority of the questions given by the victims families were never answered. Important witnesses were never called. Only those who could support the 'official conspiracy theory' were ever called to testify and many of those did so not under oath. The commission was only given 15 million dollars; a measly sum.
   
   All in all the report is a useless document that serves only to perpetuate the myths that surround the event, myths a large portion of the American people no longer believe.



5. We have established a whole industry in this country of refusing to believe anything the government says about Pearl Harbor, the Kennedy conspiracy, UFO's, and it was inevitable that the same would be applied to the 9/11 commission report. In fact, it was predictable that whatever they found, whatever they published it was going to be immediately considered a whitewash, cover-up, fraud. The scream louder people in the media, the books written by 'independent investigators,' the movies that will be produced will all point to some unknown direction. They will all be different directions than the official report, and different directions than each other.
   
   This book is not about what happened on 9/11, instead it is on how the 9/11 commission worked. It's a story of how our government works. The commission was put together with both democrats and republicans (the Bush administration had the power to only put republicans on the commission but didn't). The next election was approaching. Government agencies were seeking to cover their own blame. The media was eager to report on stumbles and mistakes. On the whole, they seem to have done pretty good.
   
   It isn't pretty, but this is the way our government works. It's an excellent and most interesting book.

1 comments about The Terrorist Perspectives Project: Strategic and Operational Views of Al Qaida and Associated Movements.

1. This is an outstanding effort and one of the first USA produced books that takes a serious and insightful look at Al Qaeda's strategy and operational fiews. A must read for finding out whether it is possible to prevail in the face of the Al Qaeda threat.
   
   The authors of this book have predicated its publication on the simple premise that you should "know your enemy." In order to prevail in the face of the threats posed by Al Qaeda and its Associated Movements (AQAM), the authors believe that you must have a thorough understanding of the beliefs and strategies of your opponent. The book is a particularly refreshing perspective on terrorism responses at a time when we are often given vacuous and empty ideas such as "The terrorists hate us because they hate our freedom."
   
   This book explores both the religious and the often overlooked secular views of Al Qaeda and its adherents. By examining salafi jihadist theory, AQAM's perception of its enemies and the strategic level communications being used, the authors are capable of providing real policy implications and not just recycled policies or empty rhetoric.
   
   One of the most interesting aspects of the book is how it examines AQAM's own view of itself. This exposes many of the myths about Al Qaeda. As was often the case in the Cold War, we were led to believe that the Soviet Army was a fearful enemy and it had soldiers who were "ten feet tall." As it turns out, this was not the case and the USSR collapsed in on itself. This book shows that not only are Al Qaeda's followers not ten feet tall, but they have significant short comings, many of which they are aware of themselves. While many in the West are dismayed at Al Qaeda's media capabilities such as As-Sahab, the authors demonstrate that the Al Qaeda's leaders believe that they are losing the media wars. As in many other sections of the book, this revelation opens up new areas of effective responses.
   
   The authors also show that AQAM has significant recruiting and retention problems. As many of the terrorist leaders note, they initially recruited tens of thousands, but were only able to retain a limited few.
   
   As well, AQAM leaders lament that many young Muslims were zealous to start with, but lost their fervor in a relatively short period of time.
   The book also makes the honest (and brave) observation that the USA is probably losing in its overall efforts. However, the book does not offer a pessimistic view of the future. To the contrary, it posits the view that the Salafi led global jihad has significant weaknesses. One of these may turn out to be its Achilles heal: recruiting and retention. The authors believe that the USA and others, if they can gain an institutional understanding of the problem, should be able to exploit the vulnerabilities of AQAM and prevail in the face of its strategies and operations.
   
   [...]

5 comments about The Cobra Event.

1. I loved this book! It was intriguing, I couldn't put it down, and it was scary. It starts with a girl with a bad cold going to school, and she collapses during art class and dies within hours after having seizures and hemorrhaging. A homeless man was also infected, and some medical officials try to diagnose the disease and find a link between the cases. Squeamish people beware: There is a very detailed autopsy part. If you are not squeamish, I recommend this book.
   Note: Ben's daughter wrote this review.



