1 comments about The Squad: and the intelligence operations of Michael Collins.

1. This book arrived on time and in pristine condition. I would use this vendor again.

5 comments about When You Ride Alone You Ride With Bin Laden: What the Government Should Be Telling Us to Help Fight the War on Terrorism.

1. Ignorance is interesting...thus an extra star.
   While you are all busy attempting to find some kernel of truth with one another, Bill Maher is probably off cavorting with Hugh Hefner and his little bunnies. Maher's association with Hefner is telling on many levels. Among them are: his affinity for the 'cool' and dedication to the depthless; his lack of meaningful personal relationships, the seed from which sprouts his warped view of society; and the maniacal influence that seems to pervade so many of his thoughts. All of that said I think that people should view Maher(and read him so that his comments can be considered naked, without the veil of cuteness). He is an example to behold. Of what? The case for ignorance is strong here. People like Maher love to ignore facts, the U.S. purchases only a small fraction of its oil from the middle east...the overwhelming majority comes from our neighbors and allies: North American nations, South American nations, European, Asian, and African nations. And, yes a solid portion does come from the middle east, but certainly not as much as the activists would like you to believe. Check the import numbers for yourself and see.



2. Maher is a comedian and a social critic. So why is he criticised for being critical and funny?
   Two issues initially drew me to this book: First, the book is endorsed by extremists on both sides, including arch-enemies Al Franken and Ann Coulter.
   Second, the critics often bring out absurd attacks against the author himself (his friendships with Hugh Hefner or Michael Moore, or personal dislikes of the author). This is often the mark of a good book, as critics can't take him so well on specific issues, so they just use personal attacks.
   Maher probably has personal issues. But this is to review his book, not his existence. His libertarian ideas are refreshing.
   One piece of advice: books by comedians like Franken and Maher gain a lot with delivery. Consider getting the audio.



3. If only Bill Maher could turn his perceptive political insights into useful prescriptions for change, rather than cranky rants. Or in other words – great ideas, poor execution. Maher's basic concept in this book is that he wishes to compare the real sacrifices that Americans were proud to make in the World Wars with the completely empty gestures and false jingoism which are all Americans are willing to do in the current war on terror. For example, in the old days people actually tried to conserve food and fuel for the war effort. Nowadays, "patriots" continue our dependence on Middle Eastern dictators by buying gas-guzzling SUVs, then slap a cheap fake magnetic ribbon on the bumper and actually think they're helping win the war. Instead of a strong president who encourages us to make personal sacrifices and serve the nation, we have one who tells us to keep shopping and consuming, thus strengthening nobody but the corporations that make campaign contributions.
   
   Bill Maher is great at finding ironies and disconnections like these in modern American politics. But after making such excellent insights, Maher doesn't know how to make his ideas useful at more than a basic oppositional level. It's not really necessary to review this book based on one's agreement with Maher's political stance. I happen to agree with much of it and disagree with some of it. But the main problem here is that Maher first addresses a problem usefully, but then goes on a tirade of self-righteous complaining, while writing as if he has the answers to all those problems. This is a real concern given his attitudes toward Islam, and his know-it-all prescriptions for military strategies. Maher's philosophy can also be very inconsistent and contradictory, especially when it comes to cultural tolerance and political correctness. Bill Maher's insightful mind finds some real breakthroughs here, but then his cynicism takes control and brings us back to regular old finger-pointing and condescending American politics. [~doomsdayer520~]



4. I admire the guts it took to say these things in modern America, a land where political correctness stifles free expression as surely as McCarthyism ever did. And how soon Americans are forgetting September 11, 2001! It floors me how so many people think it is now just a sad day from a history book. More and worse is probably coming, folks, and Bill Maher is honest enough to say so in a message that caters to neither the right nor the left, simply dishes up (in a loud voice) pragmatic commentary on how we are messing up and what we should be doing to fix it. In this semi-survival manual, a collection of topical essays combined with WWII-style political posters updated for our times, some things get said that desperately needed saying. Yes, we Americans can do more to make ourselves safer. Yes, we Americans have a partially-deserved PR problem on the world stage, and yes, our enemies overseas are waiting patiently in a state of extreme motivation, to strike us again. I recommend this book to anyone, but especially those who are too timid to wake up to the reality that we are in a watershed moment in world history, a time in which the culture of enlightenment and freedom is under direct attack by a Medieval-minded foe who would have us descend into repression and totalitarianism. Actually, wait. I'll correct that. Our foe wants the repression and totalitarianism for himself. For us he wants an irradiated wasteland from sea to shining sea. So read this book. It's frequently funny, it's thought-provoking, and it says a lot that stands in contrast to the patriotic but empty drivel that passes for our national dialogue in 2006.



