5 comments about A Savage War of Peace: Algeria 1954-1962 (New York Review Books Classics).

1. What every President should know before getting seriously involved anywhere in the Mid-East or Muslim world. It would seem that we are damned if we do, and equally damned if we don't. It's not so much the book's details (although the book is magnificently detailed), as it is the portrayal of the depth of hatreds and the commitment to violence as the sole means to the proponents ends.



2. I selected this book wishing to know more about the French war in Algeria. Mr. Horne more than satisfied my curiousity. He provides an in-depth, virtually blow-by-blow account of the eight year conflict, pulling no PC punches, and taking great care to remain as impartial as possible. This is no easy feat, given the intensity of the situation. He is very careful to present this as not a typical colonial war as much as a battle between 2 diametrically opposed visions for Algeria. On one side were the Pieds Noirs, whose families had lived in Algeria for generations, understandably saw Algeria as their home, and wanted to preserve "Algerie Francaise." On the other hand, you have the FLN (not the spokesman for most Algerians), with its demands for Algerian independence, sans the Pieds Noirs. What made this conflict a battle between extremes was the FLN's reign of terror against relative moderates among the Algerians (many of whom had advocated finding a "middle ground" in the conflict). This has the effect of presenting the FLN as France's only "negotiating" partner within Algeria. Moreover, it pushed many of the Pieds Noirs to support such hard-line groups as the OAS. Essentially, the FLN set up the conflict to end in its favor, as the war nearly tore France apart on several occasions (and nearly claimed the life of Charles De Gaulle on an equal number of occasions). Mr. Horne captures this story very nicely, weaving back and forth between Algeria and France. He demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt that the conflict had very high stakes for the French. Also, he describes how the outcome of the conflict proved to not be France's finest hour, to put it very charitably.



3. The claims by the author and other reviewers that this book is revelant to todays happenings in Iraq and elsewhere appears to be a shameless attempt by the publishers to squeeze more earnings out of this older and dated history. The Algerian Civil War has as much relevance to current happenings as The Crusades. Just because the enemy in both wars were predominently Islamic doesn't make them the same wars. Both wars are being fought for far different reasons and under totally different conditions.
   
   First of all, the Algerian Civil War was a failed attempt by France to retain control of what the French considered an integral and territorial part of Metropolitan France. This was a war easily avoided if they only extended the same rights and benefits of citizenship to the Algerian people. Though long and difficult, the French eventually obtained a military victory over the insurgents that, for good or for bad, was squandered by their politicians.
   
   The current war, as pointed out by the Washington Post, is not a colonial war and the U.S. has no territorial interests. We have taken down a disruptive influence in the Middle East that, contrary to what critics of the Bush Adminstration are saying, has resulted on some stabilization in the region.
   
   Militarily, there are some parallels as the book's praisers point out. However, there are equally important differences. The Algerians were Nationalists seeking independence and relying on foreign aid from other Arab nationalists to defeat the French. Todays insurgents are a mix of foreign terrorists (al Queda), Saddam's Sunni supporters and Shiite radicals who are receiving support from foreign powers that want the region unstable and ripe for political and religious domination. They do not care for Iraq or the Iraqi people. They just want to kill Americans, other Westerners and their Iraqi allies and maybe create a fundamental Islamic state out of the ashes.
   
   To say that the Algerian Civil War was a dress rehearsal for today's conflicts borders on being a bit bombastic. The strategies and tactics used by the Algerians in 1954 predates the spector of todays international terrorism, radical Islam and mass communications and technology. Though the war sometimes spilled over into Continental Europe through acts of terrorism, the Algerian leadership were wise in minimizing this so that they not alienate the many supporters and sympathizers for their cause among the Europeans. There was none of the sophisticated IED technology, suicide bombers or exporting of the conflict to other countries as today. The Algerians never imagined the ability of todays insurgents to use mass international communications (Internet, news media and satellite communications) to control and sell their cause, publicize their successes and issue their threats.
   
   The Washington Post go on to state that both the French and the Americans have misunderstood and underestimated their enemy. For the U.S., it was complicated by the misguided priorities of the Defense Department led by Donald Rumsfeld. Mr. Rumsfeld still thinks to this day that he will be best remembered for his attempts to reshape the U.S. military for the 21st Century. The lack of a long term, post war vision, a balanced ground force and other gross mistakes such as failure to restore post war law and order and disbanding the Iraqi military led directly to the chaotic situation that is only now coming under control.
   
   Once the French understood the nature of the enemy, they eventually won their war militarily by surging both military, police and civil forces and sealing the borders. The U.S. led Coalition is doing the same today with equal success. More importantly, they've achieved buy-in from the Iraqis themselves who are now voting with their feet by returning home and fighting the insurgents.
   
   All this, as in the Algerian Civil War, is now in danger of being derailed by a Congress controlled by an opposition party whose interests lies not with successfully winning the war, but by getting themselves back into the White House by appeasing their lunatic, anti-war constituency. That parallel is something the critics of this book have failed to compare.
   
   It appears to me that this book is being used to support the philosophy of those who think that successfully fighting Islamic based insurgencies is a no win situation no matter how its handled. However, we, the United States and our Allies are in a life and death struggle with an enemy composed of economically and politically alienated indivduals who are using a popular religion as a means of redressing real and perceived grievances. Fighting these groups is unavoidable and we better learn how to do this successfully.
   
   I read Mr. Horne's book in 1993 well before todays chain of misfortunes. His book was an excellant read and a definitive history of that unfortunate war. However, I cannot say that we could have avoided todays misteps by reading his book. I train soldiers bound for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and I can say that todays Army officers are reading his book to get a sense of historical background to today's conflict with Islamic based insurgents. However, to draw direct lessons from this book is a stretch. Comparing the two wars is a bit like comparing apples to oranges.



4. Wow!!! This almost reads like a playbook for what's currently happening in Iraq. This is highly recommended reading for every person in the country. Whether you are Pro or Anti the Iraq war the events which occured during the Franco - Algerian conflict er war have so many similarities that it's crazy.



5. 
   Alistair Horne provides the reader with an extensive and very detailed narrative of the Algerian War. His familiarity with the subject matter is plainly evident. On the down side, the book can be slow and confusing in certain parts. It is long at 566 pages and is divided into three parts.
   
