1 comments about Seeking Security in an Insecure World.

1. This book is extremely smooth to read through, and the chapters actually deal with recent global issues and modern security problems in today's society, which I feel makes it easier to keep your attention. It's not long or overly boring, and if you need to use it for research, there are pages of citations and information right in the back.

5 comments about Masters of Death: The SS-Einsatzgruppen and the Invention of the Holocaust.

1. This book blows away the myth of a unknowing wermacht and civilian populations complicity in the holocaust. It makes one think that anyone could stoop to mass murder given the right circumstances. Shockingly scary and super relevant in todays world of heightened racial and religeous tension.



2. In 1939 Hitler told the Senior Members of the Nazi Party and the Government of Germany, that the only way to insure that Germany could win the War in the East for Lebensraum would be to 'neutralize' the Jews. The Jews had been the reason that Germany had lost WWI, by their 'control' of the governments in France, England, Russia and the USA. Only by their destruction could Germany ensure the 'future' for their sons and grandsons.
   
   But how do you get rid of 11 million (based on the SS's own count) people? Do you drive them into the open marshes in Eastern Poland and let them die, do you deport them to Siberia... no you have to eliminate them, so that they do not come back to 'haunt' your children. Using this logic the SS created the Einsatz and Sonner Kommando groups to kill all of Europe's Jews. But killing is both psychological and physically brutalizing, not to mention burying all the bodies (which have a habit of decaying and marking the burial areas with escaping gas).
   
   Where they could, the SS used auxillaries, mostly Poles, Lithuanians and Ukrainians, who were only too happy to help eliminate the Jews. For the last hundred years they had been killing Jews intermittently in Pogroms. Now they were being given 'legal' authority to rob, steal, rape, pillage and brutalize thousands of their neighbors. Break out the booze and party favors!
   
   This is not a book for the squeemish, parts of it can be very difficult to read especially the graphic descriptions of the killings. But it needs to be documented for the deniers and other idiots (are you listening Mel Gibson's father) who don't believe it was possible to kill that many people and get rid of the bodies. But after the killing fields of Rwanda and Cambodia, how could anyone deny that people are capable of anything.



3. I found this book extremely well written and detailed, but it was very tough to get through due to the never-ending accounts of mass murder. There is only so much description of shootings of women and small children that I can handle. Not to mention the 'efficient' way in which the Germans went about the Final Solution - particularly the 'sardine packing' method of mass killing.
   I won't be reading anymore holocaust books for a while as this one just about gave me nightmares. Who needs fiction when modern history can provide more that enough horror stories to turn even the hardest stomach.
   I would highly recommend this book to anyone seeking a no BS account of the Einsatzgruppen and their horrific work.



4. This is not a fun read but there is so much in this book that is interesting. I thought Rhodes does a great job putting this history together. He explains how, who & why this happened. He also does a very thorough job explaining the Einsatzgruppen. It is also interesting to hear some of the stories & conflicts these groups had with the regular Wehrmacht soldiers. It will leave an impression on you.



5. As an American Jew born in 1942, I heard vague stories about the Holocaust from my family and friends. Always, the focus was on the death camps and the ovens. Later, of course, I read in more detail about antisemitism in general and World War II. However, reading this book brought home to me the broader context of the attempt to destroy the Jewish people and the fact, which Rhodes focuses on, that the death camps were the end stage of a process that was even more horrible.
   
   This was a painful book to read, but necessary for me to fully appreciate the dimensions of the Holocaust. I now feel that everyone should have the opportunity to read this book. I am not saying it is the best on the subject (there are many I have not read), nor is it perfect. The writing is uneven and some of Rhodes' theories are unproven. But I do strongly recommend this book.

5 comments about The Pinochet File: A Declassified Dossier on Atrocity and Accountability (A National Security Archive Book).

1. This book is heavy reading -- heavy in the sense that it helps to fill in a missing part of American and world history. It can be a bit overwhelming, like any good history book, but we are nevertheless indebted to Peter Kornbluh for his hard work in bringing this hidden history to light.
   
   History shows us today that the U.S. government was not so much worried about stemming the tide of communism in Chile as it was concerned that other nations, especially in Latin America, would be inspired enough by the "independent, rational socialist state" under Chilean President Salvador Allende to try something similar on their own. Witness this statement in Kornbluh's book from a secret Nov. 5, 1970 memo that Henry Kissinger prepared for then-president Richard Nixon (three years before the Pinochet coup): "In fact, as noted, an 'independent' rational socialist state linked to Cuba and the USSR can be even more dangerous for our long-term interests than a very radical regime."
   
   This book's historical value is undeniable. It would have been good if Kornbluh could have shared more copies of the secret documents and less of the story narrative. But this book, as it stands, is excellent. Highly recommended.



2. In his review of "The Pinochet File" below, Mr. Ryan Setleiff blithely concedes that a "handful were regrettably persecuted and tortured." Viewing life through rose colored glasses allows one to summarily dismiss the history of mayhem and death that have been the result of shoring up corrupt client regimes worldwide through force of arms, and, tutelage in the methods of torture.
   
