5 comments about Unabomber: A Desire to Kill.

1. Released in November 1997, Robert Graysmith's UNABOMBER: A DESIRE TO KILL fills a current publication void. During the O.J. Simpson trials, trial watchers and media produced tomes of printed commentary. The woes of Ted Kaczynski, however, have vied for media attention with sundry other high-profile criminal trials, including those of accused Oklahomah City bombing accomplice Terry Nichols, announcer Marv Albert, and British au pair Louise Woodward. And even as opening arguments in Kaczynski's trial commence, the spotlight is being stolen by the biological weapons crisis in Iraq.

   Overshadowed by this three-ring circus, the Unabomber trial may actually reap benefits in the form of a jury untainted by media spin. Unfortunately, this won't be the case with readers who turn to Graysmith's book for the facts. Although it purports to be a documentary--and is set up amid the trappings of objective reporting--both appearances are false. It is a book-length editorial, infused with Graysmith's unchecked imagination, his overhelpful interpretations, and--unfortunately--with his relentless determination to cast David Kaczynski, who surrendered his brother to the Feds and virtually certain death, in the role of beatified saint.

   It's not that the book doesn't make compelling reading. It does, and that's its danger. For it is largely fiction, in which Graysmith's extensive investigations serve mostly to launch his creative interpretions of events, characters, and the relationships between them. This hand of invention first appears in Chapter 1, "The Vanishing Professor," depicting Kaczynski's days at Berkeley, where intermixed with factual background such as Kaczynski's 1967 faculty appointment, we find:

   "The Professor entered Cody's bookstore, gigantic and well-lit at 2460 Telegraph. He fingered some books on calculus, and climbed to the fiction department on the second floor. He saw Conrad's The Secret Agent, one of his favorites which he'd read many times . . . . The real-life Professor continued down Telegraph and passed Channing Way. The gray mantle of fog, speeding on its way, met a blue-tinged and fading golden light. There were many on the street but the Professor had mastered the ability always to be alone, even in crowds. And what crowds they were to the unhappy man. Grim, wide-eyed skeletons. Walking skulls, their featured [were] etched away by the street lights leaving only staring eyes"(p. 7-8).

   Wonderful writing--highly atmospheric--it's worthy of Dickens. But, Dickens did not pretend his writing to be other than fiction. This incident--which never happened--is used by Graysmith as visual scene-setting; he does not scruple to attribute to his "real-life Professor" actions, emotions, and perceptions invented out of the whole cloth. However, nothing but scrutiny tells the reader that Graysmith is willing to embroider in the service of aesthetic presentation. And if one thinks that insult to the truth is slight here--who cares if Kaczynski saw strangers' faces as skulls?--one ought to think twice. Invention is a slippery slope for Graysmith, and his descent accelerates throughout his pages.

   For example, the author's one-sided opinions regarding the tenor of Ted Kaczynski's childhood upbringing are set forth as truth. "By the seventies," writes Graysmith, "the Professor had convinced himself that his parents were insensitive, if not cruel, to him during his formative years." However, David Kaczynski's suspicions of Ted's mental state are quoted as solemn fact: "One senses [in Ted] a psyche that fells itself terribly isolated and threatened in the world, tormented by its own complexities, unable to hold things in their proper perspective or to find comfort security or rest for itself "(p. 450).

   Such claims are reinforced by sentimental diction: the elder Kaczynski is "the gentle father," while Ted consistently has "a sly smile" and "tortured thoughts." Kaczynski's assertions about parental abuse are made into delusions produced by, and in a circular way proof of, his diseased mind. Further, because Graysmith depicts David Kaczynski as motivated by none but noble motives in turning his brother in, he must bend every interpretatation to fit this sanctified portrayal. All too frequently this verges on melodrama. In a chapter actually entitled "A Brother's Anguish" appears this passage:

   "Now the investigators had enough that they felt they would have to speak to David's mother, Wanda. Was this the worst moment of all for him? He had never mentioned his suspicions to her . . . . Haltingly, he told her of the last few months and of his excruciating decision, the harrowing nights, the haunting dreams "(p. 381).