   The author does a superb job in describing all aspects of this conflict. The first three chapters are focused on the period of 1830 to 1854. This part provides a good understanding of the problems surrounding French colonialism, the European settlers in Algeria (the pied noirs), and why the F.L.N. began the war. Part two focuses on the actual war years of 1954 - 1958. The detail provided in this part, especially the chapter on the Battle of Algiers, is very informative. Part three covers the period from 1958 to 1962. This includes not only the peace negotiations, but also such events as Barricades Week and the General's putsch. The author not only does an excellent job of describing these events, he also explains why so many high ranking French officers turned against De Gaulle. The author also describes the internal conflicts within the F.L.N. as well as the rise of the O.A.S., the French rebel group that fought against Algerian independence. Of particular interest is the fact that the author interviewed several people who participated, and also survived, the war.
   
   On the down side, the book is slightly difficult to read. Although some parts flow well, other parts seem to drag. One confusing aspect is the author's tendency to use French phrases without providing a translation. In some instances, he will use a French term when an English term would have served equally well. For example, on page 179, he describes the "presence francaise" in Indochina as opposed to simply using "French presence." In other cases, the reader will simply not understand what is being said unless they speak French. For example, the author uses the term "Ce-con-la" in a sentence on page 181. The term is not further explained. Finally, he will add references that do not contribute to the story. Mr. Horne quotes Jean Paul Sartre on page 196 even though it really adds nothing. He also makes references to other people's memoirs and the movie "Battle of Algiers." Such references are indeed useful, albeit at the end of the book, not scattered through the text.
   
   Bottom line: this is an extremely detailed account of the Algerian War. Mr. Horne does a good job of bringing many of the main characters, such as Ben Bella, Ali La Pointe, Generals Massu and Salan to life. The difficulty of reading this book can be found in its writing style and sheer length. That said, any reader who can overcome these minor difficulties, will come away with an excellent understanding of this forgotten conflict.

5 comments about America's Secret War: Inside the Hidden Worldwide Struggle Between the United States and Its Enemies.

1. A few months ago, at the suggestion of a friend who is active in the American intelligence community, I subscribed to the Friedman's Stratfor email newsletter. In it I have found some of the best analysis out there. It consistently gives clear, concise, and factual explanations of world events--something that is very rarely found in the mainstream media today.
   
   This book met the same high standard. The discussion covers the 9/11 attacks and the American response. Friedman attempts to cut through the fluff and public statements and looks at the hard geopolitical realities of the events, and he does an excellent job of doing so.
   
   I was constantly impressed by the innovative explanations he develops. For example, he argues that a major reason for the Iraq war was to put greater pressure on Saudi Arabia to reign in Islamists. Another compelling idea is that the very purpose of the 9/11 attacks was to provoke an American overreaction, which would in turn help Islamists gain ground within the Muslim world.
   
   [...]
   
   Friedman's prose is succinct and readable, with the occasional entertaining anecdote to keep things interesting. This makes for a fast and enjoyable read.
   
   My only criticism (and it is a significant one) is that Friedman does not cite any sources. There were many facts that I would like to have looked up, but I had no idea where he got his information.
   
   Still, this was a tremendously good book. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in America's contemporary foreign policy.



2. George Friedman gives us a rare look behind the scenes of America's fight with radical Islam. It was fascinating to get a look at how the U.S. viewed acts of terror and terrorists in general before and after 9/11. Friedman goes into detail that you simply cannot get from watching the news or reading papers. For example, Friedman lays out many reasons for invading Iraq other than WMD's. These include: a need for an impressive military victory to send a message throughout the Arab world, a point of leverage to deal with Saudi Arabia, and the fact the Saadam was a brutal dictator. Friedman discusses the strengths and weaknesses of various U.S. intelligence and law enforcement services in great detail. He also explains why Al Qeada has been as successful as they have and what seperates them from other terrorist groups. The book takes the reader through the military operations and campaigns of the first three years in the global fight against terrorism. For a more specific look at Al Qaeda and the rise of radical Islam see Lawrence Wright's "The Looming Tower."



3. Dr. Friedman explains the birth of Al-Qaeda, the failures of U.S. intelligence, and the goals and objectives of both the Bush Administration and Al-Qaeda in this fascinating and well written book. You're not going get this analysis in the major media.
   
   In short, Dr. Friedman says that the 9.11 attack was nothing really personal -- it was just a way for O.B.L. to unite the Arab world. The other main point: the invasion of Iraq was purely a strategic move to demonstrate the prowess of American forces to Saudi Arabia who was caught in the middle of Al-Qaeda on its turf and cooperating with its ally the U.S.
   
   In the end he concludes that the U.S. is generally winning the war but only time will tell who the real winner will be (and there will not be clear winners).



4. I highly recommend reading this book as one source in a broader study of US foreign policy since 2001. The author of this book, George Friedman, provides an interesting geopolitical explanation of the reason the US invaded Iraq under President George W. Bush as part of the broader war on terrorism. Even if one does not agree with Friedman's analysis, this book provides excellent insights into US foreign policy interests both in the Middle East and globally concerning the war on terrorism (including Afghanistan) that goes beyond events reported in the mainstream press. The book was published in 2004, so Friedman's analysis does not deal with events since that time. However, the book is still valuable for a different viewpoint into US foreign policy since 9-11-2001.
   
   NOTE: the title of the book might give the impression that this is a conspiracy theory type book. Not so! Friedman provides background material and analysis from a geopolitical viewpoint. Since the geopolitical aspects of international events are rarely discussed adequately in the press, this book analyzes the reasons for US foreign policies that are rarely, if ever, reported in the press. Hence, the title "America's Secret War" concerning the war on terrorism. Friedman also provides insights into the security interests of other nations involved in this conflict, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others.
   
   One drawback is that the author does not provide documentation for certain facts cited in the book. This is because the book focuses on his analysis of these facts. Still, providing references for these facts would make this book even better.



5. AMERICA'S SECRET WAR is a blow by blow account of the Bush regime's "war on terrorism." And while several chapters do offer valuable insights -- particularly the author's discussion of the war in Afghanistan -- overall, the book is a mine field. I cannot recommend it because the author, George Friedman, is either incredibly stupid in believing that a rag tag bunch of 19 jihadists using cell phones outsmarted the most sophisticated security establishment in the world on 9/11 -- or he is just downright devious.
   
   In the intelligence world deception is a finely honed art. The game is played by subtly spicing truth with falsehood -- and there are enough examples in AMERICA'S SECRET WAR for us to suspect that George Friedman is spinning yarns. Allow me to be blunt: He is quite skillful in the art of lying.
   
