1 comments about Domestic Terrorism and Incident Management: Issues and Tactics.

1. This was a great textbook that chronicled the terrorist movement in the United States. It addresses both Right-Wing extremists and Left-Wing extremists. The information is well researched, and well documented. I found this book to be one of the most informative book regarding Domestic Terrorism.

1 comments about Framing Terrorism: The News Media, the Government and the Public.

1. I never expected to have recieved the book so quickly. I was very surprised and ofcourse pleased to get the call that there was a package for me.
   extremely good service!
   thanks
   best regards,
   Renaat Declercq

No comments about CIA Briefings of Presidential Candidates.

2 comments about Terrorism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions).

1. Ivory tower stuff, not worth your time. A real, "How much fluff is in your bellybutton" kind of book. The most poor "Short Intro." book I have read.



2. Charles Townshend has written a helpful introduction to the subject of terrorism. He begins by discussing the definition of terrorism, a task more difficult than it might seem. He indicates that terrorism is often a matter of perspective since one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter. There are also questions about what counts as an act of terrorism. Do intentions and goals make some acts terrorist? Can a line be drawn at the kind of victims selected for a terrorist act? Townshend looks at some laws that define terrorism, USA and British law (as I recall). Even here we encounter problems because these laws could be applied to the actions of nations themselves. In my view, state terrorism is inadequately addressed in this book; I suspect because Townshend lacks a useable sense of what it might be. Yet I think that state terrorism is the easiest category of terrorism to define as well as the most pervasive form of terrorism in the world.
   
   Townshend provides many historical examples of terrorism. They are all well chosen. He discusses the origins of terrorism in history: viz., the first terrorist groups, the philosophical patrimony of "propaganda by deed," assassination as terrorism and the terrorism during the French Revolution. He also explores different types of terrorism: revolutionary, nationalistic and religious. He ends by discussing counterterrorism as a strategy and correctly mentions the dangers inherent in such an approach. Townshend apparently believes that democracies will always be hampered in their responses to terrorism because of their high regard for human rights. Yet Townshend doesn't often discuss the many ways the "great democracies" have employed terrorism, either directly or through proxy forces, sometimes resulting in massive casualties, particularly in the third world nations. Although the western democracies might have a public relations problem in using terrorism, they certainly don't lack the aptitude.
   
   If you want to read a short introduction to the topic of terrorism, then this will do...at times quite well.

5 comments about Chile: The Other September 11: An Anthology of Reflections on the 1973 Coup (Radical History).

1. It is quite an honor to review this book, which was promoted by Fidel Castro. Are you guys kidding? Or is "The Left" peopled by idiots?



2. I consider this book a far more emotional read than an academic read. It's full of personal accounts and poetry which really make you feel for the people of Chile. I agree with Castro's statements on Chile but in no way does that mean I am pro-Castro. He IS a dictator. Hands down. Joan Para's and the first writer's(i believe that was Ariel Dorfman) chapter's made the book.