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

5 comments about Others Unknown: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing Conspiracy.

1. This book was written by Timothy McVeigh's lawyer , it raises the questions: Were there Others Unknown? Were there other countries involved in this conspiracy? Why weren't the defense teams allowed their own independant investigation in the bombing? Why was evidence withheld by prosecutors? A very good book to read, try also reading Freedom's End by James Nichols.



2. As a citizen of Oklahoma and Oklahoma City, I was incensed when Stephen Jones, an Oklahoma Lawyer, wrote a book about his attempt to defend McVay--the man who blew up the Murrah Building in our town. Jones had to have a guard when discussing the first edition of his book in the Library in Perry Oklahoma (where McVey was jailed when picked up on Interstate 35 on the way back to Kansas after the Bombing). Oklahoma people, to say the least, were not happy with Mr. Jones. After McVay published his own book, thus releasing Jones from his Lawyer's oath of Confidentiality, Jones wrote what I call "the rest of the story." I was still not impressed, and I was not going to enrich him by buying one of his books. After 911, I realized that the second edition of his book was written AFTER both World Trade Center#1, and Oklahoma City, and BEFORE World Trade Center II (911). Much of Johes' wanderings about the world in his effort to defend McVay, suddenly began to seem like something I should know about, as a Citizen of this country at this time in history. I bought a copy, and am awe-struck by the information in that book that might have had a bearing on "911"...One must discount all of the "losing lawyer's grumbling" about his poor treatment by the winning side; that is normal in Trial Lawyer Books...It is the portrait of international terrorism that he discovered, and wrote about in this book while preparing for that trial,that is engaging.I doubt if there was anything in this book that would have prevented "911"..but looking back sometimes is the only view of the future that we can have in such times. Perhaps McVay's only patriotic deed near the end of his life, was to free Mr. Jones to write this book, by publishing his own work. Two of McVay's co-defendants are still alive...one is awaiting trial in Oklahoma City for his part in over 160 murders....Find this book at the Library or somewhere and read it. No,I DO NOT KNOW MR. JONES. Clarence Robison M.D.



3. I read this book in 1999 and have shared it with many friends and family. I had the privilege of meeting Stephen Jones and immediately got the sense this was a man with integrity and a very strong belief in the Constitution of the United States.

   After 9/11 my husband and myself re-read this book and again were passing it around to friends.

   It makes you wonder why the government didn't pay attention to the information Stephen and his investigators were uncovering. It is obvious there was a connection of the middle eastern radical influence in the OKlahoma City Bombing.

   With recent information connecting the 9/11 terroist and Tim McVeigh staying at the same motel makes a compelling argument that they are connected.

   This is a must read if you Love America and all the freedoms we enjoy in everyday life.




4. This book is too poorly written to read and understand. Problems in organization, narrative style and structure, plus an occasionally annoying narrative voice, make it difficult to figure out what is going on. The time sequence is random and much that is irrelevant is mixed in and has to be sorted through.

   The author's coy refusal to state whether he believes Timothy McVeigh is guilty is negated by McVeigh's own post-conviction confession.

   Had the author focused on his actual thesis, that Timothy McVeigh did not act alone and probably had the support of some organization, and had he offered well-organized, well-reasoned and well-supported evidence to support this thesis, this would have been a much better book.




5. Jones's investigation revealed many things that were they taken seriously, events like 9/11 and TWA800 might not have had to happen. The Yousef connection in the Philippines, and his link OBL, long before 9/11, was demonstrated in this book.
   
   Jones also demonstrated that McVeigh, while far from being a choir boy, probably bore the brunt of the punishment when many others were involved, and are still walking free. Strassmeier, for instance, is living a good life in Germany, while likely having the blood of 168 victims on his hands as well.
   
   This book will forever change the way you think about OKC, and more importantly, the way our government prosecutes cases without a lot of substantial evidence. The question is not about McVeigh's guilt, it is about the others involved and government's failure to go after them with the same zealousness.

5 comments about Striking Back: The 1972 Munich Olympics Massacre and Israel's Deadly Response.

1. This excellent book is by an Israeli journalist who was able to get remarkable access to Mossad. One might think this would result in a one-sided presentation, but Klein has done an excellent job of being extremely objective and analyzing the twin motivations of revenge and deterrence that underlay the strike-back assassinations after Munich. The only point on which he isn't objective (and with good reason) is in his unreserved condemnation of the action, inaction, negligence, and callousness (not to mention stupidity) of the German officials during the 21 hours or so of the hostage crisis. The book is worth reading for his thorough account of that one day in September.
   