2. Before reading this book, bioterrorism seemed like a distant threat from the past. However, Preston's novel makes a very strong story that is further rooted by scientific facts. By combining elements of horror with this story, it helps a reader understand the overlooked aspects of terrorism, and in this novel, it highlights how easily anybody can create or have access to very dangerous biological agents, and that the dispersal of such weapons can be done easily and covertly.
   
   A quick premise: Several people living in New York City have had unusual deaths, consisting of unnatural seizures, self-cannibalism and a meltdown of the nervous system. After a brief investigation, the FBI sends in a team of experts in the field of bioweapons and other operatives to find the unknown terrorist who goes by the name Archimedes.
   
   The entire story is delivered in a way that balances the action smoothly against several chapters that deliver raw facts and fundamentals of bioweapons development, geneology, and terrorism. While these chapters may be somewhat redundant or droll, they still enforce the story and further personify the "Cobra virus" (the bioweapon used by Archimedes), making it a living, breathing producer of fear rather then some virus procured in a madman's lab. Even though it's still a novel, it behaves more like a nonfiction book that has been given a bit of context.
   
   The writing style employed throughout the novel gives it a much grittier edge then other thrillers similar to this. There's no suspense between chapters, just a non-stop action sequence that is periodically lulled by the few chapters devoted the the explanation of major concepts portrayed in the book (as stated before, bioweapons, genealogy, etc).
   
   With that said, I cannot recommend this highly enough to the casual or devoted reader.



3. This was the first book I picked up after several years of not reading. Wow, amazing story! I couldn't put it down and I always put them down unfortunately.
   
   I love this book, I've recommended to several people over the years.
   
   Why isnt this a movie yet??, that question baffles me.
   
   The characters were amazing, the story was believable and very real. Story telling at its highest point, you'll stay up all night reading!
   
   Highly recommended!!



4. I loved this book for two reasons. The first being the riveting plot. This book dares you to put it down (and then try to sleep at night). The ride, the details, the pacing. This book is a cut above.
   
   My second reason is a bit of thumbing my nose at the publishing industry. This book revels in having NOTHING that the publishing industry demands today. Everything MUST be character driven! Aaaack, that one drives me crazy. Pages and pages of introspection while the story stands still. Preston does nothing of this! His characters are not the focus of the story, and they aren't terribly well developed. Ironically, this makes them much more believable than the standard novel character. I somehow don't think that Richard Preston has sheets and sheets of character outlines with details such as how Tom Cope likes his corn flakes! Preston does more telling than showing, and I wish to thank him for it! All these books filled with contrived ways of getting information across to the reader and past an editor who is just dying to mark something as "telling" rather than "showing." No navel gazing! Thank you Mr. Preston for delivering a book where the story doesn't have to go on pause for twenty pages of introspection every chapter! "Why am I here, does she feel the same way about me as I feel about her?" Baah!
   
   Richard Preston puts the "thrill" in "thriller"!



5. There was some good parts but it seemed to take forever to get into the story. Just when i was getting into the book then another dry spell would be in the next chapter. There is alot of medical terminology that I would get lost in at times and then become uninterested, but over all an okay book if you are willing to wait until at least 1/2 through for it to start picking up.

5 comments about Information Operations: Warfare and the Hard Reality of Soft Power (Issues in Twenty-First Century Warfare).

1. This is the most up-to-date book on Information Operations I've read. There are over a dozen contributors from the US, UK and Australia, all of whom have hands-on Information Operations experience. It is must reading for anyone serious about this important field of military operations.



2. Finally, here's a book that cuts through the dense brush of information operations theory and reaches a clearing where the reader can truly discover the practical application of information operations. The list of contributors is impressive...and all have practical experience in information operations. A must read for practitioners of IO.



3. This is a first rate effort, but it is incomplete and overly U.S. centric. A new expanded edition is needed soonest.
   
   For myself the best chapters were on "Intelligence Support: Foundations for Conducting IO" and "Information Projection: Shaping the Global Village." Other chapters on the language of IO, information protection, related and supporting activities, and implementing IO were good.
   