   While--state--interests (protecting overseas investments) can be seen as having served in the overthrow and murder of President Allende, perhaps a little diplomacy, and, a great deal more of urging our favorite dictatorial regimes to extend the franchise to the "least among (them)" would forestall the appeal of the very "leftist" movements Mr. Setleiff and others dismiss so readily.
   
   Rather than fostering the lining of corrupt official's pockets (on-deposit in Manhattan) by force of arms, and, through state-torture, American interests would be better served through broadening the franchise of prosperity by way of inclusion through economic development. (inclusion, incorporation, cooptation, etc.) Nothing other than economic development--a shared stake fostering an obligation to an ordered society--has ever worked.
   
   Any rigorous libertarian historian soundly condemns state torture. In "The Pinochet File" the proof is in the pudding.



3. After September 11th 2001 the big question on the mind of American's was, `Why do they hate us?' Although the bloody military coup of Gen. Augusto Pinochet was over 30 years ago (ironically September 11th 1973) the lessons and ramifications still resound today. The main villain of the story is Nixon National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger but more so it's the belief that a purity of ideology trumps all other foreign relations concerns. Kissinger is quoted as saying "We [the United States] set the limits of diversity" and in Chile allowing a democratically elected Socialist to remain in power was unacceptable. The author writes, "This would be the first record of an American president [Nixon] ordering the overthrow of a democratically elected government".
   
   I am no fan of neo-conservativism but one aspect of the movement I can appreciate is the desire to merge foreign policy with morality. Whether this has actually occurred is a debate for another book. Kissinger took such an amoral approach to foreign policy with his `realpolitik' that it's no wonder so many people around the world despise the United States. The United States did everything it could, including imposing economic sanctions using the World Bank, financing propaganda and fostering discontent among the military in order to bring down popularly elected president Salvador Allende. The goal was to wreck the economy and create conditions for a right wing takeover. So desperate to destroy Allende were Kissinger and Nixon that the CIA formed a working relationship with Patria y Libertad, a self-proclaimed neo-fascist paramilitary group that engaged in acts of terrorism including bombings who modeled themselves after Hitler's Brownshirts. After the violent coup that cost the lives of thousands of Chileans the U.S. government supported the brutally repressive Pinochet regime by reopening the spigot of foreign money and even selling military hardware while Pinochet's supporters rounded up and executed leftists. Chile wasn't just supported by the U.S. it was favored to the point where it was receiving 80% of all Title I Food for Peace in Latin America and $30 million from AID in housing guarantees compared to $4 million for the rest of Central and South America. Chile became the fifth largest customer of U.S. military weaponry falling just behind Iran.
   
   There were at least as many people in government against what the United States was doing as for and the Republican leadership felt compelled to deliver endless and blatant lies to Congress in order to cover up their actions. This was a nasty, filthy piece of work that did incredible damage to the credibility of the United States and its place as a moral guidepost for emerging countries. So now Chile has come full circle with the election of Socialist Veronica Michelle Bachelet Jeria to the presidency. Venezuelian president Hugo Chavez has already learned that the United States still intends to set the limits of diversity with a U.S. backed coup attempt in 2002.
   
   This is such an important book and if more American's were aware of history we might be less inclined to automatically blame others and spend more time correcting our own moral failings. When American's remain ignorant they become confused by the anger and resentment of others particularly in South America and the Middle East because people in those regions remember American actions quite well. This is not a blame America book but it is a look at actions that no American should be proud of. Chile is but one example of an amoral U.S. foreign policy and the more American's become aware the more we can improve in the future.



4. This book provides all of the relevant documents on Pinochet and is an excellent addition to a study of Chile. Pinochet was a brutal dictator who held his country hostage with the support of the United States. If you are looking for a book that covers this time period I would recommend A nation of Enemies. If you are looking fore the original research though this book cannot be beat.



5. "The Pinochet File" exposes in stunning detail the truth behind the infamous September 11, 1973 coup against the elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile and the United States' guilt in the event. Peter Kornbluh has produced a vast, important, priceless document about how the United States happily sponsored the destruction of democracy in a small South American country and helped install a dictatorship of death and terror. This is a horror story, no question, and it must indeed have been frightening to live in Chile during the reign of Augusto Pinochet if you were a free thinker. Kornbluh shows disclassified documents that detail how the CIA, under orders by President Richard Nixon (who else?), conducted covert operations in Chile to destroy the country's economy once Allende, a socialist, was elected president. Of course the White House could not accept a socialist government in the Americas, much less an ELECTED one. Henry Kissinger is reported here as stating that we should not allow countries to go Communist because of the irresponsibility of their own people, a chilling look into the thinking processes of men not only like Kissinger and Nixon, but like Bush and Cheney. In a sense that is the most important aspect of this book, the way it is still so relevant to our current situation in the world. The April 2002 coup in Venezuela against Hugo Chavez's government, which luckily failed, has all the fingerprints of U.S. involvement, much like the Chile case. Kornbluh meticulously documents both the rise and fall of Allende and the installment of the vicious military junta headed by Pinochet. Kornbluh goes on to report on the various detention centers and concentration camps spread through-out Chile during the regime's years in power, including Colonia Dignidad, an infamous German community said to house Nazi war criminals where Pinochet made alliances to use the spot as a horrific torture center. One of the most surprising chapters in the book, which will be a revelation to many readers unfamiliar with the Chilean story, is the one dealing with American citizens who were unfortunate enough to be in Chile during the coup and were either arrested, tortured or killed. The infamous Operation Condor is described here as well, a clandenstine terrorist network set-up by the military dictatorships of Chile and Argentina to kill any resistance in the hemisphere, all of this ignored by the CIA. "The Pinochet File" will shock many, anger others, it is a darker chapter of not just Latin American history but of our own as well. In a time when we are asking questions about terrorism and foreign policy, it is important to look into the not so distant past because it will tell us how we got here.