   Here are some examples:
   
   Friedman mentions the US-Iran discussions that followed 9/11 -- but he fails to acknowledge that in 2003 Iran made a bona fide peace offer to the US that could have resulted in a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement -- IF the US had responded. Iran offered to cooperate in the Gulf, to disarm Hezbollah, to accept stringent IAEA oversight of its nuclear program, and even signed onto the 2002 Arab peace offer, indicating that Tehran was willing to live in peace with Israel -- provided the Palestinians received a measure of justice -- in the form of a state.
   
   As we know, the National Intelligence Estimate in November 2007 provides strong evidence that the 2003 Iranian offer was genuine. The NIE concluded that Iran abandoned work on its BOMB program in 2003, which -- notice -- coincides with the date of the peace offer. The real question, which Friedman never mentions, is why the US rejected the Iranian peace offer out of hand.
   
   Friedman also poo-poohs the 2002 Saudi peace offer, characterizing it as nothing but political posturing. He writes: "The Saudis had consulted nobody about the idea. which meant that this radical proposal didn't even have the backing of [prince] Abdullah's own government." (p. 244)
   
   This is total BS. In fact, the 2002 Arab peace offer had the backing of every member of the Arab League -- and again -- could have become the basis for an Isareli-Palestinian peace settlement -- IF Israel and the US had responded favorably. Both, however, simply ignored it.
   
   The Saudi Prince Abdullah actually went so far as to personally confront Bush about the Palestinian issue during his June 2002 visit to Crawford Texas. At that meeting Bush promised Abdullah that he would take steps to solve the Palestinian question. Of course, as we know, Bush did nothing of the kind -- because his idol Ariel Sharon opposed a peace settlement.
   
   Friedman is also dishonest when he writes about an Iranian BOMB --as if Iran already had nuclear weapons. When in fact they did not -- and do not. There is no excuse for his getting this wrong. As a self-described intelligence expert Friedman should have known this. We must interpret this "error" as a case of calculated deception on his part.
   
   
   Friedman's confused analysis of why the neo cons invaded Iraq fails to persuade -- and again -- we must conclude that the author is simply fibbing to us. Friedman fails to mention the obvious: that the war was largely about controlling Iraq's oil -- and had nothing to do with fighting terrorism. I would argue: It was also about destroying Iraq as a nation -- leaving Iraq prostrate so that it could never again challenge Israeli hegemony in the region. Now why couldn't an expert like Friedman simply tell the truth and state the obvious? Clearly, he has an agenda.
   
   Friedman gives a really bizarre justification for the US policy of arming BOTH Iran and Iraq during the bloody war which raged between these two nations between 1980-1986. He states that if either Iran or Iraq gained "the upper hand in the region it would try to sieze part or all of Saudi Arabia." (p 253) Which, again, is total nonsense. Why couldn't the author simply state the obvious: The US pursued a wicked policy of bleeding and weakening both nations for its own selfish reasons -- and also to divert attention from Israel's continuing illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. It had nothing to do with protecting Saudi Arabia.
   
   Friedman also repeats the lie that Saddam Hussein kicked out the UNSCOM inspectors in 1998. This lie has been told so frequently that it has taken on a life of its own. But Scott Ritter, the chief UNSCOM weapons inspector, knows what actually happened because he was there. According to Ritter it was Bill Clinton who ordered out the UN inspection team, on the eve of a major US bombing campaign in late 1998, Operation Desert Fox, which was an attempt by the US to assassinate Saddam Hussein. Indeed, this is why the Iraqi leader then refused to allow the inspectors to return. He correctly accused the US of using the UN inspection effort to gather intel about Saddam's whereabouts in an attempt to take him out. Ritter affirms this is what actually happened. Now, why couldn't Friedman get this right?
   
   What is Friedman's agenda? We get a clue from the author's discussion about the Madrid bombings in March 2004, which he attributes to al Qaeda. Yet, today, we know al Qaeda had nothing whatever to do with that attack, which ocurred shortly before major elections in Spain. The bombing was almost certainly staged by operatives of the ultraconservative Spanish government then in power -- as a way of terrorizing the Spanish people into re-electing that same government. They blamed it on Basque separatists. Fortunately, the false flag attack failed. The Spanish people saw through it -- and voted out Bush's allies -- in the process, electing a new populist government that immediately fulfilled its promise to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq -- consistent with the strongly anti war sentiment in Spain. Here, again, by misfiring, the author shows his true colors.
   
   Friedman is the founder and chairman of STRATFOR -- which claims to be an independent intelligence agency. However, I suspect he has links to the Israeli Mossad and maybe even to the CIA. The reader should beware: Read the book with a discerning eye -- because the author weaves many falsehoods between the lines. He is a liar.

5 comments about The Shell Game.

1. This book will anger two groups of people: those who support President Bush and those who oppose President Bush. The reason for this lies in the book's multilayered plot which presumes that, at some point, 9/11 was condoned by the U.S. government. Alten, to his credit, makes the implausible plausible in his novels (that's why the reader believes that the US government did know about the hijackers plans at some point, and why the reader also believes that prehistoric sharks live in the Marianas Trench, if you've read any of Alten's Meg series) but, still, this isn't history. It's an entertaining thriller.



2. The author has clearly done his homework. Reading this book JUST to find out about how Cheney redirected all our defense planes on 9/11 alone is worth the read - and the author states that his research is out there in the public domain for anyone to have found; he merely put it all together in a thriller "novel."



3. I found this book to be a pretty good read, for fiction. If you're going to read fiction, you might as well read relevant fiction. "The Shell Game" is certainly relevant, if you have an interest in your government.
   
   The most interesting part of the book for me was the systemic elimination of the scientists. This is mostly factual and most people are not aware of if. So, kudos to Steve Alten for making this a major part of the book.
   
   For you fiction writers out there, you could do a lot for your country if each one of you would write a similar book, for the purpose of exposing 9/11 and your government's appetite for sponsoring false-flag terror to keep pathological capitalism alive.