   The most important point in this book from my point of view was its observation that modern war is only 15-25% military action, and the rest must be a unified national campaign that leverages all sources of national power **for which IO is the glue that provides the inter-agency coherence.** These authors understand and teach, very ably, how IO is at the heart of managing complex coalition contingency operations.
   
   The book over-all shows a real appreciation for the role that must be played by non-military agencies, coalitions, and private sector organizations including religions, academics, and business as well as media personalities.
   
   The discussion of the "information battlespace" is useful, as are the illustrations. There is an excellent "strategy to task" section helpful to anyone actually implementing IO.
   
   The authors are to be commended for emphasizing that knowing the enemy is not enough--you must know yourself and be firmly grounded in reality rather than ideological fantasy, if the IO message is to have traction. The authors also address, diplomatically but directly, the limitations of the traditional insular military planning process (especially the secretive intelligence process), and clearly articulate the need for open processes that can embrace and leverage varied communities of interest, non-US as well as US.
   
   The authors also raise an extremely important issue to which they cannot provide an answer, but which must be resolved sooner than later: the urgency of being able to educate Americans about global realities and threats, without being accused of propagandizing Americans. [This is one reason why Congressman Simmons, on both the House Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee, is so important--he understands that the state intelligence centers and networks we are advocating can serve two functions: as bottom up dot collectors, and as disseminators of real world open source intelligence to the state and local publics.]
   
   One minor nit: the authors assume that because most of the 9-11 hijackers had Saudi passports they were Saudi. My understanding is that they were a mixed bag with passports of convenience from Saudi Arabia for those who were not Saudi.
   
   The book concludes with cursory attention to Russian, Chinese, and Australian IO doctrine and practices, and does not address Iranian, Indian, Pakistani, and Venezuelan-Cuban IO, which are of considerable importance.
   
   The book, very understandably, does not spend a lot of time on Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) or the need to properly monitor all information in all languages all the time, but the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence has clearly articulated the need to do "universal coverage, 24/7, in all languages, at the neighbood level of granularity" (this is an abdiged paraphrase) and DoD appears well on its way to doing just that. I recommend that this book be read in conjunction with Max Manwaring and John Fishel's Uncomfortable Wars Revisited (International and Security Affairs Series) with Max Manwaring's edited work on The Search for Security: A U.S. Grand Strategy for the Twenty-First Century which emphasizes key moral messages; and my own IO book, Information Operations: All Information, All Languages, All the Time which focuses exclusively on information peacekeeping or the foreign language content side of IO, and has a comprehensive annotated bibliography. Specialty books that I recommend to IO practitioners include Larry Beinhart's Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin Robert Cialdini's Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (Collins Business Essentials); Robert Parry's Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth' and John Hasling's The Audience, The Message, The Speaker with Public Speaking PowerWeb.



4. Info Ops: Warfare and Hard Reality of Soft Power is an awesome primer to information operations/information warfare (IO/IW). The book was originally written as a textbook for some high-level defense university classes, but has worked great as a layman's introduction to the field. In it you'll find many government agencies and the scope of their involvement in IO, great examples of IO/IW [save one example I'll mention later]
   
   The book is the foundation to an IO/IW education, so it is a definite "must-purchase." Its low price may shy folks away, thinking its a "discount" overview - but that is a mistake in thinking, and maybe IO (deception) on the part of the publisher...
   
   The one example of IO/IW I was disappointed in was mention of cyberspace exercises called Solar Sunrise and Elligible Receiver. The mainstream press have called them hoaxes or reporting blown out of proportion; the book does no better by using it as a "smoking gun" without the powder burns or shell casing. The mention of both exercises seem to be wrapped in the same mystery and hysteria as found on online conspiracy theory sites.
   
   Other than that slight peeve, the book should be purchased to get the skinny on IO/IW.



5. The meaning of the tem `Information Operations' (IO) is still evolving, but it is generally recognized to be inextricably part of the concept of Network Centric Warfare which was made possible by what the U.S. Military refer to as the `Global Information Grid' (GID). Which is to say that the IO concept is essential to developing military strategy and force structure planning. So what is it? The simplest definition of IO that is currently in fashion would appear to be that it refers to techniques and actions that adversely affect an enemy's ability to collect, manage, and use information while defending ones own abilities in this regard.
   