5 comments about France: The Dark Years, 1940-1944.

1. Julian Jackson's history is the most distinguished account I've read on France during the period from 1940 through 1944. He makes an excellent case noting how the Vichy Regime was indeed part of a longstanding political tradition in France which went as far back as the Ancien Regime; he makes a similar observation of the Resistance, noting how its political philosophy could be traced directly back to the French Revolution. Jackson clearly notes the intense dislike - if not outright hatred - of many French towards their German occupiers, noting that such sentiments may have played a decisive part in ensuring the survival of more French Jews than their counterparts in other Nazi-occupied countries. Much to my surprise, he clearly demonstrates how support for the Vichy Regime came not only from a staunchly conservative elements - but also liberal, and indeed socialist elements - within French society. He also succeeds in noting how figures such as French resistance leader Jean Moulin and future French president Francois Mitterand underwent transformations - some major, but also minor - in their politics, eventually shifting their support from the Vichy regime to DeGaulle's Free French movement. Despite Vichy's reputation for cultural as well as political repression, Jackson shows that cultural activities ranging from the fine arts through film not only survived, but also flourished, at least during the early history of the Vichy Regime.



2. Buy this book - truly outstanding. I look forward to the other parts in Jackson's three-part series, "France: The Dark Years: before 1940" and "France: The Dark Years: after 1944". I gather there is a special book being brought out called "France: The Very Dark and Frankly Bloody Annoying Months, October 2002 - March 2003"



3. Although I knew something about de Gaulle, Vichy, "The Resistance," etc; usually these topics were tangential to some other main topic I was reading. Jackson's BIG book set me straight on everything I always wanted to know about Vichy, the Germans, and the Free French, Petain, de Gaulle, etc.

   France 1940-1944 covers highly controversial "history."
   Almost none of the various personalities and political parties survive Jackson's detailed analysis without taking their "lumps." France 1940-1944 presents an ambiguous, painful story about collaboration, indifference and a few resisters.
   Surely the French will never escape the shame of Vichy

   Jackson often delivers clever insights and mixed judgments. Jackson gives you enough background to evaluate some of the following puzzles:

   ·Why did Churchill recognize De Gaulle in 1940, instead of the Vichy Government?

   ·Why did FDR try so hard to get rid of "Le Grand Charles" (De Gaulle)?

   ·Why did many French literally cheer when France lost the War with Germany in June 1940?

   ·Why did powerful and influential French express such bitterness, invective, and hatred against Jews?

   ·Why did the "Resistance" accept De Gaulle in 1944? After all, thousands of French fought and died inside France while De Gaulle remained safely in England and Africa.

   ·Why didn't the Communists launch a takeover at the time of the Liberation?.

   After you read this book you will understand some of the powerful destabilizing forces in French society. But Dark Years is a long book, it's serious reading, and it's written in
   a rather academic style -- dull if you are not really intrigued by France, the French, De Gaulle, the Germans, the Jews, etc.




4. In other readings of World War II, I had always felt I did not have a solid grounding in the history of Vichy France. I have been greatly intrigued for some time as to how a country like France could have collaborated to such a degree. This gap in knowledge, I hoped, could be filled by a general treatise on the subject. Having reviewed several books on Vichy France I chose 'France- The Dark Years, 1940-1944' as the one work upon which I would rely.
   While I did admire the scope of the work, and have no argument that this book may be called the latest definitive source, be warned that this book is not written for those who do not have a working knowledge on the subject. The author does not spend time on set-up: the reader is presumed to know of not only the leading political figures in France during the 1930's-40's, but also those of greater obscurity. The list goes on with the presumptions of the author- we are supposed to know about newspapers of the era (of which there were many), political parties, both major and insignificant, and the names of resistance groups.
   Again, this would not be critical if I had the requisite knowledge of the politics and society of France during this era, of which I do know some. But this book is written for the doctoral level student of this era in history, not for those seeking a more general overview.



5. By all accounts, this is the penultimate history of "the dark years" in France during 1940-44. I agree wholeheartedly. The approach is at once scholarly without being pedantic. Every page is a gem. I have learned so much about not only the years of the occupation, but also about France itself, and why its history (political and social) contributed greatly to the rise of the Vichy government. There are, according to Jackson, proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, many,many strands of influence upon not only Vichy but the Resistance and how both were viewed during and after the war. To those who complain that it is "geared toward specialists", I suggest that you choose your topics a bit more carefully if you want something a bit more simplistic. The subject is not easy, but Jackson does a masterful job of keeping the prose interesting and vibrant. This would get SIX stars if it were possible. Bravo. A tour de force that belongs in every historian's library.