3. "Chile: The Other September 11" is one of the best books available on the tragic events that inaugurated an era of terror and fascism in the small Latin American country. This is an astounding document of what took place when radical right-wing general Augusto Pinochet lead a CIA-backed military coup against the government of ELECTED socialist president Salvador Allende. The most powerful statement the book makes is that now both Chile and the United States share the dreaded date of a Tuesday, September 11 as a day of horror and death, this is eloquently expressed in a memorable essay by Ariel Dorfman. In-between the chapters and in an important chronology the Nixon White House plot to distabalize Allende's government is detailed, showing how the U.S. in part was deeply responsible for the coup and horrors that fell on Chile. Some right-wingers here cringe, trying to make the book sound "one-sided," maybe it is, but the facts sure aren't. It is also ridiculous that some reviewers here try to discount the brilliant speech given by Fidel Castro shortly after the coup. Castro is a revolutionary leader, something hard to grasp through American eyes eventhough now sadly, we can grasp a taste of what Chile experienced with our own day of terrorism and murder. Castro's speech is both a memorable tribute to the Chilean spirit, the Chilean revolution, Allende, and the solidarity between Cuba and Chile, and yet Castro still gives a well-calculated warning about unarmed nations being defenseless against the tyranny of fascist intentions. The book also features some wonderful poetry that expresses the FEELINGS of what happened, this is an insightful style for the book considering Chile is the home of one of the world's great poets, Pablo Neruda, who's sad fate following the coup is detailed here by his wife. The two most powerful chapters belong to Joan Jara, wife of murdered Chilean folk singer Victor Jara, she writes about her final moments with her husband on the morning of the coup as they held each-other for the last time before he leaves for the city's university, never to be seen again except as a bloodied, murdered victim of the military rulers. Jara also shares here her husband's final poem, written while imprisoned in a horrific sports stadium turned torture center. "Chile: The Other September 11" should not be read by just Latin Americans or history buffs, it should be read by Americans not just as a look into what we've helped unleash on other nations, but as a warning of what we shouldn't allow to happen here. It is easy to dismiss the crimes of men like Pinochet as something from "over there," when in fact, it can happen here because human beings are human beings no matter where they reside. When we hear about "the war on terror" and some of the frightening stereotypes being developed around immigrants and others, it would be wise to read this book and see what happens when ideaological paranoia produces a state of terror and oppression. Chile politically has emerged from the darkness of the Pinochet regime, Michelle Bachelet is now the nation's first woman president (and head of Chile's socialist party), but reading this book, one realizes there are national scars that take longer time to heal. "Chile: The Other September 11" is a book that refuses to be ignored and shouldn't be ignored, it is a look at the past, and a document that helps better understand the present.



4. This was a great book that really brought back many memories of that awful day. It gives first accounts of those who lived through some of the worst days in the history of Chile. The memory of Salvador Allende comes blasting out to show what a great man he was. The book also features a candid look at Victor Jara and Pablo Neruda



5. I was growing up under the regime of a series of military dictators.Violence was pervasive and even covetous act .As a naturally result of that, every town and community there are at least one or two who dissapeared for a while and returned with black marks all over their bodies. I heard so much horror stories about arrest, interrogation and of course torture. It's a regime imbued its citizens with social-darwinism, male chauvinism, excessive violence, and so-called Military virtue. Individual's liberty and freedom of expression were only existed in books.
   
   For an imbicile American who left scathing review on this book, these are no other than stories from remote third world countries and only possible under COMMUNIST DICTATORSHIP. No brother!
   
   my childhood experience probably led me to have a symphathy and emotional cameraderie to Chilean people who suffered so much under the authorative regime of Augusto Pinochet( By the way, it's third class comic opera . When Park Chung Hee was assasinated by one of his own henchmen, Pinochet , who admired Park so much, seriously considered to order entire chile to hoist half-staff . Yeah Dictators also have heartwrenching cameraderie!!)Probably , I am not brave enough to look at my country's history without shuddering .Reading about Chile might be a contingency experience for a coward like me.
   
   This book is consisted of first person anecdotes written by those who lost their loved ones during the septerber 11 1973 and subsequent repression that cost more than 3000 lives. The book's poignant title means more than mere title . It show how the destiny of common people of two countries forever entwined by tragedies happened coincidently on September 11. As the editor of the book wrote these tragedies forever rob people of U.S and Chile the innocent look at their surrounding and the world.
   This work is not history book. There are scarcely any detailed information of CIA covert operation and involvement.Nor are there any depth of information over the U.S corporate interest and the electoral victory of Salvador Allende.
   yet, this is a valuable historical evidence. Why? Because it's a book comprised of real people who provide their personal tragedy without any political agenda. yeah, Fidel Castro's piece are polemical and the work of demagogue.But, even his works contains enough honesty that show his personal symphasy to the destiny of Chilean people and especially President Allende. I was especially moved by Joan Jara's piece . It's a deeply moving book. Anyone want to know about the tragedy of Chile should read the book.