   All this is by way of introduction to this book, which although written by a committee of U.S. and Australian IO theorist and operators, is a pretty good over view of how IO works both in theory and, interestingly enough, in practice. The book makes perfectly valid claims that IO clearly must be based on effective intelligence production and good information systems. Ironically both defensive and offensive IO are dependant on access to accurate and timely information (knowledge) to be successful. In this context it was rather surprising that the book did not make more of an issue of the dangers of disinformation and corrupted information to IO success although it did discuss psychological warfare as an aspect of IO. Still the book is for now a good primer on IO and understanding the complexities of war in the 21st Century.
   
   Yet this book is not the definitive statement on IO, rather it is another step on the road of the U.S. Military to transformation to force structures based on Network Centric Warfare. Incidentally for those interested in that concept I suggest they read "The Future of War" by Mark D. Mandeles (Amazon.com). A rather different but equally relevant view of IO can be found in "Information Operations' by Robert D. Steel (Amazon.com). Until the term `Information Operations' is finally established, it is a good idea to keep an open mind on what it means.

5 comments about The I.R.A. and Its Enemies: Violence and Community in Cork, 1916-1923.

1. 'The lads on the hill' was how the local IRA battalion was known in my home area, and the affectionate terms 'the lads' or 'the boys' seems to have been prevalent throughout Ireland for the young guerillas who opposed British Rule in the period 1919-21, and the Irish Free State in 1922-23. This will become the classic work on how the mythos of 'the boys' was built, and as it explains the myth, it also (of course) destroys it. Hart shows it was the communal bonds of extended families, neighbours and parishes that sustained the IRA when repression forced many to leave to leave the movement in the 1918-19 period. The riots and repression by the RIC also gave these men the steel to begin killing 'outgroups' - at first the RIC, then the British Army, later Protestants, 'spies' and 'informers', many innocent. Hart's prose brings home the moral wasteland of many of the guerilla's activities. On both sides IRA and their opponents, Auxiliary policemen and 'Black and Tans' killed without hesitiation or discrimination. Hart could have explained more, I believe, the contradiction between a 'national' struggle, and the small community versus metropolitan air of much of the IRA men's statements at the time. Certainly, the bonds of community were unable to prevent the total victory of the Free State in the Civil War. If anything, this should destroy the smug republican propaganda of 'the IRA were never defeated'. For one thing, the Free State were even an even more implacable foe than the British State, and the ex-servicemen and former labourers who made up the Free State's army (around a core of ex-IRA men)were much more effectively led in a political sense. So the small 'parish republics' of Cork went down before the centralising state. Hart's book is of immense value to those who are interested in Irish history and nationalism generally, but also to the military historian who studies guerilla warfare and why men fight. Highly recommended.



2. I am researching a PhD dissertation on the British security forces in the Irish insurgency of 1920-21, and of the dozens of books and articles I've read on this subject, Peter Hart's _The IRA and its Enemies_ is unquestionably the finest. Hart's research is incredibly thorough: when I was in Dublin last summer, archivists remembered him and spoke admiringly of his industry. His history of County Cork in the revolutionary period combines two approaches: a social history of a single county, of the sort pioneered by his dissertation supervisor, David Fitzpatrick; and microhistories of individuals, families, and incidents that bring this conflict vividly to life. His first chapter is gripping: by describing the string of murders that began with the shooting of a police sergeant, Hart teaches the reader more about the nature of guerrilla warfare in Ireland than other authors have conveyed in entire books. His book has only one weakness--it has much more to say about the IRA than its enemies. Lucky for me: if Hart had decided to cover the British security forces in the same detail as the Republican insurgents, I would have had to find a new dissertation topic.

   If you enjoy this book, you may also want to read David Fitzpatrick's _Politics and Irish Life 1913-1921 : Provincial Experiences of War and Revolution_, Michael Farry's _The Aftermath of Revolution : Sligo 1921-23_, and Marie Coleman's forthcoming _County Longford and the Irish Revolution 1910-1923_. Each of these books, like Hart's, examines the impact of the Irish revolution on a single county (Clare, Sligo, and Longford).