   Klein's analysis of the Mossad reaction is unsparing, especially in the disaster and tragedy at Lilliehammer, when Mossad agents killed an innocent man whom they should have realized was not Ali Hassan Salameh ("The Red Prince"). Six Mossad operatives were actual imprisoned in Norway for this crime, and the fact that "Munich" never makes mention of this incident is sufficient refutation to those who ridiculously claim that Spielberg and Tony Kushner were insufficiently sympathetic to Israel. While he wrote the book in Hebrew, Klein makes it clear this is not an apologia for Mossad. He sternly questions the rightness of the process in which Palestinian terrorists were identified and "prosecuted" in "show trials" before Israeli Prime Ministers who issued death sentences. People identified as "architects" of Munich often had little if any direct connection to the tragedy. He also carefully analyses the deterrence claim. While Black September terror largely faded after the strike-back assassinations, this appears to have had much to do with the PLO's attempt for legitimacy (Arafat addressing the U.S. in 1974, etc.) and reluctance to incur the wrath of potentially friendly European governments by continuing to execute terror strikes in their countries. Klein also explodes the myth of Mossad invincibility, pointing out with great irony that two of the actual Munich terrorists are still alive, and neither of the actual planners of the mission (Abu Daoud and Abu Ehyad) died at Mossad's hands. Abu Daoud is, in fact, still alive, and Abu Ehyad was assassinated by an extremist Abu Nidal follower because Abu Ehyad had become "soft" on the destruction of Israel.
   
   Don't confuse this book with the movie "Munich," however. "Munich" is based on a different book, George Jonas's "Vengeance," based on the recollections of a Mossad agent. There have been some criticisms and questions of "Avner"'s story in "Vengeance." Klein's account, however, shows that the initial 3 assassinations and the Spring of Youth assassinations in Beiruit were generally very accurately portrayed in "Munich." I see "Munich" as more of a philosophical question about the human cost of the eye-for-an-eye approach, and the ultimate futility of translating ideology into direct and violent action, especially when it means undertaking violent action that is dangerously similar to the type of action undertaken by your enemy. Klein's book is more of a thoughtful policy analysis of what Mossad did, and whether it was effective. While Klein claims that moral judgments are far beyond the scope of his book, they are an inevitable consequence of evaluating the remarkable research that he has compiled.



2. Yes, I understand this is not a novel, but it is as dryly written as a computer manual. It's a shame because the story is compelling, true and quite dynamic.



3. I purchased and read this book after having seen Steven Spielberg's movie "Munich" and I am glad I did it in that order. While reading the book I could picture many of the scenes from the movie which helped keep all the names and characters straight. A sad, enthralling story - I could not put it down.



4. This is the second book I bought for my son, and one for myself because my son said that MUNICH was 90% fiction.
   VENGEANCE was the story of one Israeli spy team as told to the author by the leader of that one team. This book, STRIKING BACK is more scholarly, and discusses many teams, the theory behind the teams, the results of their wet work, and also tells us about Israeli policy as it changes through the years. Both books help us understand that the facts and stories as presented are 90% fact, and we can learn a gret deal about how Israel survives using an Old Testament technique ("An Eye for an Eye.". Israel's survival depends on how it responds to attacks and we have a clearer understanding of the reason for desperate measures. It's a good book, a more difficult read than VENGEANCE, but worth the effort.



5. This was a very interesting book describing a very tumultous time in Israel's history. I'd recommend it to anyone wanting to understand more about "Munich" and the history of Palestinian and/or Islamic terrorism
   
   The author did a good job of pointing out the pros and cons of Israel's assassination policy, including the bungled job in Lillehammer, Norway that resulted in the death of an (apparently) innocent civilian. It's not a simple issue, by far. Overall, though, the work of the Mossad over time probably did reduce the incidents of terrorism, and I think a reasonable person would come to that conclusion by looking objectively at the evidence. Whether it justifies killing a target in another sovereign nation is another issue, though I lean slightly toward the positive.

4 comments about The Terrorists of Iraq: Inside the Strategy and Tactics of the Iraq Insurgency.

1. There's been quite a bit written about the enemy we currently face in Iraq and in many cases I think the material seems to be embellished with hyperbole or just a rough overview lacking any detail you couldn't gleen from the internet or the media. Nance's book is a dramatic departure from what's come before it. I was given this book on return from a recent deployment to Iraq and find that it jibes well with the model we faced downrange. Nance is a skilled arabist with an intelligence background that makes him an excellent scribe to collect the vast pool of information on the threat, filter it and format it into a useful product. But what makes this information so unique is that Nance didn't just call upon his background and assessment from afar, he's been on the ground for years in theater actively working the threat. His assessment of how the threat evolved, its adaptive techniques, motivations and goals is refreshingly honest and sans political slant.
   