   By contrast, there are significant omissions of material one would have thought Graysmith compelled to include--but to do so would have embarrassed his double portrait of the crazed Ted and sainted David. A salient example is Graysmith's choice NOT to include the text of the Unabomber Manifesto, thereby denying readers the chance to study it firsthand. As those who have read it know, its level-headedness hardly suggests a madman; this is largely why federal prosecutors wish to use the Manifesto as evidence. However, Graysmith evaluates its freely in its absence, declaring it permeated with rage. He also uses excerpts from it as headings to each chapter, exposing another awkward omission for those familiar with the Manifesto's contents:

   ". . .a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system . . . . (paragraph 51). . . take the gypsies. The gypsies commonly get away with theft and fraud because their loyalties are such that they can always get other gypsies to give testimony that "proves" their innocence. Obviously the system would be in serious trouble if too many people belonged to such groups"(footnote to paragraph 52).

   Given Graysmith's format of chapter headings, this was the obvious choice to lead the one recounting David's communications with the FBI. It is more than obvious that David's actions constitute a textbook example of the phenomenon described by his brother: the individual whose family loyalties have been weakened and subsumed by loyalty to the system. It is equally obvious, regretfully, that Graysmith had no intention of permitting his readers to make this connection, and this attitude of concealment is the book's chief handicap. Consequently, his choice to entitle the chapter on Ted "Cain" and the one on David "Abel" is not surprising, but he ought to recall that it was Cain who was the agent of Abel's death, and not the other way round.

   Still, the book has many virtues, with vivid writing heading the list, in particular when the author evokes graphic images or communicates the technical construction of the many bombs. Graysmith is also a gifted illustrator, whose pen-and-ink drawings of the landscape around Lincoln, Montana and of Kaczynski's Thoreauvian cabin augment the historical perspective derived from his regional studies. Essentially, the book is a wildly uneven agglomerate of sterling scholarship and serious deficits of objectivity. What the author brings alive is impressive, but it is frequently not what took place.

   Another important book is being published at the same time, Dominick Dunne's Another City, Not My Own (Crown, October 1997). Like Graysmith, Dunne has created a dramatic, highly imaginative treatment of a high profile criminal matter--the O.J. Simpson murder trials--but as a novel, Dunne's book wears its fictional status openly. One can't help thinking this would have been the wiser choice for Graysmith--it would have given his speculative talents free rein without distorting real lives. In any case, the reader must take the bad with the good--no other book exists that so coherently brings together the many strands in the Unabomber matter, regardless of the author's bias. UNABOMBER: A DESIRE TO KILL is an admitted "must read," even though the reader must beware.




2. This was a great descriptive book about the UNABOMBER'S whole life- from his successes in college, being a genius and going on to become a proffesor at Harvard as well as other highly educated universities to the components that made up his killing machines.



3. I live in Lincoln, Montana and I found a number to statements in this book not true. They may be small statements, not very significant, but in a non-fiction book every statement should be lchecked for truth before being printed. We do not have a bus that goes from Lincoln to Helena. If just one statement is not true, then it makes you wonder what else in the book is not true.



4. Everyone seemed to know about the Unabomber. There wasn't a bigger surprise than when they found the maker of some 15 bombs was a Harvard graduate living in the woods in Montana. This book helps explain why Theodore Kaczynski had reasons for his mail bombs, why he picked his targets, and it will answer that important question, "How could a poverty-stricken man, riding a bike, living in a shack with no electricity or running water, spread fear from coast to coast, and elude the police for almost eightenn years?"