3. Professor Hart is an industrious researcher and a good writer who is perhaps over attached to his thesis that the IRA fought a sectarian war during the Irish War of Independence 1919-21. So much so, he does not allow awkward contrary facts to disturb his narrative flow. The reader is left with the impression of a well crafted and well written study. But perhaps too well crafted. Reality does not have a linear flow. The story of the past, however, requires the imposition of narrative structure so that the reader is guided to the events and personages that the historian thinks relevant to the point being made. Professor Hart tells his story well, so well in fact that the substantive gaps in his story line took some time to emerge.
   
   As the years go by more and more people are asking more and more questions about Professor Hart's methods. Irish historian Meda Ryan (Tom Barry IRA Freedom Fighter, Mercier Press 2003) has asked an important question: how was it that in The IRA and its Enemies Professor Hart interviewed a participant in the Kilmichael ambush of November 1920 some days after the last known survivor died in November 1989. She and others ask this and other questions of Professor Hart in History Ireland (March April to September October 2005, available on the web). In History Ireland, and in the Irish Political Review, another Irish historian, Brian Murphy, questioned Hart on clearly misleading presentation of evidence.
   
   Professor Hart has not answered the questions, which are receiving increasing support from within the academic community of historians. The recent publication in paperback of a new edition of Meda Ryan's Tom Barry IRA Freedom Fighter (Mercier 2005) and the open clash between her and Professor Hart in History Ireland has set sparks flying in such a way as to make readers seek out both books anew. Increasingly opinion is coming down on the side of Meda Ryan's defence of the reputation of Tom Barry and the conduct of republican forces during the War of Independence. In doing so she has had to defend her own reputation from the assault upon it by Professor Hart (who is perhaps operating under the old adage that attack is the best form of defence). However, his recent attack on Ryan did not impress the neutral observer and this is reflected in the latest (Sept-Oct 2005) edition of History Ireland.
   
   If you buy this book, buy Meda Ryan's Tom Barry IRA freedom Fighter (Mercier Press, Cork 2005) as well.



4. I find Amazon's book description of "similar terrorist organisations" rather offensive and somewhat ignorant of a company that deals primarily in the commendable area of knowledge supply. The I.R.A of those years were given a direct mandate by the Irish electorate during the Dail elections of 1919 against an occupying force. It amazes me that this resistance army that was fighting for a democratic republic, elected in a democratic underground government is still so ignorantly called "terrorist". It is a word now used to describe insurgents in Iraq, Afghanistan, and soon probably Iran, while British and American invading, occupying forces will be called "liberators."



5. They came under the cover of darkness, stealth-like with fixed faces and minds set to the task at hand. All around them was a vast, lush countryside, now concealed under a black liquorish sky, for this was the perfect time, as night was their closest friend and ally, as night always is to men committed to murder. To them, the men who were about to be shot, eleven in all and ten of those killed outright, were not their fellow countrymen. They were something less. They were traitors, spies, loyalists, the dissident supporters of a foreign invader who had long since had it coming. Of course, all but one was Protestant and none were Catholic. These treacherous protestants, these others, were anything but the unarmed civilians all but one of them was proven to be. "Take that, you Free Stater," howled one unseen killer upon gunning down a recently-awakened Protestant at his front door while his wife and children listened on. This was war, and war was often reasoned by all or nothings, black and whites, with those dispensable thoughts within the area of gray, where empathy for the enemy or reason is often hastily flushed out with a little help from alcohol or long-embedded propaganda. Had the initial motivations of the Irish War of Independence began with such long-stemming aspirations? The answer to that question remains dubious to this day. Hart states at one point, "Revolution had turned these people and their families into strangers, and their neighbors into enemies." The implicit message here is not that the events of April 1922, or those like them, were the principle foundations of the Irish Revolution, but rather, the offspring of a slow residual effect that seeped its way into the consciousness of a people who, by that point, had taken on the tone of `if you're not for us, you must be against us.' Thus, the war had slid from a definitive view against British prevalence and occupancy to one that categorized co-workers as spies and long-standing neighbors as enemies, often times without merit and essentially based upon prejudice or disdain that was formed aside from the issue of the British presence in Ireland. It is from these viewpoints that we can best determine what fueled much of the violence as the victims called out another, less-noble story as to the motivations of many of the killers.
   