5 comments about Tea with Terrorists: Who They Are * Why They Kill.

1. i have read this book and have done thorough research on islam and other major religions too, but this book does not have a lot of authentic or traceable facts. this is just rubbish.



2. It does for Muslims what the DiVinci Code did for Catholics.
   
   I don't know how many of the factoids are true and it is not worth the time as a thriller.
   
   In the end it just boggles the mind.



3. I've studied Islam and its teaching at the college level, but I must say that this book explains its terrorist roots well. After reading this well documented book in novel format it was easy to understand why there is so much violence associated with this religion. This book will open your eyes like no other that I have read. You will get a first class education while you enjoy the novel like format. I checked its sources and amazingly they are very accurate.
   
   Excellent book to read....must get for people who want to understand why there is so much terrorism in the world associated with Islam.



4. Craig Winn is a money hungry businessman. After 911, he made a goal to make millions of dollars by lying about Islam. Don't be fooled by this guy.



5. Great Read, especially how it reflects today's real threat from extremist Islams in the name of allah. Definitely a long book, but worth every page.

No comments about Essentials of Terrorism: Concepts and Controversies.

3 comments about This Connection of Everyone with Lungs: Poems (New California Poetry).

1. We can get a sense of the grand, encompassing scope of this book from its title alone, a phrase drawn from the opening poem: "Poem Written After September 11, 2001." This poem's central task is to articulate the model of radical interconnectedness upon which the rest of the book depends. Over its eight pages it performs this task through what essentially amounts to a slow zoom-out, from the microscopic level ("cells, the movement of cells and the division of cells") all the way out to global scope ("the space of the cities and the space of the regions and the space of the nations and the space of the continents and islands"). To call oneself a "global citizen" is slightly pollyanna-ish, but this poem still functions as a lovely vision: the way it is made elegiac by its positioning as a "post-9/11" poem feels slightly predictable, but that makes the elegy no less real. One of the more "important" poems in recent memory (let's set aside, for now, the question of whether poetry should aspire to importance).
   
   More interesting and important still is the book's remainder, a single long poem (broken into discrete chunks), entitled "Poem Written From November 30, 2002, to March 27, 2003." I think this poem is more interesting because it's doing the thornier work of dealing with the consequences of the first poem: if "everyone with lungs" is connected in a "lovely [and] doomed" global matrix, then what does this mean? If we can successfully expand our consciousness to the point where it encompasses the whole earth as a system, then what does it mean when part of that system (including but not limited to "our part") is attempting to kill another part of that system (including but not limited to "their part")? Is it possible to love humanity in an all-encompassing way when some of the humans that we're connected to behave murderously? Is a person killed in the Burij refugee camps important? What about someone killed in the Monoko-Zohi civil war? What about Justin Timberlake? How important is the weather? If you can make your own bed a place of "connected loving" and "pleasure" and "agency," what relevance does this have to the rest of the world, if any? How can you consider these questions seriously in a world at war without going insane or succumbing to crippling grief?
   
   I don't think that the book answers these questions, but I think they're the right ones to be asking, and any book that represents a sustained attempt to address them (lyrically no less!) gets my recommendation.



2. You thought this was err.
   You thought err, and that was err.
   There is no err anywhere.
   There nears err, but it is there.
   Like air. Prefer air like a sea otter confused as we are, my preciouses.
   Precious is was Precious does, and Precious is bare, with air in her hair
   and an heir in her snare.
   
   For we are confused as we are. Read and be confusedednesses.
   For the meaning of meaning is meaning and meaning combined with
   air and the hair of someone we remember, recall, call later when we've run
   across err and need console gaming.
   
   Oh, game show host's false smiles smiles back to me,
   back to me and my poetry's poetry back in the back where
   I eat a snackpack.
   
   For we are fullness of bologna and tasteless cheese.
   Tasteless.
   Bologna.
   Cheese.
   Cheese and bologna and bologna cheese taste tasteless fullness.



3. I read this book for my Writers on Writing Class, and the author paid the class a visit to discuss the book. Here is my response:
   