   Who is this book for? It's a fantastic read for troops heading to Iraq as well as intelligence analysts as it covers in depth the genesis and evolution of the threat as well as its amorphous form. Military historians and enthusiasts will get much from this book as it appears to be the most complete and accurate record of the Iraq insurgency currently published (2007). I give it my highest reccomendation.



2. This is by far the most accurate, contemporary, and complete single source of information available to the consumer on the topic of terrorist threats in Iraq. It is a "must read" for anyone wishing to develop an understanding of Iraqi political and war dynamics.



3. The author does an excellent job of bringing grounded research to look at some questions of national security. Some of these questions are "simple", like "Why are the Iraqi's using IED's?" and other more difficult questions such as "What should be done to improve the situation for Iraq?". In particular I really enjoyed the author's analysis on Saddam's preparations for insurgency before the US occupation of Iraq. I recommend that the decision makers read this book to see some common sense patterns clearly laid out.



4. The author provides an overview of the various terrorists groups operating in Iraq, along with their tactics and potential size. Although the research and discussion of tactics is infomative - I did not really find much value that could be derived for either Soldiers operating in Iraq, or military or civilian leaders attempting to use this book to assist with planning a future strategy due to its lack of specificity.
   
   I especially had issues with the size of each terrorist group depicted by the author - I did not see any true evidence to support his claims
   
   Finally, the numerous editing / mispellings throughout the book gives an extremely poor impression - the most poorly edited book that I have ever read.

1 comments about The Political Economy of Terrorism.

1. An interesting book in which the best aspects are the use of the theory of games and economic behavior to analyze the behavior of terorism. The tools used are powerful but the conclusions are insufficient.

2 comments about Intelligence and Human Rights in the Era of Global Terrorism (Stanford Security Studies).

1. This is a fantastic book, balanced, well written and insightful. The editor argues that we need to strike the right balance between the need to maintain security and protecting human rights. We not only need to stop terrorist attacks but also pre-empt terrorist organizations from recruiting more suicide bombers. This requires more than the effective use of force and intelligence. We need to prove our culture is genuinely superior, and this can only be achieved by respecting the rights of individuals. One of the chapters by a former senior Israeli intelligence officer is also amazingly insightful in explaining why Western Intelligence agencies all failed over the Iraq WMD issue prior to the invasion of Iraq. Most highly recommended.



2. In dealing with terrorists, it's a slippery slope to avoid to not become as bad as the terrorists themselves. Compiled and edited by Steve Tsang, "Intelligence and Human Rights in the Era of Global Terrorism" is an informative body of work focusing upon the 'War on Terror' and how to go about waging it while still respecting basic human rights. Stating that the best weapon is peace to turn potential terrorists away from becoming terrorists in the first place is just one among many other useful ideas and tactics to be employed if we are to succeed in overcoming global terrorism in the 21st Century. A very strongly recommended addition for community and academic library reference collections, as well as the non-specialist general reader with an interest in the subject, "Intelligence and Human Rights in the Era of Global Terrorism" is a must for those who want a realistic plan for winning the war on terrorism.

5 comments about Against All Enemies.

1. "group of "patriots" from Idaho take credit for the bombing" um.. Mr Gandle, did you actually read the book? The militia didn't do or take credit for the bombing, and the army did not initially act against the militia. The Publishers Weekly and Booklist editorial reviews are inaccurate too. Anyway, I'm having great fun reading it, especially since I can look out my office window and see the Gowan Field battleground. I'll be passing this on to some of the NG members who work here.



2. I had previously read Harold Coyle's TEAM YANKEE and BRIGHT STAR back in the '80s, when I was a young troop facing the motherless commie hordes across the Iron Curtain. Both books were well-crafted, with plausible scenarios and compelling scenes and characters.
   
   "Against All Odds," alas, was a disappointment. The prose is turgid, the characters walking clichés, and the storyline is frankly ludicrous. The book was apparently set against the 1990s backdrop of the OKC bombing and the rise of the much-ballyhooed "militia threat." A disgruntled Gulf War vet stages a terrorist incident, which is the inadvertent catalyst for a showdown between a populist, scheming Idaho governor (backed by rabidly anti-government militiamen) and the Federal government. The Idaho National Guard, depicted as mindless tools, shamble into action to defend their tinhorn governer and his unwholesome coterie against what seems like an eminently reasonable Federal ultimatum. When push comes to shove, the outcome is a foregone conclusion, with plenty of pointless heroics and sacrifice on both sides.
   