4. I have read Steve Alten's other books in the past and have mostly enjoyed them. This is the first book that I stopped reading halfway through in 10 years. It left such a bad taste in my mouth, I just couldn't bring myself to read the whole thing. Alten's liberal political agenda taint this book to the point that I had to look closely to find the real story. Alten's viewpoints clearly mirror those of anti-american bomb throwers like Michael Moore, Rosie O"Donnell, and Sean Penn etc. If you believe that the President and other top officials knew about 9/11 before that date and purposely allowed it to happen, then you will like this book (God help us all!) if not, then throw this book in the trash where it belongs.



5. I don't normally read fiction. However, "The Shell Game" was recommended to me by a friend. The book is very fast-paced, plausible and unfortunately, disturbing. I say disturbing because the author wraps the story around little known facts surrounding 9/11, Iraq and our current Oil Crisis. It's clear that Steve Alten chose "fiction" as a genre to convey that the United States, if not the rest of the world, is smack in the middle of a geopolitical and environment crisis. If we don't wake up from our deep sleep, the crisis will only get larger and we will all suffer as a result.
   
   Regardless, it's worth your time to read this book. If for no other reason, it will make you think and that's not such a bad thing, particularly before a Presidential election.

No comments about Tsar: A Thriller.

5 comments about Courage After Fire: Coping Strategies for Troops Returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and Their Families.

1. As a disability service provider, I found this book particularly helpful. It is practical and to the point. Veterans can find tips on everything from how to sleep better to how to relax and cope with stressors. The triggers of anxiety are explained well, as are the ways veterans typically handle their pain. At the end of each chapter are helpful tips for family members. After I read it, I ordered ten copies of this book to give away to student veterans and their families.



2. I was skeptical when purchasing this book, but the topics are discussed in such a way that you do not feel like you're reading "self-help". The focus is not on PTSD (although that is one of the topics covered), but more on a healthy transition from a chaotic environment. I would recommend this to any serviceman, spouse, parent, or close friend.



3. It wasn't the war, it was when I returned home and could not function. I applaud this book for it's intent and gratitude that it gives to our young warriors. It is one of the few written for "our" generation. Thank you
   
   -Timothy Kendrick author-PTSD: Pathways Through the Secret Door



4. My son suggested I read this before he comes home from his tour of duty in Iraq. It has been very helpful to understand what he has to deal with in terms of adjusting from daily combat and normal day to day life at home. Most people don't have a clue what these brave men and women have to deal with. They cannot just turn off their emotions just because they are back home.
   Eveyone who has a loved one serving in a war zone should read this book.



5. I purchased this for my boyfriend upon him returning home from Fallujah. He didn't open it once. It's just not a book that a war veteran wants to read, or even be reminded of. He went through enough and all he really needed was professional help. Not a book that reiterates the pain and struggles that families endure.

5 comments about Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror.

1. Mr. Scheuer takes a serious look at why U.S. policy towards our Islamist enemies is failing and makes a compelling argument for a means to reverse this trend. As someone with years of experience in our "global war on terrorism," his discussion regarding how to deal with our enemy on the field of battle are the most illuminating I have heard since the war began. He argues that our war strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan are tantamount to Grant and Sherman occupying Richmond and Atlanta while leaving the Confederate armies marching around the Southern countryside. We need to strike out at our enemies and utterly eliminate them before we even think about nation building.



2. Michael Scheuer lets it all out and tells us that basically "The Emperor Has No Clothes". America needs more from our professioanl politicians, Military Officers and C.Y.A. (not CIA) intelligence agencies than the constant hubris, hyperbole and regular B.S. we receive on a daily basis. I appreciate that someone has the intestinal fortitude to tell the truth about America's damaging relationship, in Muslim eyes, with the likes of Saudi Arabia and Israel. We need to get out of the Middle East and let those conflicts burn themselves out while we concentrate on our OWN economy. We need to start a "Manhattan Project" or "Race to the Moon" type of mentality to rid our need of foreign oil. The only reason we are in the Middle East or cared about Kuwait was because of one thing and one thing only..."OIL". Hopefully the next person in the White House will not be another "Village Idiiot from Texas."



3. This book should be required reading for any one that has an opinion is going to form one and be involved with the future of this country.Hubris is the only way that the present administration's view of Islam can be described. This is an attitude that forces Islam to see the west by default as the enemy.If our "leaders"military and diplomatic could read this book and try to begin to understand some of the thinking of the muslim world, we might just be able to get along with them and remember the fate of all emperors .Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror



4. Seems to be a well-researched and accurate account of why the Unites States is so despised among the Muslims of the world, and how we got there through the policies and actions of the Bush administrations in recent years, and the mistakes of years prior to that. Scary!



5. Written by an ex-CIA back office dude who could not beleive the non-sense he witnessed first hand. I voted for Pres. Bush twice. I bought into the "we gotta kill 'em all now!" stuff right from the start, going back to the first WTC attack in 1993. After 9/11, all bets were off. However, over time I noticed something was amiss. This book brings all of what is amiss into sharp focus. A must read for anyone who buys into the "WAR ON TERROR" - "WE MUST REMAIN ON THE ATTACK". Simply because we are not on the right track, and have not been from the start. A factual book thats hard to put down.

5 comments about 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press.

1. Dr. Griffin's newest book is a good reminder of the many contradictions invoving the events of September 11th. "Official" lies feed to us by the Coporate Media. It is easy to read and understand. I gave each of my sisters a copy to read, hopefully to begin a dialog with them. Not easy when you have been raised to never question your government or the nightly newshour. "9/11 Contradicitions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press" could be an important tool to bring forward a courageous Journalist or Congressperson to question the Bush administration. To stand up and speak out before we experience another false-flag attack and blame it on Iran. Seven years is too long to wait for the truth.



2. Griffin's previous books have successfully aimed at dissecting and disproving the official 9/11 story. With this book, he takes direct aim at the corporate media, chopping their own conspicuous failures into small, easily digestible pieces the same way one might cut up steak for a child. This work leaves the members of our media no further excuses, and allows their continued silence to speak even more loudly for their guilt. And isn't that the beauty of watching a superior intellect spar with a lesser foe-to see an opponent tied down with their own hands? Unfortunately, the majority of Americans will never read this book, and thus the official story continues to serve its purpose, like a Hollywood set painted just good enough to show well onscreen.
   
   Nevertheless, we in the 9/11 Truth Movement shall persevere in our efforts to expose the truth, and this book gives us a valuable tool in that process. Without addressing the complicity of the corporate media, the idea that the operation could be kept secret seems ludicrous. Once people understand the degree of sophistication and manipulation that goes into their misinformation, perhaps it will also dawn on them just what that power is capable of, and just how much trouble we're in.