   Juliana Spahr compiled poetry for her collection, this connection of everyone with lungs that is part creative non-fiction and part political statement. Not including repetition, the poetry follows no form or scheme (except for line breaks/double spacing here and there) and the collection literally consists of two poems. The first, "Poem Written After September 11, 2001," is a single piece that spans eight pages. The second, "Poem Written from November 30, 2002, to March 27, 2003," spans 61 pages, but is broken up chronologically by date fifteen times. This unusual format speaks of a postmodernist approach to poetry, one that Spahr herself admits to not fully understanding. But she says, "it was the way it had to be written."
   The poems in the book read less like poetry and more like a diary, or rather like an intimate conversation. This comes from the conversational, albeit unhappy, tone and the use of addressing the reader as "beloved," The conversation topic couldn't be clearer: 9/11 has emotionally shaken up Spahr, and she's against the war. This seems fair enough; this is her book and her poetry, thus she can talk about whatever she feels like. However, the constant reiteration of her position on past- and present-day politics becomes tiring. Spahr told the class, "I sometimes feel like a hammer, because I feel like I'm always hammering in my point." And in this book, she has done just that. Her repetition of words, and constant list-making, such as the list of major cities in various countries on page 54 which felt exhausting and unnecessary, seemed to be more distracting than powerful. For example, one couldn't help but anticipate the upcoming word or phrase ("I speak for..." or "...exists"), and ignore the accompanying sentences.
   And yet another distraction was her use of pop-culture references. It appeared to make a point in the beginning: the American people were more aware of Snoop Dogg's affairs than world affairs. But as the "time" went on, and more pop-culture references thrown in, it was even more distracting, as it caused my mind to start thinking about the famous actor that was jus mentioned.
   However, the author does have many admirable qualities within her words. The strong, steady voice and tone within the poems, keen word choice and her ability to articulate pressing questions made reading enjoyable.
   In the end, this connection of everyone with lungs was an ambitious and noble project. Spahr attempts to put words to an unthinkable tragedy and controversial conflict. However, it seems almost inappropriate to read these poems if you are not a left-wing political affiliate. Her viewpoint on the war is made so abundantly clear that it becomes a hindrance to the beauty of her writing. I find that she was at her strongest when she was posing questions and observations about all people and human beings, of course, "everyone with lungs." It was when she made connections between people, and the simple beauty in things like love, is when she truly had my attention. Alas, with her many disheartening facts thrown in, and strong political views masquerading as poetic voice, she lost a potential fan.

5 comments about Where in the World Is Osama bin Laden?.

1. BORING. If Spurlock had been even a little novel, not quite so NYC smug,---like telling us that GW Bush is a genius and 20 years from now, we will all be wishing for another President like him, he might have actually sold more books.
   
   Makes me wonder if Spurlock doesn't realize that the real problem in the Middle East isn't an overgrowth of people--thanks to a culture that somehow prefers to live half in the 21st century and 1/2 in the 6th century CE and allows multiple wives and copious children, but expects the rest of the world to pay for that practice. Religious wars are the nastiest, longest and bloodiest. Try as he might, he does not convince that the GWOT is a political struggle. He provides way too many inconsistent and uneven observations to wear that political war mantle. Take Islam out of the picture, and the problems get solved easily.
   
   And also I would like to know if all those 'good folks' he met along the way knew about his own personal life style choices (impregnating first, marriage saved till later), what their reaction would have been?
   Off with his head??? Or you go-- you cute, humorous yankee, you?
   
   This book falls short of good satire and is a little too preachy to be serious journalism. It can be ranked right up there with SOUTHPARK, though. So if you like that, feel free to spend $25. Or if you really want to know about Bin Laden, just Google his name---A much greener solution to your thirst for knowledge.



2. Spurlock has always been intelligent, funny, witty and humane, both in Super Size Me and on 30 Days, where for one episode he spent a month living as a devout Muslim. I therefore expected his take on the Global War of Terror (as Borat puts it...) would be well-informed, insightful, fair, and probably very funny.
   
   It is all of those, but what I did not expect was the wealth of really well-researched history of the Middle East. This book is as good a primer on the lingering injustices that fuel the region as any you'll find, and the presentation is readable and comprehensible (not easy with that subject matter!) You'll learn both sides of each issue, or more accurately, the myriad of sides seemingly to every issue. There are no easy answers, no trite moralizing, no assigning unilateral blame. Spurlock explains how decades -- centuries, even millennia -- of tribal rivalries led up to today's powerkeg situation, and how the events of the past 40 years have inflamed them. He does not lay all of the blame on current leadership (ours or theirs), although the disastrous consequences of recent blunders on both sides are made evident. Clinton's failures in the region are profiled, as well as Bush 1st and Reagan. Although not specifically name-checked, Spurlock traces a lot of the escalation back to the early 1980s when Charlie Wilson, himself the subject of a recent book and movie, arranged to supply high-tech weapons to the Mujahideen fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. What once were sword encounters from the backs of camels suddenly became missiles and tanks, and these weapons have torn the region apart and are now used against the new occupiers of Afghanistan.
   
   He traces the origin of Al Qaeda and explains how fundamentalists and terrorists came to be intertwined. He draws the inevitable parallels between fundamentalists in any of the three Abrahamic apocalyptic religions, and shows us how over-zealous adherence to principles and so-called morality can lead ordinary people to violate their innate humanity.
   
   In all this is a fabulously-informative (and sobering) book while still being laugh-out-loud funny in many places. Morgan Spurlock has done a great service by informing Americans (and hopefully everyone else!) about the realities on the ground.



3. Okay, I'll start with listing my prejudice: I think Morgan Spurlock is a genuis. I like everything I've seen from him, including "Sper-Size Me," "30 days" and "What Would Jesus Buy?" He is funny, but educational at the same time.
   