   All of the characters, without exception, are formulaic caricatures who lurch automaton-like toward a needless (and to the reader, inexplicable) armed confrontation. If you're looking for dynamic tension arising from moral dilemnas, look elsewhere. I resolved to read the book to the bitter end, since I'd plunked down 25 hard-earned dollars for it. Nonetheless, I found myself hoping for some dues ex machina, like a giant meteorite slamming into the earth, say, on page 43, that would terminate the story and leave me with 373 mercifully blank pages. No such luck. The characters are so contrived, the dialogue so wretched, and the plot so mind-numbingly predictable, that I never was able to muster anything but abject indifference as to whether any of the characters survived or got whatever it was that they desired or deserved.
   
   I would like to believe that Harold Coyle has yet to have his finest hour as a writer, but if this book typifies his future offerings, he'll have to make do with coasting on his past reputation.



3. This is one of those "what-if" scenarios that gets you thinking.
   
   The State of Idaho decides that it is tired of onerous Federal control and events are engineered to create a confrontation between a state's right to determine its affairs and the need to maintain the union.
   
   In many ways the issues raised by the Civil War are re-examined, and the author makes a clear distinction that in this fight the bad guys might be the good guys.
   
   Some people might suggest that it can't happen here, but since the start of the current century we have witnessed an attack on American soil and the destruction of an American City. WHile events might not unfold as Harold Coyle envisions, something like AGAINST ALL ENEMIES is not as far fetched as some might believe.
   
   The book was written in 1996, in the aftermath of the OKC Federal Building bombing.
   
   I think it is his best book to date.



4. A typical harold coyle novel - introduces new central character and brings back some old favourites - strong action and flowing narrative - current events (at the time) play a big part. Thoroughly enjoyable.



5. Coyle has written some really engaging books: "Team Yankee", "Sword Point". In this one he gets the next generation of Virginia Military Institute - VMI, referred to by U. Virginia as the Virginia Marching Idiots - grads into his plot. Closing out General Scott Dixon's career - or soon to be done in the next book - he introduces Dixon's son Nathan. Nathan is a newly minted 2nd Lt, VMI grad, who goes into the INfantry so as to not be compared with his illustrious tanker father. Coyle doesn't miss an opportunity to make good comic use of Texas A&M and West Point graduates throughout the military.
   
   Set against a backdrop of Idaho's militia and written shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing by Tim McVey, this book still resonated today, six years after 9/11. Terrorist can be home grown! In this case, the militia influences the governor to kick the US out of Idaho after unfavorable results in a Federal Court case. Idaho declares war on the rest of the US!
   
   Although there is a lot to work with and some great action, the book really drags in the middle and just seems to coast to an ending. Coyle's always great on his armor engagement descriptions - especially here where you finally realize that the US Army is doing its level best to NOT shoot to kill by to damage the fighting infrastructure while trying to not kill the Idaho National Guardsman and women. Good bead read or to keep you entertained on an airplane flight. But, not his best!

5 comments about The Demon Lover: The Roots of Terrorism.

1. This book argues several points regarding world history. First, the victims, sacrifices and heroes of wars have always been defined in terms of males; the victorious general, the dead soldier, the grunt in the trenches, etc.., despite the fact the primary victims of wars are civilians - women and children. Second, the factors that demographic, economic and political causes that lead to wars can often be attributed to a male-dominated society. Third, women by nature would probably make better rulers and do a better job of avoiding war, but the political landscape in many countries is biased against women in leadership positions.
   
   The author presents a lot of factual and historical data to support her viewpoints. This includes interviews with war victims and criminals, citations of government documents, treaties, war plans, references to religious and historical works, and opinions by others who have explored the role of sex and gender in politics and war.
   
   The problem with the book and why I would not recommend it is the style the author uses. Her arguments come at the reader like bullets from a machine gun, quickfire and haphazard. Facts and examples are cited in quick succession without text to place them in context. The text is divided into chapters, but the number of arguments and sources of arguments are so numerous and varied that each chapter should be broken into subsections. Overall, the points in this book are insightful and I agree with most of them. But the writing style is horrible.