   Peter Hart explores the rationale of the paramilitary groups which fought from 1916-1923 in County Cork, a county in the central section of the Republic of Ireland, a region that acted as a hotbed for Republican activity during the first wave of fighting following the Easter Rising of 1916. Hart's research is second-to-none and his objectivity, while controversially failing to depict the one-sided nature of the Irish Republican movement, is momentously strong throughout, giving the reader a fair look at the reasoning behind so many of the killings.
   
   A beautiful and important book but one that will not copy and paste the heroic nationalist boastings of the Irish Republican view.

5 comments about The Lessons of Terror: A History of Warfare Against Civilians.

1. This book would be a good gift for someone who is still afraid of terrorists.



2. Mr. Carr has written a concise history of warfare against Civilians. I would recommend this as an excellent primer on the subject. In my belief this should be regarded as a political history as well as a military history.
   
   Saying that, I will add some of his conclusions about reforms are overly simplistic.



3. When Carr wrote this book he obviously had a predetermined conclusion that he wanted to convey. Though I personally agree that deliberate targeting of civilians is counterproductive to any political / military endeavor, Carr presents a lengthy list of historical evidence that is taken out of context and without an understanding of how militaries fight wars.
   
   In his book he describes Roman brutality in its dealings with invaded countries and asserts that this brutality was the eventual cause of unrest that led to the fall of the Roman Empire. I'm not sure if he could have generalized this more than he did. He failed to look at the overall success of an Empire that lasted nearly 5 centuries. Also, history has shown that part of Rome's success was due to how it integrated conquered countries into its society and allowed those people to eventually become citizens of Rome.
   
   Carr goes on to show the terrorist tactics used by both sides of the U.S. civil war, and he focuses on Sherman's march to the sea and then to Washington. I will agree that both sides had incidents in which civilians were targeted, but it is over simplistic to say that Sherman's tactics were purely terroristic and were eventually counterproductive. Carr and many other people point at the burning of Atlanta as a major example of targeting civilians, but they fail to remember that Atlanta was the largest supply distribution point for Confederate Army and that Sherman gave the civilian population ample warning to leave the city. Any true student of military history will agree that Sherman's destruction of the Confederacy logistics support structure was critical to expediting an end to the war, which consequently falls in line with Carr's belief in decisive warfare as the preferred tactic.
   
   Carr's final chapter draws scrutiny of U.S. strategic bombing, in the form of cruise missiles, as sites them as a terrorist weapons. His argument is based on his assertion that because military leaders are aware that civilian casualties will occur this makes it a deliberate attack on civilians and not collateral damage. His absolutist attitude does not take into consideration that the military target may be worth the cost in civilian lives. Prior to 9/11, President Clinton had the opportunity to kill Osama Bin Laden with a cruise missile, but in accordance with Carr's way of thinking about terrorist acts, he aborted the mission at the last minute because civilian family members were present in the camp. In retrospect that decision to not target a few civilians has cost tens of thousands of civilian lives in the both the U.S. and Middle-East.
   
   Finally, Carr asserts that limited, preemptive ground warfare is the best method to avoid long wars of attrition and civilian casualties. I wonder what his opinion is now after three years in Iraq. I don't think many people really saw that coming.



4. Carr's book is, first of all, good. He brings that new and overdue sensiblity which refuses to accept the classifications of previous regimes and establishments. At least this is his attempt. Some of the insights he shows, such as the idea that Total War is not a morally reprehensible product to non-Europeans, helps to shift the perspective of the discussion. But his basically middle of the road argument that Total War is inefficient and therefore never advisable is based on a hopeful assumption: that reasonable men will wage war in a reasonable way if shown the numbers. Of course this is false. The war we are presently engaged in is not a reasonable war. It is a war of fear against a culture different from ours, a shadowy enemy that scares us back to childhood remedies of sandbox fighting and therefore, unfortunately, brings Total War out of our Total Fear.