No comments about The New Face of Terrorism: Threats from Weapons of Mass Destruction.

5 comments about Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq.

1. In "Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq," coauthors Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber take a critical look at a very important subject. The authors cover a number of intriguing facets of both the war and its background. They analyze the U.S. "propaganda blitz" to improve the U.S.'s image in the Muslim world-a strategy they judge an "abject failure." They also look at some of the individuals and organizations that played roles in the leadup to war-among them Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress.
   
   Rampton and Stauber accuse the Bush administration of many distortions in its attempt to "sell" the war as if it were a product. One of the book's most interesting sections is the authors' deconstruction of the Bush administration's wartime catchphrases: "axis of evil," "coalition of the willing," "shock and awe," etc. They critique not only the U.S. government, but also the Saudi regime.
   
   The book also looks critically at the media's role in the war. The authors accuse the "right wing media echo chamber" of promoting a culture of fear and intimidation. Among the figures whose work they question are Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, and Ollie North. Particularly intriguing is the authors' look at differences in U.S. and Arab TV coverage of the war.
   
   I should note that I am an Army Reserve officer who has done a tour (2003) in Afghanistan and is currently serving in Iraq, and that I am firmly committed to carrying out my mission. I was not bothered or offended by this book. I believe that the authors are doing a service in challenging Americans to be more careful and critical consumers of information. This book dares its readers to analyze and decode the messages that they receive from the government, the media, and the advertising industry; it also suggests that we need to know and learn from history. I recommend this book to readers regardless of their political persuasion.



2. The book "Weapons of Mass Deception, the Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq," written by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber generally deals with the United States' current conflict in Iraq. However, it does not deal with the strategic side of the conflict itself but rather the steps taken to get there. This text focuses primarily on the supposed false information that President Bush and his administration provided the American public in order to gain their support. Rampton and Stauber deal with the psychological aspects that come with preparing a nations people for war.
   Rampton and Stauber set out to make a contribution to their field by expressing their points of view in this particular text. The fundamental point that both authors set out to make is that the war in Iraq is a battle that is being fought unnecessarily, based on false pretenses. President Bush blatantly lied to a nation in order to better serve his own needs while asking thousands of men and women to give their lives in the process. Both authors make it their business to make clear the fraudulent steps that President Bush and his administration took in an effort to coerce a nation into believing that going to war with Iraq was the right thing to do. Furthermore, it is Rampton and Stauber's goal that after reading their work, American citizens will analyze carefully and be more skeptical of the different types of media that they come into contact with.
   There are several areas covered in this text regarding the war in Iraq and the deceptive measures employed by President Bush while doing so. In fact, Rampton and Stauber claim that Bush was involved with the invasion of Iraq even before he was elected into office. Bush's key officials advocated the invasion all along but opted to wait until September 2002 to inform the public, through what the White House expressed as a product launch. This is simply the Bush administrations attempt at selling the war in Iraq to the American public through a well thought out public relations operation. The White House representatives apparently used propaganda along the lines of misinformation and constant replication in order to create the false notion that Iraq was behind the September 11th terrorist attacks on the United States. Additionally, there were allegedly forged documents which fabricate the claim that Iraq possessed vast supplies of destructive weapons. Apparently, Bush's public relations firm facilitated an opposition group known as the Iraqi National Congress, which contributed largely to the decision to go to war. While these lies were taking place, the American news media was entirely occupied with the propaganda being provided and continuously kept repeating White House communications.
   "Weapons of Mass Deception, the Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq" is put together by authors Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber. Both men work for the Center for Media and Democracy; this is a non-profit association that Stauber himself founded in 1993 in an effort to observe and expose deceptive public relations campaigns and other assorted propaganda distributed by corporations and governments. John Stauber is a longtime activist who has worked in the field of public interest, consumer, family farm, environmental and community organizations at the local, state, and national levels. Co-author Sheldon Rampton is a graduate of Princeton University and has worked as a newspaper reporter, activist, and author. Rampton and Stauber are both clearly opposed to the work that the Bush administration has done while in office. In fact, based on the work that they have done with this text as well as past work, both men appear to be against any type of governmental or public relations group that misinforms the public on any issue. Rampton and Stauber present a strong argument throughout their book, supporting their points of view with documented facts. In addition, both authors remain true to their feelings and points of view in an uncompromising fashion; perhaps this is the most concrete element to their text. The only flaw, if any present in this book is that both men are partially biased because of their dislike for President Bush. It is likely that a supporter of President Bush would not be so critical of the tactics he has used in recent years.
   This text seems to be quite useful and a positive addition to work in its field. It offers readers and consumers an alternative source of information that is able to rival the media. In addition, to it being an alternative source of information, it is written by well educated and experienced men who support their adamant views with concretely documented facts. Therefore, this text is not merely two liberal men running their mouths about issues they are not well versed in, but a brilliantly put together political argument. Lastly and perhaps most importantly, Rampton and Stauber attempt to relay an important message to the public; that they should never settle and accept information that the media and government give to them. There is always the right to question the government and related associations when the public is being misinformed.