2. First the bad news!! The constant,cloying comments about the "patriarchal/ masculinist/ male dominated" world, and all the horrors unleashed by this world got on my nerves, and were truly way overdone! OK, this is a feminist tract, but enough's enough! Imagine a book,written by male or female, this angry about the feminine sex! Who would/could publish it?! Having said that, this is definitely among the most passionate and personal books I've ever read, full of interesting ideas starting with ancient mythology about how the author feels terrorists are incubated, mainly through the lazy, macho, women-hating males out there! She builds up a good case, and there is a lot of truth to her comments, even if she does vent too much spleen! The trip to 1980's Palestine was almost worth the price of the book, even if all women all described as wonderful, educated, child rearing, usually beaten by their male counterparts,drunken, uncaring lowlifes and bullies who can't wait to dress up in their guns and ammo suits, and kill whatever enemy is current. During the 1982 Lebanon War, all the artillery noise and racket suddenly stops! Why? So all the men can take a few hours off from killing and maiming to check out the World Cup Games on TV! Probably not far from the truth, like our Super Bowl! Lots of this book is downright mesmorizing, and terrifically well done, and the basic point of domineering war-loving men loving and leaving starry eyed women is probably true! Maybe a little dated, but even with it's flaws, a page turner well worth a few hours of one's time!



3. This book has never been more important than it is today. It's prophetic, and illuminating. It will shift the view you may have of terrorism, why we're at war, and who is doing the warring, permanently. A truly 'must read' volume. Morgan's best non-fiction.



4. This book attempts to analyze the interconnectness between war, sexuality and terrorism. The author, Robin Morgan, begins her book with historical accounts of violence and terrorism that she contends existed since biblical times. Morgan maintains that terrorism can assume many shapes, for instance: Multinational corporations, governments, rebel groups such as the IRA (Irish Republican Army) and other international freedom fighters. Morgan provides several example of how terrorism is defined. One definition of terrorism, according to political science professor Yehezkel Dror, is "the use of selective intense violence by small groups to undermine democratic government, and to bring about changes (ill-defined) in regime and society..." (2001:39). The rest of the definitions she provides hold the same idea as the definition provided by Dror. Reading this book was, frankly, disturbing. The author repeatedly makes inaccurate and out of context claims perpetuating negative stereotypes of terrorism, men, women and Arab and Muslim communities.
   Morgan also includes a timeline of accounts of violence against women between 1989 to 2000. In the time line she highlights such cases as the murder of Nicole Simpson by accused football player O. J. Simpson, serial killer Ted Bundy and Canadian gunman Marc Lepine. Morgan repeatedly fails to contextualize any of her theories and outlandish claims and states, "The long fuse of manhood that's been burning for centuries has, in this age of globalization, become a conflagration of heroes/martyrs/killers/. It is the era of the demon lover" (Morgan 2001:14).
   At first it may appear to the reader that perhaps with the references in the book such as Franz Fannon, C. Wright Mills, Hannah Arrendt or William O'Brien that maybe Morgan's argument holds weight, but while reading it became clear that Morgan's book is far from an accurate portrayal of violence against women, terrorism or sexuality and is a disservice to, especially Arab and Muslim communities.
   Within the contents of the Demon Lover, Morgan describes her two months visit to Palestine and her travels throughout the refugee camps conducting qualitative research and collecting stories from the women who live in these camps. Morgan misleads the reader by stating she doesn't want to take a tour bus with the other journalists, and specifically asserts that she doesn't want to infringe on peoples lives (2001: 250). Instead, using the accounts of Palestinian refugee women, Morgan exploits the women by contributing to the racist, stereotypical and completely inaccurate misrepresentation of Palestinian women. At one point in her book, she discusses how the World Cup soccer was on and how the men "finally" absolved from violence for a few moments to watch the game. Meanwhile the woman ran amuck "foraging" for food and burying their dead, as if Palestinian men lack the ability to mourn a lost son or sister to the atrocities of Israeli military occupation.
   Morgan continually perpetuates the stereotypes of Arab men being hypersexist and preoccupied by violence. She even goes so far as to say that through this intergenerational cycle, fathers force their sons to adopt the same ideologies about violence, disowning their sons if they refuse (2001:33). She also claims that men's sexual obsession with women is central to their masculinity. According to Morgan the majority of terrorists are male and her underlying premise is, women are seen only as "tokens" and are involved in acts of terrorism because of their love for a particular man, "a demon lover," draws them in and by whom they are seduced.
   Although she asserts that she doesn't support biological determinism, she continues to provide the reader with the idea that men are naturally violent and women are notoriously the peacemakers. In the final chapter, Beyond Terror: The Politics of Eros, Morgan argues that we need to abandon "the politics of Thanatos" and adopt "the politics of Ethos" (2001: 326). In other words the author calls for a solution of not subscribing to Thanatos or male/violence, but instead embracing a life of Eros or female/love.
   Demon Lover poses numerous rudimentary questions and never attempts to follow through and provide solutions to the list of endless of non-contextualized claims. Although in the contents of Demon Lover, Morgan claims not to have any expertise or solutions, she manages to provide only the most simplistic solution of the embracing Ethos.
   Throughout Demon Lover, Morgan makes statements and poses theories that all lack context. The detrimental effect of a lack of contextualization and the omission of accurate accounts of history leads to misinforming readers and reinforcing the stereotypes. One of the many injustices and disservices that Morgan provides in her research is she never addresses the fact that occupation and the politics of war impact societies, changing dynamics for all individuals