5. The story of the Unabomber is quite fascinating, but I feel it could have been told better. This book could have used some more aggressive editing; some of the writing is downright sloppy and it could have been told just as thoroughly using a lot fewer pages.
   Here's an example of what bugs me (page 126):
   Much of their squad's training is done by the FBI and the military. And so one comfort is that if a bomb squad gets "into a situation that was over your head, it's easy to call for help. You can call military -87th EOD.
   Where's the editor?
   The book is worth reading but, as I said, could have been better if some more time had been spent cleaning it up.

5 comments about Harvard and the Unabomber: The Education of an American Terrorist.

1. Every leader of our government should read this book, NOW! It is brilliant!!! Professor Chase shows us that the unabomber was not a psychological aberration, but rather, the product of a society which promotes pessimism and despair, creates technology without the restraint of ethics, and uses power without considering moral consequences. All terrorism shares these common roots... without facing this fact, without recreating ourselves with optimism and high ideals, we shall never win the "war" on terror. Jeff Zekas, Susanville, California, 7 March 2007.



2. _Harvard and the Unabomber: The Education of an American Terrorist_ by Alston Chase, published in 2003, is an attempt to explain the motivations behind the reign of terror unleashed on the American people by Ted Kaczynski (dubbed "the Unabomber" by the FBI). Kaczynski was a brilliant man with a 170 I.Q., a graduate of Harvard University, and at one time a professor of mathematics; however, he left his career in mathematics to go live out in the wilderness of Montana. Feeling increasingly alienated by industrial society (what he refers to in his _Manifesto_ as "the system") and increasingly troubled by the loss of "wild nature" to modernization, Kaczynski felt that he was left with no way out but to unleash a reign of terror upon those who he believed were furthering the technological system. Ironically, much of Kaczynski's justification for his murders, can be found in the writings of more mainstream sociologists. A constant theme that recurs in sociological literature (the very literature that Kaczynski himself read and studied) is the sense of alienation and anomie brought about by the disruption of traditional ways of life through technological advance. Further, the modern science of ecology tells us that man has caused untold amounts of harm to nature and has disrupted the wilderness, perhaps irrepairably. Kaczynski who for years had felt himself an outsider to modern society, first as a high I.Q. student and intellectual in a largely blue collar community, then as a student from a blue collar background among upper class Harvard students, and finally as a research mathematician (a field well-known for extremes in introversion), came to identify with the environmental movement in part because of his love for the wilderness. As a "green anarchist", Kaczynski saw little hope for modern industrial society and with each technological advance saw further dangers brought to humanity and the wild. This led him to take extreme measures against those who he believed were furthering "the system". This book delves into the influences on Kaczynski's thinking: the influence of Harvard University and its curriculum (which maintained that judgment was impossible and that values were meaningless), the influence of the Cold War, the CIA, and psychological experimentation on distorting Kaczynski's underlying perceptions of reality, and ultimately the influence of the 1960s and the environmental movement. As the author repeatedly states, "bad men do what good men dream of", and for those of us who have often felt disillusioned and disaffected with modernity and "the system", there is a certain sense of "There but for the grace of God go I", when we encounter the case of Kaczynski. There is also a sense of embarrassment felt by many who find that the very ideas they have been advocating are taken to their logical extreme by an individual like Kaczynski. Modern technological society has left many feeling profoundly alienated, and the loss of wilderness and traditional ways of life has only furthered this alienation. Those who champion "the system" and naively accept the idea of "progress" frequently scoff at such notions as "primitivism"; however, they then refuse to see the manifold harm that has been wrought upon nature and society by their own advances. It must be said though that while this book does appear to be somewhat sympathetic to Kaczynski and his ideas and way of life, it ultimately must not fall short in condemning his methods for attaining his goals as cowardly and futile. Further, I believe the author should not so readily dismiss the notion of "mental illness" in the case of Kaczynski. Kaczynski was obviously an extremely introverted and hyper-sensitive (he feared loud noises for example) individual whose inability to fit into modern society was readily apparent. As a society we have no other way of dealing with such people than to label them as "mentally ill". Further, it seems likely that there is some sort of underlying biological basis for such tendencies; though, the extent to which this biological basis operates is difficult to determine.
   