5. 
   1.0 out of 5 stars Not worth the paper on which it is printed, March 29, 2008
   By J. J. Surbeck (San Diego, CA USA) - See all my reviews
   (REAL NAME)
   I was a first excited to have stumbled on this book since there are so few good ones on terror and terrorism. Then as I read Carr's early chapters, I was astonished that see that he hadn't bothered to add one single footnote to make his case. In fact, as seductive as his original thesis is, and which I agree with, i.e. that terrorism always comes at a huge political cost, his book appeared to be more and more a long rant rather than a serious work resulting from in-depth research. It feels as if he wrote it in just a few hours of moderate work, or maybe he just talked for an hour and dictated it to his secretary. Because he obviously did no research, his many analyses of battles and conflicts in history are not only partial in their choice but quite questionable in proving his point. This has "sloppy" written all over it.
   
   All in all, this book is not worth the paper it is written on. It is an enormous disappointment. Clearly, the market agrees with my assessment: at last count, 67 copies of the hardcover version are on sale here for 1 cent each. I wouldn't even spend that. I had even added it to a list of references on terrorism, but I have since removed it. For good.

No comments about The Seems: The Split Second: Book 2 (Seems).

5 comments about Watching the World Change: The Stories Behind the Images of 9/11.

1. I really enjoyed knowing more about the photographers behind the photos. Some of the technical information was more than I needed, but it was very well written and I would recommend it.



2. Watching the World Change: The Stories Behind the Images of 9/11 tells stories behind the now-familiar shots taken by bystanders and professionals of 9/11 events, taking the reader back through the years to dialy events experienced by families and the nation. From how some of the most harrowing photos were taken of events to their lasting effects on photographer and viewers alike, WATCHING THE WORLD CHANGE questions how modern history comes to life with images, reveals the lasting traumas of events of 9/11, and draws important connections between observer, reporter, and daily life. Public libraries and college collections strong in the social sciences will find this a hard-hitting survey.
   
   Diane C. Donovan
   California Bookwatch



3. This book had incredible stories, I have read this book several times and continue to pick it up and read it again. The only thing that bothered me was the lack of photographs. Not enough photographs, especially ones more closely related to the stories. I have many books on this subject and felt there easliy could have been more photographs. It just frustrated me to find so few. Barring that, the stories were solidly told and that day will never be forgotten.



4. A very well written book in an "intimate" style, it shares many heretofore unavailable "takes" of that day. While I was surprised at the small number of photographs the book actually contained when I received it, the true value of the book is in "filling in the blanks" about the images it does discuss. This becomes apparent as the book is read. It also becomes obvious that only a limited number of images could be "explained" as thoroughly as Mr. Friend does without the book becoming exceedingly bulky.
   
   Some of the images in "Watching..." border on the farcical - such as a pregnant German woman. Hands on her stomach in an apparent takeoff of the modeling magazines, she languidly poses for the camera as the Twin Towers smoulder in the background. Must be a German thing, this ennui regarding mass murder.
   
   Others, such as an image of one of the "jumpers," is accutely haunting, searing itself into one's consciousness like a branding iron. Reading Mr. Friend's explanation of the image, in which the probable identity and work location of that poor soul become apparent, the horror becomes even more immediate, as we feel we "kind of know him."
   
   For those of us who love New York but (thank God!) weren't there to witness the perdition in the flesh, Mr. Friend's book probably gives the reader the closest possible approximation of what it feels like to have lost a loved one that day. He manages to "put a face" on many of the victims. They come to seem like friends.
   
   I love and hate this book. It's a "magic telescope" which "brings it all back" so effectively that it almost seems to stretch time backwards to that horrid day. It is masterfully done. Americans must never forget what was done to Americans that day. Mr. Friend's book should make the "Day of Infamy" comprehensible, almost immediate, to future Americans. Well Done!



5. David Friend has collected some outstanding pictures and informative interviews in Watching the World Change. And he is certainly right in his argument that the 9/11 terrorism made every citizen a potential photojournalist and went a long way to cementing digital photography's triumph over film. He is also exactly right in capturing both the global nature of the event and how quickly people became witnesses to it. In other words, his book validates the reality of nearly instantaneous global information. The book is annoying, however, because while Friend tiptoes up to, he does not really address the issue of how much of that instantaneously available information, especially graphic photographs, the public really needs to know, how such photos should be handled by both photographer and the media. He dodges any judgement and consistently refuses to criticize any photographer's behavior, no matter how boorish or sensational it might be. In short, Friend provides little help in the question of "where are the boundaries?". If this question matters, and I think it does, Friend's book -- while an excellent chronicle of who shot what with what kind of camera when -- is less than it could have been.