5. I would divide the book into two acts. The first half of the book is the philosophic explanation of terror and atrocity, the second half is more of a case study of women living in the context of terror. Also, in response to another reviewer's observation about out of date explanations being republished, the introduction of the book states that the book was slated to be republished prior to 9/11 and was actually pulled from the presses so that a new introduction could be written. It was not republished directly in response to the events in question. I read it the spring afterward. At that time I thought it was the only thing that actually explained the independent variables behind terror. I think her analysis is consistent with an academic understanding of agriculture and patriarchy and therefore consistent with a biblical view of the fallen world whereas civilization is contingent on patriarchal modes of production and authority whereby we displace God, no other permutation of civilization is possible without divine intervention. The alternative is tribalism. That said, her analysis is dead on.

5 comments about Fuse of Armageddon.

1. Originally published on my blog at hewhocutsdown.blogspot.com.
   
   Recently my wife & I sat down & had lunch with a much more experienced writer and author, Sigmund Brouwer. He & I are working together on a project that is yet to be released, but he gave me a gift in his latest work, entitled Fuse of Armageddon.
   
   It's a strange animal.
   
   In writing style, the pace matches some of Clancy's novels (most notably Rainbow Six), constantly accelerating toward the climax. This works both for and against the novel, as I finished it in two sittings (would have been one had I a longer flight), but there is only a much abbreviated dénouement to close it, where a few more pages would have been warranted.
   
   Thematically it takes aim at a very specific target market: open-minded, evangelical Christians who read thrillers such as the ridiculously popular Left Behind series. In all truth it is very open all, with vividly detailed locales and arguments that lay the foundation before building upon them, but this does not discount it's primary role. Fuse is really meant to expand evangelical Christians' thinking to really look at the consequences of a dispensational eschatology hell-bent on pre-millenialism. If you didn't understand that last sentence, don't worry about it; I didn't mean you.
   
   The sarcastic comments of Khaled Safady probably capture this irony the best. In listening in to a Christian group touring the Holy Land, he juts in (paraphrased):
   
   
   "In miles, how long is that river of blood?" (referring to the predicted river of blood from God's 'winepress of wrath')
   
   "Roughly two hundred miles, twenty-five feet wide and four and a half feet deep."
   
   "Incredible. How many people would this require?"
   
   "Two hundred million."
   
   "But I'm a physician. I've seen horrible accidents. I've seen people die. Any wound with enough blood loss to lead to death stops the heart long before the heart can pump itself dry. How will Christ squeeze the remaining blood from two hundred million bodies?"
   
   "Revelation tells us there is a great winepress and that the blood came from the winepress."
   
   "Incredible. All two hundred million bodies get fed through a winepress to be squeezed of their blood? How long would that take? Even at the rate of one body per second, that would only be 60 bodies per minute, 3600 bodies per hour, and from what I've calculated just now...maybe 80,000 per day. Make it 100,000 for even math."
   
   "I find this macabre..."
   
   "But earlier I heard a chorus of amens and hallelujahs...joy as you had us contemplate the deaths of liberals and gays, Arabs and Muslims who are left behind. I find that equally macabre"
   
   "The unjust will pay the price"
   
   "So you're telling me Jesus will return and spend his first 5 and a half years squeezing out the blood of his enemies?"
   
   
   If you're going to read Revelation and other biblical prophesy as literal events, fine. But accept the consequences of that interpretation, as grotesque and horrific as they may be. Or take a step back and seriously re-evaluate what brought you those beliefs.
   
   I know that I have gotten truly enraged; something that has happened only 3 times since leaving home; listening to a tele-evangelist giving Israel carte blanche for genocidal warfare. I in no way believe in supporting terrorism, and that includes the terrorism of nation-states.
   
   This book is not a theological breakdown, nor is it a political seminar or a primer on Mid-East policy. What it is, is a thriller that leaves you with the question: do my beliefs add or detract to the problems at hand? Is that because of me, or because of the belief?
   