   The author begins by discussing the crimes of the Unabomber. Noting his bomb-making skills and also noting some of the obscure influences on his ideas. For example, Kaczynski was obviously a fan of the novelist Joseph Conrad (a fellow Pole), and particularly enjoyed his _The Secret Agent_. Kaczynski signed his manifesto with the epithet "FC", which may have been taken from _The Secret Agent_. Kaczynski also advocated the "scientific method" and philosophically was a rationalist and strict positivist, though he ironically saw science and technology as destructive forces. Other instances of Kaczynski's intellectual games, include the recurrence of the word "wood" in his destructive acts. The author also explains various aspects of Kaczynski's "mountain man" existence which were distorted by the media. For example, Kaczynski was portrayed by the media as a "loner" (though he was known and liked by a few individuals who lived near him) and a "slob" (though his cabin was as neat as a pin).
   
   Following this, the author turns to the influence of Harvard on Ted Kaczynski. The author notes the fact that Kaczynski was from a blue collar community, in which he was an outsider both as a consequence of his high intelligence and strong mathematical aptitude and because his family were intellectuals. Kaczynski subsequently attended Harvard, where he remained largely alienated. At Harvard, Kaczynski faced a General Curriculum which de-emphasized the underpinnings of Western Civilization and Christian values instead promoting materialistic nihilism. Further, at the time the Cold War was raging, so intelligent individuals like Kaczynski were forced into mathematics and scientific related fields (something which Kaczynski always held against his parents). It was while he was at Harvard that Kaczynski participated in a psychological experiment directed by Henry A. Murray (who was influential in the early CIA). This experiment sought to assess alienation and may have promoted a breakdown in the mind of Kaczynski. At the time, the CIA was engaging in many reckless policies, including unlawful and unethical experimentation with LSD and other drugs and mind control (something that Kaczynski would make note of in his _Manifesto_). Kaczynski left Harvard to become a graduate student at Michigan and then a professor at Berkeley before dropping out of mainstream society and returning to the wilderness.
   
   In terms of philosophical influences, Kaczynski was a voracious reader. Principally though his writings seem to be distortions and perversions of the ideas of radical localists and anarchists such as Jacques Ellul (particularly _The Technological Society_) and E. F. Schumacher. Kaczynski also was influenced by primitivism, and the author distinguishes between different kinds of primitivism in the writings of sociologists and in Kaczynski himself. Kaczysnki's thinking also appeared to resonate with radical environmentalists such as the Earth Liberation Front, EarthFirst!, Edward Abbey (writer of _The Monkey Wrench Gang_), and anarcho-primitivist John Zerzan.
   
   It is an unfortunate and sad fact that Kaczynski found himself so alienated by society that he chose to lash out as he did. His methods of attacking the system were indeed cowardly and deplorable, and ultimately only resulted in the deaths of many innocents. He achieved little by way of halting progress or restoring the wilderness which he loved so much. This book is a good book in attempting to understand the motivations of Kaczynski. Ultimately to prevent such atrocities in the future, it will be necessary for society to rethink itself, for people to be less greedy, and to achieve a viable alternative to modern materialistic decline. Whether or not such a reversal can be accomplished at all remains to be seen.



3. Author Alston Chase is a contemporary of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski. Both attended Harvard in the late 1950's, both worked as university professors and, coincidentally, both retired to seclusion in Montana. Chase originally set out to write a book about the legacy of 1960's America. His research on Kaczynski revealed that contrary to the media's snap judgment, Kaczynski was not a product of his 1960's time at Berkley. The Unabomber manifesto is, in fact, rooted in 1950's Cold War ideology and the teachings of liberal arts colleges such as Harvard during that decade. Chase writes, "Once they had made up their minds about Kaczynski--whether deciding that he is insane, a profound philosopher, a misguided ideologist, or a representative of the sixties--many people lost interest in him. University scholars all too willing to devote seminars to such pop cultural doss as the Grateful Dead and Star Trek have virtually ignored the manifesto, producing just two articles on it since its appearance."
   