   This book documents his search for Osama Bin Laden, the supposed most wanted man on earth. Through interviews in many different countries, he documents what people believe about jihad - from Muslims of differing varieties, as well as others. He uncovers both truth and lies. He visits people in their homes, oftening sharing meals with them at their insistence.
   
   Morgan Spurlock, the genuis (no, this is NOT being written by his mother or other relative,) does his best to entertwine his personal story of his sometimes dangerous and always thrilling travels, with the views of people from many different backgrounds - people that do and do not believe in the War on Terror. His interviews include those that hate bin Laden and want him dead to those who think bin Laden is just about the best person who ever lived. Spurlock's own opinions are buried so that the results of the interviews are what gets presented.
   
   This book asks whether or not there really is an American campaign to capture bin Laden and bring him to "justice." What would it mean if he ever was arrested? Would it make any difference in the world? Would it make us safer? He also examines the War on Terror by visiting the countries and the people involved on both sides - civillian and military. It asks whether these operations are in anybody's best interest.
   
   He documents bin Ladin's history and visits the places where bin Laden had spent the most time.
   
   I wish I could convey his sense of humor in this review, but to do so, I would have to quote the book itself, which I would rather not do. After all, ripped out of context, the funny stuff might not be that funny.
   
   Spurlock documents his search for the truth about bin Laden in this War on Terror. We all get to ask whether anyone is safer now that America has gotten involved in these conflicts. Are our allies better off? Have we actually helped any Arab nations?
   
   Finally, this book is a good read. As far as I can tell, it is not pro-Muslim or anti-Muslim, pro-war or anti-war, pro-American or anti-American, although it is VERY American to ask tough questions on controversial issues and confront what our country does and says.
   
   Buy it, read it or the terrorists win.
   
   just kidding....lighten up



4. This is a great book. I actually initially just thought it was going to be a humorous travel adventure similar to British authors Dave Gorman, Danny Wallace etc. With the title an obvious parody of those old 80's first computer programs they introduced us kids to computers with in the 80's ie Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?, and with the Australian version of the cover being more cartoony (see my cover in customer images), I assumed this book would simply be about an average American guy travelling to places he knows nothing about and his humorous culture clashes, observations of the culture etc. Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden is so much more than that though.
   
   The book actually delves into the cultures of Muslims, Islam as well as what actually happens to imigrants from these cultures when they move to the West. He also tackles the failure of housing commission/welfare housing suburbs (where a lot of these immigrants get placed) and the impact they have on those from all races who live there and their attitudes towards every other resident of their new/own country from living there and the impact of those attitudes towards committing crime.
   
   For those who have seen the film Supersize Me this book reads in the same sort of tone and uses vocabulary just like Morgan spoke in that documentary.
   
   For those who don't know much or anything about the Islamic religion this is also good introduction book to get an understanding of that unknown, often feared and misunderstood culture. Since Morgan Spurlock knew nothing either as he started his journey his lack of bias allowed him to get the facts from the mouths of different people within these cultures. As well he also met and interviewed FBI/CIA ex agents, political experts and so forth.
   
   Quite a controversial topic which Morgan Spurlock will no doubt get some flack from and negative reviews simply for the subject matter. I mean check out the Where's Wally (Waldo for North Americans) parody Where's Bin Laden, which is a great funny parody but the simple subject of Bin Laden results in people tagging it unAmerican and other stupid things. Good on Spurlock for writing this.



5. A young American documentary film-maker decides to find out what all the fuss is about global terrorism and religious fanaticism. Who better to ask than Mr. bin Laden himself ? So, he decides to go look for him. He doesn't find him, but in the end, he is much sadder, but also definitely much wiser. He travels from the U.K. to France, from Egypt to Saudi Arabia, from Afghanistan to Pakistan, speaks to hundreds of people from all walks of life, who represent scores of cultures and a multitude of religions. Mr. Spurlock presents a very even-handed account of the rise of religious extremism and international terrorism. He looks at the causes that make ordinary people into killers of innocent people, he examines the role of developed countries in inadvertently fanning the resentment, he and he tries to figure out what measures should be taken to bring the world back from the edge of the abyss where it is tottering at the moment.
   
   This is a book which presents the present-day socio-political climate without resorting to any jargon. It is one man's attempt to understand how the world has become such a dangerous place in the space of a few decades, and his resulting narrative is also an impassioned appeal for humanizing the enemy, for improving the quality of life of millions of people who struggle just to put food on their tables every day, and the need to use the modern communications we have at our disposal to educate people all over the world. A must read for anybody; I am not a current-affairs buff, but even I enjoyed Mr. Spurlock's reasonable tone, his genuine effort to stay open-minded, and his honest attempt at looking at the world through the eyes of people driven to the extreme, who have gone off the deep end, and resorted to murder and mayhem in order to achieve their objectives.

2 comments about Secrets of 24: The Unauthorized Guide to the Political & Moral Issues Behind TV's Most Riveting Drama.