   And that is what makes this such a wonderful book. It's a step back from my usual bookshelf (I prefer source works, history and Dostoevsky) but for a general audience, this is a voice that needs to be heard, a novel that needs to be read, and more than just read. It requires action, and like the Jonathan Silver in the novel, making the jump from theory to action can be a frightening one, but it can make a world of difference.
   
   Peace



2. Fuse of Armageddon is a novel to be enjoyed on two levels. On one level, it is a solid piece of Christian fiction. Sigmund Brouwer is a clever story teller who rises to the task of authoring a thriller tailored to a modern Christian audience. The plot's strength is its subtlety; the heroes are not gloriously converted or the perfect blend of holiness and worldly wisdom. They are fallible and at times their faith seems ambiguous. Even the villians have a point. Although Brouwer is clever writer who has done his homework, at times the plot lines seemed a bit rushed and the dialogue stiff and awkward.
   
   On the second level, the novel is essentially a trojan horse for Hanegraaf's theological position on the end times, which runs counter to the doctrines held by millions of evangelical Christians. Through the fictional characters, Hanegraaf is able to carefully pinpoint and apply pressure on some weak points of popular end times theology. For example, querying why there would be the need for restored Jewish sacrifices in the light of Christ's atonement does indeed give one pause. That it comes from a Islamic terrorist is a delicious irony.
   
   One flaw is the thinly veiled contempt for those who hold the contrary view, and that comes out in the book. Evidently to Hanegraaf, the millions of believers who hold to "Rapture theology" have basically been duped by slick talking TV preachers, and are stuck in an intellectual rut of not being able to think through difficult theological concepts. Maybe they need to listen to the Bible Answer Man broadcast more.
   
   To his credit though, Hanegraaf doesn't waste a lot time splitting doctrinal hairs, but emphasizes the disastrous impact of years of western Christian neglect toward the Palestinians and the geopolitical events in the Middle East. On this point, Hanegraaf's moral logic is unassailable.
   
   This is a very good book; very entertaining and morally engaging to anyone who has wondered about the Middle East crisis from a Biblical perspective. You may not agree with the thesis, but it contains a viewpoint that is intelligently and creatively presented.



3. Just a good thriller! First book I have read by either of these authors and I was very impressed!



4. I tend to read more nonfiction than fiction, but I must say I've enjoyed all 3 books in this series. All 3 have been definite page-turners.
   
   The plot is a little complicated at times and it can be hard to keep track of what's going on. Especially since the book keeps you guessing at a lot of characters' real intentions (which is one of the things that keeps this book so interesting). Although the book makes no effort to make the ending surprising, the characters keep you guessing and there's suspense until the very end.
   
   One reviewer commented that this book is a bit of a Trojan horse for Hanegraaff's ideas, which is true. A few scenes were obvious devices to work the theology in, but at least the scenes were still plausible and didn't seem too out of place. As Hanegraaff often says on his radio show, ideas have consequences, and the authors try to show that here. Dispensationalism has major consequences for the Middle East and our foreign policy.
   
   My only complaint was that this book was completely unrelated to the last two in the series. I hope the authors write another "Last Disciple" book soon so I can find out what happens to those characters too.
   
   Overall, I'd recommend this book, both for its ideas and the story itself. It's very good on all accounts, and a very worthwhile read that will certainly entertain you and may transform your thinking while it's at it.



5. There is nothing more annoying (to me) than to pick up a FICTION book and find the authors shoving their political agenda down your throat. I wasted my money on this book, wish I could get it back. The book started out really well, and then went straight to the toilet when the authors started preaching that the plight of the Palestinians is all the fault of Christians and Israel. Oh, yeah, strapping a bomb on your back and blowing up children in an ice cream shop is caused by the lack of funds sent in humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people. I'm so glad that these intelligent men have solved the problem that society has been grappling with for some time now. Oh, but, what about the rest of the Arab world, which has never allowed these people to claim a home, no matter where they wandered to. Even Jordan didn't want them. So, why don't they bomb the Jordanians? Gosh, kind of weakens your arguments, doesn't it? Oh, and of course, let's not forget their corrupt leadership that has lined it's own pockets with aid sent from the good ole US of A, aid that never reaches it's people. Next time, please warn people in advance that you have a political agenda in your book. It will save people money.
   
   Unless you buy into the garbage that WE are to blame for allowing Israel to reclaim their land, and we have been unfair in aid sent to the Palestinians (could have made Arafat a whole lot richer if we sent more), that all the hatred from the Muslims is because of these two reasons, then don't waste your money. That is the underlying premise that this book is based on.