3. The mind of David Ray Griffin is refreshingly clear and logical. His meticulous research and critical analysis of documentary evidence is astute and compelling. In "9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," Dr. Griffin presents a logical sequence of irrefutable facts drawn from actual documents and testimony that demonstrate twenty five internal contradictions in the official 9/11 story. As each contradiction is presented, the author juxtaposes documented timelines and official memos, eye-witness testimony, television broadcasts and news articles that are logically inconsistent with the narrative contrived by the 9/11 Commission. Griffin objectively questions these contradictory narratives, some of them inherent within individual alibis, and observes that the Commission avoided confronting these inconsistencies by eliminating all mention of them in its report. Facts that could not be logically refuted were strategically omitted, thereby erasing from the historical record all evidence of possible perjury and complicity. Each chapter is devoted to one of these contradictions and ends with the request that Congress and the media investigate this inconsistency.
   
   One of the most fascinating contradictions involves the whereabouts of principals on the morning of 9/11 during the critical hours between 9:00 -10:00 am. Refraining from subjective suppositions, Griffin presents public and internal records that suggest that the timeline of critical events was adjusted by the Commission to place the principals at their command posts too late to protect the nation, too late to orchestrate a military response, too late to give stand-down orders, too late to give shootdown orders or to be otherwise guilty of collusion. Thanks to this revised timeline, principals were thus relieved of all evidence indicating their complicity. The conflicting testimony of eye-witnesses such as Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and FAA officials, who placed the principals and military liaisons at their command posts well before the Commission's timeline did, was simply omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report. The Commission's systematic timeline alteration and omission of incriminating evidence thereby suggest that its mission was damage control, a deliberate cover-up of government complicity in the crime. Griffin, however, does not make this charge; he simply presents the contradictions.
   
   The Commission claimed that Vice President Cheney did not arrive in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center until 9:58. That claim was contradicted by the testimony of Norman Mineta, Secretary of Transportation, who arrived at the PEOC around 9:20 where shortly thereafter he witnessed Cheney confirm an order that is most naturally interpreted as an order not to shoot down an incoming object shortly before the Pentagon was struck. Richard Clarke's account in his book, "Against All Enemies," corroborates Mineta's testimony, which was evidently so threatening to the official story that it was deleted from the 9/11 Commission video archives.
   
   General Richard Myers contradicted his own story in several incarnations of his alibi as did Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, both of whom claimed to be unaware of unfolding events when, according to Richard Clarke, they were both participating in a live video teleconference initiated by Clarke at about 9:10. Griffin analyzes these contradictory versions of events, asking Congress and the press to find out the truth.
   
   The Commission's claim that the FAA did not notify the military early enough to scramble jets was contradicted by the FAA's assertion that not only was a military liaison present throughout its nationwide alert but "within minutes after the first aircraft hit the World Trade Center it immediately established several phone bridges that included FAA field facilities, the FAA Command Center, FAA headquarters, DOD, the Secret Service, and other government agencies." NORAD's original (September 18, 2001) timeline corroborated FAA statements as did military officers, such as the National Military Command Center's Brigadier General Montague Winfield and NORAD's Captain Michael Jellinek. One also learns from Richard Clarke that the "Secret Service had a system that allowed them to see what FAA's radar was seeing." The 9/11 Commission's claim, therefore, would be laughable had the consequences of this lie not been so tragic.
   
   Griffin has compiled extensive eye-witness accounts by firefighters, police officers, journalists and building workers who gave vivid reports of hearing and seeing powerful sequential explosions within all three of the World Trade Center skyscrapers prior to their collapse. Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, also collapsed symmetrically into its own footprint around 5:20 pm - an event that was anticipated and communicated to firefighters by Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management around noon. Griffin poses the question to NIST, the agency tasked by the Commission with explaining the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC7, how OEM could have known so many hours in advance that the building would collapse.
   
   Further evidence of controlled demolition is suggested by three professors at Worcester Polytechnic Institute who noted the peculiar characteristics of oxidation and sulfidation on salvaged WTC steel beams. NIST admitted that the temperature of the fires was insufficient (by at least 1000°F) to melt steel. However, if thermate cutter charges (thermite plus sulfur) were used to slice the steel framework, that would explain the molten steel. How did NIST and the 9/11 Commission deal with all the eyewitness testimony that steel had melted? By simply not mentioning it.
   
   Several chapters are devoted to exposing contradictions concerning the alleged hijackers. The assertion that Hani Hanjour could have flown American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon after making a spectacular 330° turn over prohibited airspace is demonstrably preposterous given his record of total incompetence as a pilot. The profile of Mohamed Atta as a devout Muslim on a sacred suicide mission is contradicted by numerous eye-witnesses who described his drinking and sexual activity in detail. The FBI's assertion that Atta's personal belongings provided a treasure trove of incriminating evidence (a Koran, his Will and a list of the 19 hijackers) is dubious, given two inconsistent FBI versions of where this miraculous proof was found. It was first reportedly found in a white Mitsubishi at Boston's Logan airport. But then another FBI claim ~ that two men named Bukhari had driven a blue Nissan to Portland, Maine, and then taken a commuter flight back to Boston on the morning of 9/11 ~ fell apart when it was discovered that one Bukhari had died the previous year and the other was still alive. This problem was clumsily "resolved" by a new FBI story, according to which Atta drove the blue Nissan to Portland and then took the commuter flight back. In this new story, the incriminating evidence was found in his luggage, which failed to get transferred to Flight 11. The 9/11 Commission simply repeated this new story as fact, with no mention of the FBI's earlier story.
   
   Numerous media reports of phone calls from hijacked passengers played a central role in reinforcing vivid imagery in the public mind about Middle Eastern hijackers. One source of this picture was the Justice Department's Solicitor General, Ted Olson, who told CNN that his wife (Barbara) had called him twice from American Flight 77. That story was contradicted at the Zacarias Moussaoui trial in 2006 by the FBI's report on phone calls from the four planes, none of which, according to the report, were made by Barbara Olson. The belief that hijackers took over the planes was also based heavily on reports of over 15 cell phone calls from passengers to relatives, even though high-altitude cell phone calls were not possible in 2001. The FBI phone report resolved that conflict by saying that there were only two cell phone calls, these being both from United Flight 93 when it was down to 5,000 feet. This claim, however, contradicted the reports of many family members, including Deena Burnett, who reported that she knew that the four calls she received from her husband were made from his cell phone because she saw the name on her Caller ID.
   