1. The surprising parallels to the De Vinchi Code. When sane people read or watch fiction for the joy of it and then act like it's effecting our culture in negative ways. Great book to read if you're hooked on "24" like I am. The later chapters are really outstanding on how torture is addressed by West Point generals and FBI consultants. After you read this book you'll appreciate the work involved in making the "24" series or any good work that comes out of Holly Wood. Nowadays it's not much.



2. Call me an addict if you like, but I've watched every season of 24 live on Fox TV as it unfolded in its real-time scenario AND I've watched them all on their subsequent DVD releases -- with the exception of Season 6, at present -- along with their special features and commentaries ... so you can only imagine the kind of outright glee I experienced when I happened across "The Secrets of 24: the Unauthorized Guide to the Political & Moral Issues Behind TV's Most Riveting Drama" on the shelves at the local bookseller, had to have it, and read it right away (a rarity for me if based solely on my ever expanding library of "things to read before I die" library). Like the show, I couldn't put the book down, so much so that it begs me to offer one surprised observation from the getgo: why are these "Secrets" unauthorized? It would appear that many of the essays contained therein either quote what show creators Robert Cochran and Joel Surnow have publicly said about the program, about its influence, about its topics, etc. Indeed, it appears clear the Cochran and Surnow even dissected some of the pieces presented here in their interviews. It's a mild curiosity more than it is a major gripe, but couldn't the mere act of making this an official sanctioned publication only helped its sales?
   
   Well, enough with the semantics ...
   
   The "Secrets of 24" is a stellar book, the perfect companion for fans of the show's idea. Rather than spend time exploring the various controversies of each series, the authors have collected interviews and essays from think tank types, almost all of exploring some facet of the ideas that fuel the show's popularity. From political differences (both liberals and conservatives love the show but for very different reasons), from academic differences (what does TV say about our society at large versus what does it say about us militarily) and even quick swatches of infotainment (brief interviews with the cast and crew about the show, its impact, and what it all means in the scope of television history) get terrific play between these covers, and there's so much to explore you'll find yourself watching the clock -- inserting your own 'plunk-plunk-plunk' like the show ticks down each approaching second -- hoping to "just read one more page" before going to bed ... until you realize it's morning, and, oh no, work is calling! If you're as jazzed about the exploits of Jack Bauer as I am, you won't be able to put this one down.
   
   I'll admit that I generally don't put a whole lot of stake into what comes out of any actor's mouth when they're sermonizing about the evils of our world, but, thankfully, "Secrets" avoids most of the pratfalls by having these contributors focus on 24 as a phenomenon, even when they don't so much see the show in that vein. From politics to people, from terrorists to Tinseltown, everyone here has something to say. There are admittedly a handful of interviews that don't so much relate to 24 as they could have, but, all in all, these "Secrets" are best shared amongst the fans of the award-winning TV series. If anything, this book will help you pass the time waiting for another day in the life of Jack Bauer ... and reliving the old ones.

4 comments about Fatal Choice: Nuclear Weapons: Survival or Sentence.

1. Richard Butler, a proponent of the abolition of all nuclear weapons, has written an important book concerning the current state of nuclear weapons in the world. His main thesis states that the problem with nuclear weapons are the weapons themselves and anything short of getting rid of them a futile effort. Specifically he refers to the Bush administrations future deployment of National Missile Defence as the "fatal choice."

   According to Butler, the advocates of missile defense and other measures designed to keep and expand nuclear arsenals in the U.S. use the argument that current treaties, especially the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, are not being adhered to and are thus useless. Butler, however, indicts the U.S. as being the main noncopliant culprit in that the U.S. has not bilaterally reduced its arsenal along with Russia to lower levels as is required in the treaty. Instead of scrapping the treaties, Butler advocates that these treaties ought to be bolstered and the proper institution be established to ensure compliance by all signators.

   Butler's book outlines effectively a few specific arguments against NMD.




2. I must say right up front that I was disappointed with this book. I had read the authors other book on his time as an Iraqi weapons inspector and found it to be both interesting and entertaining. I had hoped this book would be the same. It turns out the interesting sections were sparse and even the authors mother might be hard pressed to call the book entertaining. The author has spent most of his career working on nuclear weapons issues in regards to disarmament. Given that he was a member of the Australian government this meant his work consisted of being ignored by the countries with the weapons and be placated by the countries that wanted them. The book is his review of the current state of affaires with nuclear weapons and his opinion on the "star wars" missile defense system the U.S. is in the process of building.
   
   I guess I should not be too hard on the author. He did drop into his book here and there very interesting bits of information about nuclear weapons, who has them and what do they have. He also gives the reader some in sight as to which counties helped who with the creation of the weapons. I also liked the numbers he tossed in every now and then. The overall amount of money the U.S. alone has spent on these weapons systems is jaw dropping amazing. My complaints with the book are two fold. First he left out a large amount of interesting information that could have bulked up the book. There were very little discussion on what the current weapons can do, how they are delivered, and how the missile defense system is supposed to work. Given that the author was barely able to scrape together 160 pages for the book, it might not have been that bad of an idea to spend a little time at the library and give the reader a bit more.
   