   In the first half of the book, Chase provides a chronology of Kaczynski's crimes and his never-ending quest for a more powerful, more deadly bomb. Chase sheds lights on the futility of the FBI search and the numerous red herrings Kaczynski set our for law enforcement. The media, cut off from Kaczynski's cabin, were quick to label his messy and unkempt, when in reality he was meticulously organized. He kept a standard mountain tradition of not wasting water bathing while doing heavy winter work, and for that he was labeled a strange, unclean hermit. The media interviewed people Kaczynski didn't like, and they labeled him a misanthrope. When Chase interviewed Kaczynski's friends in the local Montana town, however, they remembered him as friendly and intelligent, if somewhat reserved. And the desolate cabin in the woods? It was within hearing distance of a highway, and Kaczynski had enough neighbors that he managed to keep up several boundary and land use disputes.
   
   Chase's thesis is that Kaczynski was forever scarred by a series of intense psychological experiments he participated in as a Harvard undergraduate student. Researcher Henry A. Murray, a veteran of DoD psychology experimentation conducted highly unethical multi-year studies on a group of students. The subjects were deceived about the nature and length of the study, which aimed to discover their fundamental life philosophy and place them in highly stressful interrogations to observe their reactions to demeaning, belittling questioning. Chase provides a never-before-seen look at the experiments Harvard had tried to seal, but he never makes an ironclad case that this study was the linchpin for the creation of the Unabomber.
   
   The book also exposes a dark side of the US military involvement in funding academic and psychological studies in the 1950's. During that time, the government wanted to fight the Cold War with propaganda and psychological manipulation. Murray's Harvard experiments descended from his military work on these subjects. By the mid-1940's a quarter of all US psychologists were serving the US military, and in the 1950's, the CIA was directly and indirectly (via dummy foundations) funding a significant portion of academic research in psychology.
   
   Chase's book serves two important purposes--(1) revealing the true Ted Kaczynski, a brilliant and disturbed man who was judged quickly and incorrectly by the media and (2) revealing the military's significant influence on two decades of psychological research in the U.S. Chase doesn't have a smoking gun for the creation of a domestic terrorist, but he probes previously unexplored and unpublished areas in his search for answers about the genesis of Ted Kaczynski as the Unabomber.



4. the book "harvard and the unabomber" addresses several interesting issues that many rebellious intellectuals face. Among them - the desire of some to move to remote places like Montana, their issues with poor career prospects there, the double standards that many of them possess when they attack "the system", their issues with emotivism and moral relativism, and their skepticism of the moral legitimacy of authority. It also addresses the schism in academia over the question of whether a core curriculum should be put into place, and whether the said curriculum should inculcate moral standards in the students or not. It also addresses the fact that a Harvard degree is not necessarily a guarantee of success - that many Harvard graduates end up as nobodies.
   
   Those are incidental, of course, to the main topic of the book, which is how these themes have influenced the Unabomber.



5. after reading the manifesto several times, this book really added some perspective.
   
   gripping at times.
   
   lots of great references.
   
   highly recommend.

5 comments about The Unabomber and the Zodiac.

1. This book is a remarkable analysis of the shared similarities of two high-profile killers; one of which (the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski) was captured after an 18-year hunt by authorities, but ONLY after being identified by a family member through his writings; the other (the Zodiac) still unidentified almost 40 years after his reign of terror, leaving behind a myriad of correspondences, coded messages and elusive clues to his mysterious identity.
   
   Chapter by Chapter, Douglas Oswell breaks down the parallels of known works of the Zodiac and known works of Kaczynski offering the reader a clearer insight into each similarity. He covers both pro and con of each situation, allowing the reader the ability to decide for himself as to whether or not these two could possibly be one-in-the-same.
   