   Why do these contradictions matter? The story of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and nineteen Muslim hijackers is based entirely on claims that have never been verified. Despite promises of forthcoming evidence, the US government has yet to deliver any hard evidence. To this day, the FBI's web page concerning Osama bin Laden does not accuse him of involvement with the 9/11 attacks because, an FBI official has admitted, "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11." What, then, is the justification for attacking two sovereign nations and killing over one million civilians?
   
   Although Griffin refrains from making direct accusations, he methodically presents objective evidence that leads the reader to an inevitable conclusion ~ that the purpose of the 9/11 Commission was to assign guilt where it did not exist and to cover up guilt where it did. The Commission's many omissions of contradictory evidence appear to this reader as desperate attempts to protect the principals from criminal indictments for treason, mass murder, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against the earth.
   
   David Ray Griffin's impeccable research documents a multitude of significant contradictions, too many to review in this short summary. The enormous public service he has provided in preparing this meticulous archive cannot be over-stated. This brilliant work should inspire diligent investigation. Any investigative journalist worthy of that title would need only to validate this extensive research. Dr. Griffin has documented and analyzed the evidence with the precision and skill of a seasoned District Attorney. The logical sequence of objective evidence that raises significant questions presents a case that is so well organized it could be used intact by any prosecutor devoted to uncovering the truth.
   
   Let the trials begin. Indictments are long overdue.



4. Buy this book.
   
   Buy it if you believe the cause of the collapse of three skyscrapers was a conspiracy of Arab amateur pilots who flew planes into two of them.
   
   Buy it if you know that story can't be true, and are looking for an intelligent, objective, scientific investigation of it.
   
   Buy it even if you've seen every video and read every book about what really happened on 9/11. You'll find it digs even deeper, looks even harder, and pins the issues down more firmly than any other 9/11 book to date.
   
   By impartially exploring the facts of just 25 of the many contradictions in official 9/11 testimonies and alibis, Griffin exposes both the extent of U. S. Government corruption, incompetence, and complicity in the attacks, as well as the complete failure of its censored, controlled "official" reports -- more unassailably and completely than any single work has exposed it so far.
   
   People have been asking some of the book's 25 questions for years, e.g.: "How did Rudy Giuliani know in advance that the towers were going to collapse?" (Griffin points out, "Had the [9/11] Commission investigated and reported on this issue, it could have answered, at least partially, the question as to the source of this foreknowledge. Information relevant to this question is contained in the oral histories recorded by the Fire Department of New York." Though the 9/11 Commission's report neglects it, this book does follow the trail of those oral histories to shed some light on the puzzle of Giuliani's foreknowledge that the buildings would collapse when the architecture, engineering, emergency, and firefighting experts who were there that morning believed it was impossible, and Dr. Griffin concludes "Congress and the press need to do what the 9/11 Commission failed to do: Ask Guiliani what he and his people in the OEM knew that other people did not know.")
   
   This book also raises questions that haven't yet occurred even to most of the better-informed, e.g.: "Where was General Richard Myers that day?" Myers was the highest-ranking military officer at the Pentagon on 9/11. Griffin points out that "Dozens of people would surely know where he was that morning. And yet, we have been given two radically different accounts of his whereabouts."
   
   Others: "Had 9/11-Type attacks been envisioned by members of the Bush Administration?" "Is there hard evidence of bin Laden's responsibility for the attacks?" "What caused the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon?" All followed by systematic analyses of the contradictory answers that no official report has yet addressed.
   
   Questions this book doesn't explicitly ask, but sure makes you wonder about:
   
   Q: How could a terrorist attack of such colossal proportions have been committed anywhere, let alone in the most militarized part of the most militarized country in the world? (A: The terrorists were not foreigners, and the attack was a crime by United States citizens rather than an act of war by enemies of the United States.)
   
   Q: How could the people who committed these crimes have even dreamed them up, or helped cover them up, and had such confidence that they'd never be held accountable? (A: Perhaps they believe, and have been taught to believe and allowed to believe, that they're smarter and more entitled to privilege than the rest of us, who are perceived as vastly gullible, controllable, and powerless.)
   
   Q: What were the people who committed these crimes thinking? How could the conscience of any human being justify planning and carrying out such evil? (A: Maybe the prospect of increasing personal riches and power, and belief that gullible, controllable, powerless people and institutions would fail to detect or contain them.)
   
   Q: How could one of the most advanced and respected justice systems in the world have failed to prosecute even one person responsible for an attack on the citizens of the United States in crimes of such colossal proportions? How could they remain in power and go unpunished for so long after committing them? (A: There's still time; no statute of limitations on many of the crimes.)
   
   Q: How could our military, elected representatives, media, courts, and other institutions have so completely failed to serve us in preventing, reporting, investigating, prosecuting, and responding to crimes of such colossal proportions? (A: Maybe because this is all a more challenging problem than any republic has ever had to contend with. And how many people ever work as hard and conscientiously as we're going to have to work to get this job done? Other than Dr. David Ray Griffin?)
   
   What would we do, what would the 9/11 truth movement be, if we didn't have Dr. Griffin writing and speaking with such integrity, honesty, and impeccable credibility? I know without him, I'd have far less hope for the future, and the present, and the fate of the U.S. Constitution, and the possibility of justice here or anywhere, and the condition of the world, than I do.
   
   To protect yourself, your future, and your children's future, buy this book. Better: buy several copies and put them in the hands of your elected representatives and local journalists. That's who it's addressed to. Law enforcement professionals, educators, clergy, and anyone with any influence in every community needs to read this book too.
   
   P.S. If you live in New York, be sure to register to vote, and then sign the 9/11 Ballot Initiative before June 30, 2008 (nyc911initiative.org).



5. As you read David Ray Griffin's elegant and restrained text, as you read, for example, that an Air Force E-4B was caught on news video over Washington, DC during the 911 crisis and the Pentagon claims it had no planes aloft, your entire brain screams for relief: How can this be? you cry. With the eyes of the world focused on the events of 911, how could the Pentagon deny the reality of the aircraft when there is irrefutable evidence it was there, and no one in authority challenge that? How, oh how, could this be?
   
   911 is in a category not by itself. In the post-war period, I can think of four controversies which fall in the category, defined as matters so explosive in their implications that the utterly outrageous "contradictions" which accompany them go unchallenged because the American people simply cannot bear to contemplate those implications.
   