5 comments about The American.

1. Trapped in an airport with a flight delay and out of reading material, I ventured into the airport bookstore to pick up a book or magazine. Somewhat uncharacteristically, I allowed myself to be drawn by a book jacket's plot description into buying an unknown author. In the end, it was a worthwhile purchase. Britton's first novel, The American, was actually a fairly good novel. While perhaps not as polished as some of his compatriots in the action-thriller genre, this work nonetheless moved along with pace. Like many of the recent novels published by numerous authors of late, Britton is focused on the Middle East and terrorism. In a bit of a twist, the antagonist in this tale is a former U.S. soldier now aligned with middle-eastern terrorists. If you have been wondering about whether to take a chance on this new author, pick up this book. You will not regret it.



2. So far, i'm really not understanding these positive reviews i've seen here. I'll admit, ive only read a bit over 100 pages, but despite the semi interesting first few pages, not much has happened since. When is the author gonna get off the hero and his young gorgeous lover kick and decide this is an espionage thriller, and not a Danielle Steel sap novel?
   Britton should take notes from better authors such as Daniel Silva or Vince Flynn, and take a chill on all this dull romance, which most readers dont require in their thrillers.



3. I've just, with a deal of effort, finished reading this book. What drivel it is. Cardboard cut out characters immersed in a confused plot. Hackneyed phrasing and stock situations, edited by some dolt who thinks a jet shot down over the Arabian Sea will crash into the Atlantic and that the noun derived from "detain" is detainment rather detention. One could go on but it's not worth it.



4. I first heard of The American from an announcement on UNC-TV for DG Martin's North Carolina Bookwatch. I was intrigued by the body language between Andrew and DG, because DG seemed so impressed with the young writer. I watched a re-broadcast and had my son and husband join me. "Watch how impressed DG Martin seems to be with the young novelist. Watch the unspoken part, the body language" I ordered The American and read it within a few days. Given I have a master's degree in English, I know the middle of a novel can be a trap for losing the reader's interest. Andrew created a masterful meeting between the anatagonist and, well, I will not spoil the middle for you. I was impressed by the dust jacket illustration. As someone close to Andrew pointed out, it is unusual for a dust jacket to be white. I had seen the American flag draped and swathed sideways before, but I was startled to realize what I thought was the flag staff was actually the little girl's arm. Clever way to see if readers are really paying attention.
   
   I enjoyed the way the protagonist tricks his way into a prison facility to question a prisoner and gain information. The ending was haunting and showed great use of parallel structure, very satisfying to someone who has studied literature: "They slept lightly but they did sleep." Then a few paragraphs later, "They slept lightly and they did not dream." I think the first novel is superb. My family enjoys reading Tom Clancy's thrillers and to me Andrew Britton takes a more literary bent and is a cut above Clancy.
   
   Of course I read the second novel. Then a couple of weeks ago, Amazon's notification for the third novel was a welcome eye opener, so I ordered it. Remembering the site of the first book signing for Andrew's debut, I journeyed to Tir Na Nog pub. I met Andrew's mother, plus arranged to attend the book signing, met Andrew, and told him I was an avid reader. I heard about the possibility of The American being made into a movie and was excited for Andrew's achievement.
   
   Today, Easter Sunday, 23March2008, I learned the sad news that Andrew passed away earlier this week. Everyone who likes Andrew's novels will hear with a heavy heart, because we have lost an extremely talented young novelist. Andrew will live in our hearts and through his novels, and my prayers go to his mother and his family. Andrew, RIP. From Jennifer D. Riley and family



5. AGAIN THE AMERICAN BY ANDREW BRITTON IS A GREAT BOOK. I AM IN THE MIDDLE OF IT NOW AND BELIEVE ME YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO PUT IT DOWN