   Of most particular interest and one that struck this reader with awe, is each killer's uniqueness for communicating through writing to the media (in some instances, the same media), the police and their victims; their knowledge and use of code; their need for public attention, their teasing ways of threatening the public (then withdrawing their threat) and their high-powered use of literary allusion.
   
   Bottom line - not only is this book an outstanding examination of these two murderous legends as it relates to the unsolved murders of the Zodiac, it presents itself as an extremely well-written, highly-educated and exceptional tool for use in any classroom of criminology or psychology.



2. I must confess that I began Doug Oswell's The Unabomber and The Zodiac with anything but an open mind. Having co-authored a book on the Zodiac case myself, the idea that Zodiac and the Unabomber might be the same person initially struck me as far fetched. From the very first chapter, however, Oswell's carefully reasoned, meticulous analysis put major dents in my skepticism. He reveals an amazingly detailed knowledge of both of these very complex cases. His reasoning is quite measured inasmuch as he does not assert in any final way that Zodiac and the Unabomber are one and the same. His analysis does succeed in revealing many startling and though-provoking similarities between Zodiac and the Unabomber. And, I must confess, his writing includes keen insights into the psychology of the Zodiac that I missed in my own analysis. While I'm still not fully convinced that the Unabomber is the Zodiac, I do now see the common threads in their underlying psychodynamics and I am far more open to the possibility that the Unabomber may be the Zodiac. Oswell's book is extremely well written and thought out. I recommend it without hesitation.
   
   David Van Nuys, Ph.D.
   co-author, This Is The Zodiac Speaking: Into The Mind of A Serial Killer



3. Instead of being a 250 page book, this would have been much better as a 5-10 page essay. I have read pretty much anything there is to read on The Zodiac. I was willing to read this with an open mind, but the author did little to impress me or make me believe in his theory. Could The Unabomberand the Zodiac be one and the same? Sure, anything is possible. To me the author himself came across as not open minded. It comes across as he has his opinion, and is out to prove it by twisting everything into one big giant piece of evidence to back up his beliefs. SOme of the things he says to use as proof is that both men used the word "statement" in their letters. Such as "in regards to the statement on the news". He says they used statement instead of "say, says, saying". WEll does the sentence " In regards to the saying on the news" make sense. They used the word "statement", because it was the logical word. Also his proof that both men were intellegent. Last i checked there were many intellegent people in the world. You can make many people look guilty of something if you try hard enough. This is what the author seemed to me to be doing here. Only using facts that would support his statement, and ignoring facts that would make it look less possible for them to be the same person. Also, i believe, in an attempt to make him look more intellegent, and therfor more qualified to author a book on this topic, the author seemed to go out of his way to use big words and intellegent sounding words, wich i feel slowed the book down, and would make people have to look up many of the words. Each paragraph was like reading the previous one. Just repeating the same thing over and over.
   I give the author credit for his obvious hard and dilligent work in trying to prove his theory. He obviously did do a great deal of research and work, however i feel he was only willing to print the part of his work that attempted to prove his point. Very single minded. The book should have been more of a chacne for the reader to reach his own conclussion, instead it was an attempt to make you agree with his. But to me and the way he came up with this theory, i could just as easily make my neighbor in Cleveland Ohio look like a possible subject. ANyone can look like a subject with the right twisting of the facts, proper wording, and developing of illogical theories.
   As i said at the begging i ahve read pretty much any thing that has been written on Zodiac, and read quit a bit on the Unabomber, though not hearly as much as Zodiac, and of all i have read on both subjects this by far the biggest waste of money i have spent.