   The four controversies are: (1) that John Kennedy was assassinated by elements of the US government; (2) that the CIA traffics in illegal drugs; (3) that UFOs are extraterrestrial and the US government knows it; and (4) that 911 was a false flag operation carried out by elements of the US government. If criminal responsibility of the US government was established for any of these four controversies, it would shake American society to its foundations. That is why the American people do not want to know about these controversies beyond the official story.
   
   I remarked to a friend one day, "You can load the World Trade Center with explosives, kill 3000 people and get away with it, but don't fire nine US Attorneys! Oh, they'll get you for that."
   
   To reach a conclusion about any of the four controversies requires years of study. I have put my time in on only one of the controversies, (3) UFOs. As for (4), the 911 controversy, I try to keep up with it, which led me to Griffin's book. It is written with exceptional restraint, care, deliberateness. Griffin presents his facts with an almost plodding deliberateness; one by one they are set in front of the reader, with little comment and no hype at all. It is a manner of writing which gives the book great credibility.
   
   Dissent from the official line on each of the four controversies has spawned a cottage industry in which the controversy scholars toil away and produce analysis of impecable quality--all ignored outside their respective cottage industry communities. In each case, the public would rather have the corruption, the depravity, the audacity, the venality implied by the controversies remain in place than face the disintegration of our institutions that would result from revelation.

5 comments about Prince of Fire.

1. I am now a die hard fan of Daniel Silva. The Prince of Fire was just as great a read as all of his others. I recently ordered all of his novels and look forward to reading each of them. These books are suspenseful page turners that I can hardly put down to sleep or do work. I passed one onto a friend and now he is hooked on Daniel Silva as well. If you like suspense thrillers, Daniel Silva is the man. I would suggest starting from his first novel and working your way through. Although each novel has it's own storyline, his novels seem to build on one another; either way, don't pass up this and his other books.....they are all a must read!



2. 
   You've heard about the Israeli agent (or the Palestinian terrorist) who fell into a trap? No, I'm not referring to a two guys walk into a bar joke. I'm addressing the fact that the agent vs terrorist theme is getting so shop worn, that books like these seem to be novels that are churned out by some supercomputer hidden in a safe house south of Florence, Italy. The next novel to be written should be how a group of agents interested in restoring novelty to spy thrillers break into this house and destroy the hack writing supercomputer.
   
   As for me one of the earliest, and the best of terrorist vs agent novels is John le Carre's book The Little Drummer Girl novel, a book that deeply explores the motivations of men on both sides of the deadly fence of political enmity. All through this book I kept thinking, surely I've read this book before. I hadn't, but I have read ones that follow the same plot.
   
   A Palestinian terrorist blows up a building. An Israeli agent goes after him. People get misled and fall into traps. They escape from traps and chase around some more. There are women in the book, all beautiful, and, of course some are destined to die. That's it folks. That's the whole book. Yes, I don't think that I've left anything out. And if that seems awfully familiar to you then you know on page one how the book will end.
   
   In some ways I found it difficult to rate this book at only two stars, because Daniel Silva is a fairly decent writer. He occasionally throws in an adjective or an adverb, descriptive parts of speech that many writers of this ilk find extremely difficult to use.
   
   My recommendation. If you like reading this sort of plot over and over again written in a competent style then by all means read the book. Otherwise spare yourself the deadly repetition of terrorist vs agent. And, certainly, if you have not read John le Carre's The Little Drummer Girl go read it first, or reread it if you've had the distinct pleasure of having already enjoyed it.



3. When you read a review saying that Daniel Silva can flat out write, believe the hype! Silva can really write, and "Prince of Fire" proves just that. Another reviewer said that he didn't think Silva would raise the bar with this one, and that he was wrong. That's accurate enough, because I felt the same way. If somebody were to tell me that Daniel Silva isn't up to snuff, I'd be laughing for a long time at you.
   
   So, what kind of situation can Daniel Silva put Gabriel Allon into this time? Well, look no further then the likes of Ari Shamron and Lev. Lev says move, and Gabriel calls some critical shots in this lethal game of chess! And when check-mate seems so far away, you better check your king and queen, because Gabriel will find the move that you don't see coming. This is a whole new hunt, and the question is, who's being hunted? He also deals with issues concerning his wife, and coming to terms with it altogether. In some ways, he becomes more of a leader among men then he thought possible. And the stakes just get higher. If you ever thought of "Daniel and the Lion's Den," just think of the possibilities.
   
   This is by far the best that Silva has offered up concerning Gabriel Allon! I mean, WOW!! And I still have "The Messenger," as well as a couple of others to go in this series. Does that mean I'll be looking forward to his next offering? You bet! This was an explosion of Daniel Silva's very best, and it'll sure be a tough one to beat!



4. Silva can always be counted on to deliver a taut, fast-moving yet nuanced thriller and this is no exception. Hero Gabriel Allon sets out, somewhat reluctantly, to to avenge a massive, ugly bombing in Rome and in so doing, is forced to consider why he does what he does. In this book, as in his other Allon books, Silva ties the plot into the historic troubles between Israel and the Palestinians and ably reflects the complexities that motivate both sides. Allon is a believeable hero, now aging. Will Silva let him fade into the sunset? Doubtful, although Silva is quite capable of penning compelling novels that don't rely on this worthy hero. All in all, a good thriller. Your time won't be wasted on this one.



5. A gripping tale with a likable hero, I recommend this book for travelers, insomniacs and vacationers. Daniel Silva has mastered the thriller style, knows how to keep his reader turning the pages, guessing and fearing and hoping.

5 comments about The Mirrored Heavens.

1. n 2105 the Treaty of Zurich is co-signed by the representatives of the leaders of the United States and the Eurasian Coalition. The two contracting powers agree to reduce the tensions of the protracted second cold war with some cooperation although neither side trusts the other as the environment has failed "Quickening" the potential end of the planet.
   