3. When factual evidence did not reveal that Saddam Hussein had "Weapons of Mass Destruction" the Bush administration simply hired the country's best media consultants to engineer support for the war: anybody who was thus questioning the administration found themselves labeled as contributing to the terrorist threat. Because reality did not give them what they wanted, the White House fabricated data.
   
   This book, written by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton is not one of the reccent anti-Iraq war books, but it lays out the opposition to this policy in basic bare-bones langue. As such, this book is a good read for people who are not neccessarily policy wonks, but want the truth in an America of lies.
   
   It is convienient that one of the loudest internal anti-Saddam groups in Iraq, the Iraqi National Congress, had ties to the American Pentagon. If something like that arrangement were to happen to our country, we would be screaming bloody murder. But, because Bush had convinced the public we needed to stop 'the terrorists' wherever they were, we did not ask critical questions about the opposition sources origin and their own motives.
   
   Likewise, the same profession which once had helped to expose Watergate and FBI abuses against new left activists turned into the official White House parrot. Reporters who allegedly knew much better stopped asking critical questions about the Bush administration's official policy. Very little has publically been made of the glaring contradictions between Bush's infamous 'mission accomplished' aircraft carrier landing and our continued presence in Iraq---ironically with no formal end to the 'mission' in sight.
   
   Why were we going to war with Iraq? What information prompted this decision? Who collected this information? If Saddam really was such a threat to international security, why weren't the other nations (especially his neighbors) who mourned with us over 9/11 agreeing with our plans?
   
   Consequently, the American people had no idea of what they were really supporting. We were only told that dissent against the country was unpatriotic and that we needed to support whatever this president did in Iraq.
   
   Compounding that problem, the administration went into Iraq with a distinctly western mindset. Not only did/and is still preventing Americans from being taken seriously, but it breeds terrorists who point to the 'provisional government'...etc as evidence that America only had wanted to colonize Iraq for it's own material benefit. The people working for the White House thought they were good, but they also forgot that the Iraqis and the Arab world needed to be sold on this policy to (ironically) avoid generating terrorists.
   
   Because the authors are pre-disposed to disagree with President Bush on other issues, this book might not have a wider audience when compared with the growing number of titles of people who were neutral or even previously supportive of the administration's Iraq policy. If Iraq really does turn into another Vietnam however, I am willing to bet that this book will suddenly find a larger audience alongside the more reccently published works.



4. One of the best excerpts from this book is Rumsfeld being confronted by a journalist about his visit to Iraq, denying it and then shown a videotape from the CNN archives. This is a good book to read to get away from the Bush spin of things and see things a little clearer.



5. Read this book in conjunction with American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century by Kevin Phillips to get the full context of how we were hoodwinked into the Iraq War and how the Bush Administration lives for getting us to give up our liberty for some alleged safety.