   But my largest issue with the book was this pie in the sky view that by just talking to all the counties in the world about not having these weapons, somehow the countries that currently have the weapons would just decide to trash them and we would all live happily ever after. Now I do not argue that this would be a nice state of affairs, but lets step into reality. Who really thinks the conservative government we have now would think voluntarily getting rid of all nuclear weapons is a good idea. How about the Israelis, surrounded by enemies or how about India and Pakistan, two countries that routinely have boarder fights today. I felt the thinking was simplistic, narrow minded and bordering on the fanciful. Overall the book was average, it held some interesting bits of info, but also suffered from rather long and dull musings about a better world. I am sure there are better books dealing with weapons disarmament or the missile defense system.



3. The author, Richard Butler, headed the UN Special Commission for Disarming Iraq. He was formerly a career member of the Australian diplomatic corp. and is a strong advocate of nuclear disarmament. In this book, the author gives his point of view. The international community of countries is facing a critical choice concerning the spread of nuclear weapons. The world is divided into countries that possess nuclear weapons, the "Have" countries, and those countries that do not possess such weapons are the Have-Nots". In the U.S., every country that attempts to join the ranks of the "Have" countries are berated with military threats and international sanctions because they have broken the terms of the (Non-Proliferation Treaty) NPT. The author's view is that the "Have" countries have themselves to blame for the root of the problem. The other half of the NPT holds that the countries possessing Nuclear Weapons must strive toward disarmament. The "Have -Not " countries that are playing catch-up in this arms race consider the NPT a broken treaty as they view each successive generation of improved nuclear weapons being deployed by the "Have" countries. Richard Butler's idea is that everything the nuclear powers use to prevent the remainder of the countries from joining its privileged circle is doomed to failure. The idea for the U.S. to set up a missile defense system will just be another privileged circle that will make the "playing" field even more tilted. Another exclusive club that will also become more populated as the technology trickles down. The book provides an excellent history of the Nuclear Weapons Age politics and treaties and their interplay upon different countries of the world community. .
   Some very current and good information is provided on the status of Iraq. The author explains the problems and his views very well. Well worth the read. His solutions seem to be a situation of "more of the same thing" I gave it three stars just because the solutions seems so weak. The information and the history provided is the five star section of the book.



4. I have been following Richard Butler for many years with a lot of interest as he is a man who is extremely experienced in the issues of nuclear proliferation.
   
   His argument is that nuclear weapons spread is caused by other states that have nuclear weapons, they are expensive and that we could modify the world system so we could get rid of them. Well I find myself disagreeing with him.
   
   Originally nuclear weapons were first developed by the US against a non-nuclear opponent Germany. When the US discovered that Germany did not have a bomb, they kept on making it. They then used it against a non-nuclear enemy Japan. Then they built up their nuclear resources against a non-nuclear Russia. Later on Israel developed its nuclear weapons to be used as a last resort against enemies that lacked nuclear weapons. What I think one could argue is that the presence of nuclear weapons accelerates the spread of nuclear weapons but not that it is the cause!
   
   I also disagree about the expense. To quote the US federal government and say that nuclear weapons cost more then education, training, employment and social services; agriculture, natural resources and environment; general science and space research; community and regional development; law enforcement; and energy production and regulation is dishonest. Most these expenses are not federal but state and local costs. Defense tends to be a federal expense. I could use the same argument and argue since the US state governments spend so little on nuclear weapons compared to other things that nuclear weapons are cheap.
   
   But say his own figures is correct and the US military spend about 14% of its budget on nuclear weapons. The US military budget is about 19% of the federal total. So that works out to about 2.7% of the federal budget. For that expenditure, the US gets a massive powerful weapon system which is much cheaper then any other conventional system. President Eisenhower, who Richard Butler likes to selectively quote, talked about getting the biggest bang for the buck, and Eisenhower was talking about nukes. Bluntly the reason the US went for a nuclear defense system was it was cheaper. Similarly nuclear programs in other countries, do not appear to have made much a dent on their countries budgets so much that open societies like Britain, France, Israel and South Africa all managed to hid the relative small amounts in large items.
   
   
   Not only that but many countries purposes, a conventional system cannot do what a nuclear system can do. What size conventional force could North Korea or Iran build, that could deter the US?
   
   
   Lastly as anyone who has followed world affairs can see, its extremely unlikely that the international community can even if it wanted to police nuclear proliferation. His example of a policeman and crime is just wishful thinking - crime occurs in all countries. Nor is it easy to find, EVERY nation that today possesses nuclear weapons has lied about its intention to develop them. EVERY nuclear nation once protested that either "we are NOT going to develop nuclear weapons" or "our nuclear research is for peaceful purposes only." Then they went right ahead and developed the bomb. All we need is one crime in this case for a country going nuclear and Richard Butler's theories go out the door. By Richard Butler calculations then 44 countries could get a bomb, if they wanted one. Since then, one now has it North Korea. So we have a failure rate of 2%. Considering the record of the UN there is no reason to believe that any new UN body would do much not that much. Short of an invasion of North Korea, there is little the world can do to stop North Korea.
   
   The problem is that nuclear have been invented, its very hard to uninvent them and wishful thinking like this book suggests is not the answer.