   The prime symbol of their cooperation is the construction of the Phoenix Space Elevator which will near full operations by 2110 in Belem-Macapa to enable humanity to expedite journeys off world. Central Intelligence Command counter cyber terrorism agent Claire Haskell is tracking the elevator networks as regional freedom fighters Jaguar's Swords have reportedly hacked inside. However, a series of explosions soon rock the elevator and devastates much of the city. The enigmatic Operator sends "mechanic" Jason Marlowe to rescue Claire as he has plans for the pair in a complex counter operation against Autumn Rain who has taken credit for the destruction; while the superpowers blame each other as the cold war turns close to heating up on earth and on the moon. The Operator counts on his subordinate razor Claire and her mechanic Jason remembering fondly their love for one another a decade ago; however, as the pair works together to prevent another Rain tsunami, each wonders if their love is real or an imprint by their razor the Operator.
   
   THE MIRRORED HEAVENS is an exhilarating action-packed futuristic counter intelligence espionage science fiction thriller with Brave New World twists and spins that will have the lead field agents and the audience wonders what revelation is next and just who road kill is. Reality is blurred by constructs to expedite a mechanic's assignment so Claire and Jason only know that she is his razor and he is her mechanic on the stop the Rain project. Readers will appreciate this fast-paced grim look at earth twenty-second century.
   
   Harriet Klausner



2. Just because a character runs the internet with their mind, and there's a cyborg involved, does not make the work cyberpunk. As someone who's read not only Neuromancer, but Hardwired, and the Enigma Variations as well as the precusors Shock Wave Rider and Cold Cash War as well as dozens of other works in the Genre I think I can define it. Cyberpunk has cyborgs, mind hackers, and even a dystopian future like this book. It also, however, has A PLOT it has CHARACTERS AND CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT.
   
   This book is one long retaliation piece to an initial event. The empty, flat, no back story, automaton characters vomit dull simple dialog. The description, even the description of action, is repetitive poorly explained and lifeless.
   
   Cyberpunk has anti-heroes who reach out to do better and are transformed by the end of the book, usually the seeds of their transformation can be found in their back story which is revealed through exposition or inner dialog: the dull simplistic paper cut outs of this work have no back story and very little inner dialog. And no the plot device that they can't trust their memory doesn't count. The author only uses it to get around poorly drawn characters he does not make it truly intergral to the story. Character motivation is simple survival with little or no thought. They do not ask why, nor look around and understand; they act, they react, and they reload. Even at its most intense the dialog about the society the work is based on reads more like a cheap cold war novel from the 60's than a cyberpunk piece.
   
   This book is like the Executioner series or any of a dozen sci-fi miliporn works. If you like the empty bundles of thoughtless macho typing that David Drake writes then you will like this. Even Dietz' cyborg marines series is closer to cyberpunk than this work and only a fool would call that series Cyberpunk. Instead of revealing the culture's dystopia via dialog the author uses the lazy back of the book index dodge. Even then the author does not seem to be up to the task of truly providing the decriptive globalism that is a hallmark of the writing style.
   
   Finally, in Cyberpunk, the science has become so pervasive it is invasive within the body. That state is bases of the dystopia, the engine of the plot, and the conflict which brings about character redemption. In this work, the science is just a tool for the one dimensional zombies of the work to shoot each other and stand in. Really, you can almost argue that the work shouldn't even be considered science fiction.
   
   If you liked the Cyberpunk of Asher, Morgan, Gibson, Jeter, Maddox Roberts, Jon Williams, and Stross and you want more cyberpunk then do not read this work. However, if you think that the last legion series, Orphan's series or the Clone Alliance series are great forms of Science Fiction writing then read it.



3. Damn. David J. Williams can write. This is one of the few books that I've read that live up to the all the author endorsed blurbs on the cover. I haven't read much cyperpunk, but I enjoyed this book. The twisted political intrigues, the unflinching action sequences, and the vision of a world in detente on the verge of breakpoint is simply masterful. This book however, does NOT sanitize war, and if realistic violence disturbs you, this book might not be for you.
   
   But damn what an ending! I'm definitely looking forward to the next book!



4. There's a lot to be said about this book, and most of it is even good.
   Basically from the first page of the story, it takes you on a rollercoaster ride with half a dozen characters that is so full of twists and turns that keeping track of what is actually happening becomes a task of its own after one's halfway through the novel. The action is unforgiving and direct, with the battle raging through the streets of bleak concrete molochs, the emptyness of space, the grey wastes of the moon and the depths of cyberspace. The writing style immerses the reader directly into the action after a short while. It's a tale about a looming world war, about idealism and about the uncertainty of identity in a future where mind and technology can interfere with each other very easily.
   
   The picture David paints of the future is deeply dystopian, with the world locked in a cycle of inner and outer conflict, with a completely collapsing ecosphere and a society where a life's worth less than even in ancient Rome. It's a world that's been completely thrown off balance, a world in which sometimes your own side is far more dangerous to you than your supposed enemies might be.
   
   The technology shown in "The Mirrored Heavens" is not too far out there. Whether we will truly be that advanced with regards to neuro-interfaces and cyberspace by that time is up for speculation, but at least the space technology and weapons systems shown already exists in their basics today.
   
   The novel is a great one - once you've adapted to the writing style. Usually I'm not fan of third person present tense writing, but with this novel it works rather well. There's also a certain degree of ambivalence in me with regards to the dystopian setting. I'm no optimist, but I think that most political systems primarily strive to achieve internal order. Thus, while the setting works well for the novel, I'm no great friend of it. Moreso, the very literal mindf*** that nowadays cyberpunks presents us with is, well, positively disturbing. If one has ever seen Ghost in the Shell: Standalone Complex, he know's what I'm talking about.
   
   My last point of criticism is that the actual information you get about the world is rather thinlayered. I understand that the novel focusses on the plot, but there is hardly said more than a) there are the Eurasians, and they have different factions; b) there is the USA and within it different factions intriguing against each other for influence on "The Throne"; c) and there are Combines and the Euromagnates, on which basically nothing substantial at all is said. I'm an avid fluff-reader, digging through pages of explanations is a good read to me, so that disappointed me somewhat.
   
   All in all I'd call "The Mirrored Heavens" a solid and action-packed work and definately a great first novel of David Williams. Maybe the world it plays in will be elaborated on in possible sequels.



5. Mirrored Heavens won't leave my mind. The present tense, staccato prose with constantly shifting POV (indicated nicely with icons), and a narrator so personal, it feels like it's in your head ... all that was refreshing and new. The action is constant and well written, but it comes off as a media tie in novel. I'd have given this a 4 star review if this was set in a world I'd been immersed in for 20+ hours already. As it stands, while I found each individual page enjoyable, and think many people will enjoy this book, it overall didn't work for me.

No comments about In Defense of America.