1 comments about Biological Weapons: From the Invention of State-Sponsored Programs to Contemporary Bioterrorism.

1. Biological weapons and their potentials has received public attention relatively recently in this country, and for a basic primer on the topic, don't miss Jeanne Guillemin's Biological Weapons, designed to help readers understand the relevance of these weapons and their use. Chapters examine policies of use, deterrence, and proliferation, considering conflicts between media rights and secrecy in development, public awareness issues and rights, and preventative measures against attack.

5 comments about The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots' Quest for Destruction.

1. This would be a great addition for any student of the Middle East. Many of us think we are knowledgable of this part of the world from our past studies. But we are really just beginning to grasp it. This book is a great help in that area. Any media people who report in this area should see this as required reading.
   The book takes us through the events of the Middle East from the 1979 capture of US hostages up through the present with continuity. It describes each administrations responses to the events. It is amazing how the US has and continues to pander to Iran. This book also describes how Iran has had their hand into practically every major event against Israel and the US. They are extremely organized and very focused on their goal...world subjugation. The book shows that, unlike us, Iran does not have this obscene sense of political correctness. That has enabled them to succeed in their war efforts while we look weak. The book shows the reader how Iran is firmly convinced that we will not fight them seriously and lays out the evidence for that. Iran truly sees itself at World War with the West and oddly enough, we don't. It's a good book and sort of a wake up call to those who think we can talk ourselves out of this.



2. Concise, well-written, well-organized so that the situation in the M.E./Iran and its neighbors becomes quite clear. The author has done great research and a complete job. Has sparked my interest in foreign policy. Great job.



3. Ladeen's credibility is shattered beyond repair after his lies and deception about Iraq. This is another source of his unfounded and delusional imagination which does not worth the paper it is written on.



4. Those who are not yet aware of the existential threat from Iran's powerful must read this important book. It's not going to be the "light entertainment" that so many crave, but without this knowledge a person is lacking in a basic understanding of the most important and most dangerous political forces in the world today. Read the book and pass it around to all of your friends!



5. The Iranian Time Bomb - reveals disgustingly inefficaciousness political bluders when dealing with Iran. No democratic government can deal or trust an Islamic country. Iran, Islamism, Hezbollah, Hamas, are not open minded, conservative, freedom loving leaders. The ruling Islamic mullahs have the intent, will and power to take over countries by terror acts, and they will continue to do so until they have conquered the world, and they believe the U.S. is next to fall. There should be no dealings, even oil shipments, with Islamic countries. Islam is not a religion, but a pretense. It is an evil political feudal fascism disguised as a religion. Americans and free people everywhere needs to be alerted and educated to this serious threat on our freedoms. We cannot simply accept Islam as just another peaceful religion, never. This book should be required reading in every high school, college and university, and by the public.

5 comments about The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq.

1. This is a polished proposal for the invasion of Iraq. It was highly praised in 2002. In retrospect, it was a bit too candid:
   
   "Assembling a coalition would be infinitely easier if the United States could point to a smoking gun with Iraqi fingerprints on it -- some new Iraqi outrage that would serve to galvanize international opinion and create a pretext for invasion. Saddam's pursuit of nuclear weapons is the real reason for invading, but because estimates vary widely on how long it will take for Iraq to do so, and because some countries simply assert Iraq is not doing so and dismiss all of the evidence to the contrary, that may not appear to be an imminent enough threat to justify the march to war, especially for those countries (such as France, Russia, and Turkey) which do not want to see Saddam overthrown."
   
   No doubt Feith and Wumser in the Office of Special Plans took this to heart ("Within a very short period of time, they began to find links that nobody else had previously understood or recorded in a useful way" - Richard Perle, PBS Frontline Oct 2003). Niger yellowcake, Al Qaeda ties, aluminum tubes, unmanned drones, mobile bio-labs, plagiarized studies, and "smoking gun in the form of mushroom cloud" followed. All were needed to create "outrage" to sell invasion.
   
   The lies are now blissfully forgotten, and felonious collaborator Chalibi firmly controls the Oil Ministry. Most countries failed to buy the sales pitch (maybe they didn't want to see international law overthrown: they were right about the threat).
   
   Is this important? Reinhard Heydrich was tasked to provide an incident on the German-Polish border to justify invasion in 1939. His `attack' on a Gleiwitz radio station (`Operation Himmler') murdered KZ prisoners in Polish uniforms to provide a `smoking gun.'
   
   This book, and the invasion it helped engender, became illegal when it's claims (WMD, etc) failed to materialize post invasion. It can not, and should not, so easily be excused as `faulty intelligence.' It was then (and remains) an invitation to aggressive war.
   
   "Any resort to war - to any kind of war - is a resort to means that are inherently criminal. War inevitably is a course of killings, assaults, deprivations of liberty, and destruction of property. An honestly defensive war is, of course, legal, and saves those conducting it from criminality. But inherently criminal acts cannot be defended by showing that those who committed them were engaged in a war, when war itself is illegal." -Justice Robert H. Jackson; Nüremberg 1945.
   
   The author is worth reading (I enjoyed this book in 2002, but wasn't convinced). His proposition was then (given the inspections option), and is now, as illegal as crimes prosecuted at Nüremberg. He has since has moved on to targeting Iran.
   
   Meanwhile, American firms feast on Iraqi oil and no-bid reconstruction. Four years after 9/11, Osama bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar remain at large.



2. Although some of the reviewers have applied descriptors such as "debunked" or "false," Pollack's book is an important study of the situation in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Critics of the war should read this to gain a greater understanding of what kind of threat really did exist (and check the footnotes if you remain skeptical), and hardcore supporters should read this book to understand better the premise as well. By criticizing people on the Right and Left, while also singing their praises at times, Pollack weaves a fair account of the political situation surrounding Saddam Hussein, and the finished product is a well-crafted argument for removing a tyrant in the Middle East. The staunchest war hawks will even find new information that alters their opinion and handling of the war and aftermath.
   
   Although some of his beliefs turned out to be incorrect (such as his belief that France, even while supporting Saddam Hussein, could be brought into the coalition to invade), his larger argument remains true: Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the international community, and his repeated defiance of international laws and restrictions validates the Bush administration's argument that he could not be trusted.
   
   Pollack's most convincing argument comes in his description of Saddam's chemical and biological weapons programs. By pointing out how easily it is to mask their development in civilian research centers, coupled with the evidence of Saddam's usage of these agents, Pollack shows that just because coalition forces did not find WMDs does not mean that Saddam never had them or used them in the past.
   
   A person who reads this book cover to cover will come away with a different opinion of the entire situation, for better or worse.



3. ...this book on the face of it has done serious harm. That's all I have to say.



4. Well Ken, guess you kind of blew it huh? Looking at the pathetic reviews here from 2002 I have to wonder do any of you feel any guilt? Even just a little? Well "Dubya" followed the advice of this book and now he and Kenny-boy have the blood of over 3000 Americans on their hands. And now this clown has a book about Iran! In the words of a REAL Republican president: There you go again.



5. Many reviewers here are criticizing Pollack for supporting the Iraq war as it was waged, talking about the disaster Iraq is now and laying that at his feet.
   
   This is unfair. Pollack was clearly very concerned about post-war stability and blowback against the United States, and laid down a number of prerequisites to any invasion ... all of which were completely ignored by the Bush administration and other Iraq-war backers. Ultimately, the situation we face now is exactly what Pollack predicted would happen if we didn't take appropriate steps before the invasion.
   
   Now, one may reasonably conclude that invading Iraq would have been a mistake even if we followed Pollack's advice, but recognize that such criticisms are squarely in "what if?" territory. Ultimately, to lay the chaos we now face there on Pollack's feet is to cherry-pick from his book in much the same way that the Bush administration cherry-picked evidence to argue that we must invade. It's an intellectually dishonest criticism.