4. Wow, I never would have even considered the possibility. Mr. Oswell has obviously performed a wealth of research in preparation for authoring this book. The many analogies, comparative data and statistical analyses were overwhelmingly convincing! It is hard to dismiss the possibility of the Unabomber and Zodiac killer being one in the same having read this book. I would recommend this book to anyone who has an interest in the Unabomber and/or the Zodiac killings. It is packed full of detailed information and analysis on each notorious killer.



5. First let me suggest that if this is your first book on either subject I'd start with some other selections. My impression was that the author assumes the reader has a fundamental understanding of both criminal cases, so he does not go into detail explaining the grizzly events attributable to the killer/s. Again, this book is specifically about the similarities in the Unabomber and Zodiac and not about the actual crimes.
   
   
   The books strength is that it paints a new and intriguing picture of the Zodiac's profile and puts it in a real context - that being Ted Kacynski. The author provides an interesting contrast to some other recent books that profiles Zodiac as nothing more than marginally clever and very lucky. However, I'd ultimately categorize this book as trivia as it frequently succumbs to drawing ludicrous connections and assumptions that strain credibility. Had the author stayed focused on the similar pathology of both men it probably would have been a stronger book.

5 comments about Unabomber: The Secret Life of Ted Kaczynski.

1. See the title? Well with this book you get to know an awful lot (repeatedly) about how the author new the forests betterthan the unabomber...ad nauseam. This is a book about the author, about 85% and very little about Ted Kaczynski. When you have tired for the umpteenth time of how but for the author we may never have found "Ted's Secret Cabin" you will have to seek out other books to find out about the unabomber.
   Is it me but why have the last two books I bought from American authors (last one supposed to be about Tim McVeigh) all about themselves and not the subject matter? Very very tedious book and to be avoided if you want to know much about the unabomber but great if you want to learn how skillful and terrific the author is.



2. Great job capturing the complexity of the situation and awesome depictions of the wilderness



3. Although, in general, I enjoyed this book, I (also) got tired of (supposed) writer, Mr. Waits, lauding himself and how (now that he was armchair quarter backing) he knew more than Ted, the FBI and and town locals - combined. He paints himself as the smartest hero in this book - heck, any book. He plays classical piano, speaks several languages and is skilled in most earth sciences. Yet, Mr. Waits never puts two and two together - that when a new weirdo moves into town - construction equipment and cabins start being destroyed, animals begin turning up dead or tortured and at least one person is shot in the back (of this small mountain community) and that it just may be... the NEW LOCAL WEIRDO committing these crimes. Hello! Because the local area and topography itself is so interesting and the little glimpses of Ted are fascinating I was able to make it to the end of this short read. But, I also got tired or hearing Mr. Waits grandstanding.



4. 
   A cryptic but scenic window into the clandestine side of the life, times, and the surroundings of the very disturbed mind of the Unabomber. Told by a friend as it was lived secretly by Harvard Math whiz kid and genius UC Berkeley Professor Dr. Theodore Kaczynski for more than 25 years in the mountains and environs of Lincoln, Montana.
   
   The reader should be warned that this book is not high academic political science or a learnt psychology treatise: Just the basic outlines of a life lived on the edge of American civilization: the bare bone facts with occasional speculation as to what Ted was up to, or usually down to, during his hermitically sealed life away from normal society.
   
   Chris Waits came about as close to a friend as Kaczynski was ever likely to have. Yet, for 25 years Kaczynski succeeded in remaining an elusive enigma even to Chris, his only friend and closest neighbor as he went about his calculated mission of committing the most horrendous of evil deeds. Chris helped Ted; allowed him to roam about his gulch; and then after Ted's arrest, helped the FBI uncover a treasure trove of evidence against him -- catalogued and detailed by Ted himself in such a meticulous fashion that only a compulsively twisted mind could have maintained it. Had Ted gone to trial, his own archive would have indicted and convicted him.
   
   It included, among many others things, Ted's secret cabin in which 22,000 pages of notes chronicling every evil deed committed -- including a vast amount of local vandalism was found. It chronicled how and why they were conceived, fashioned and delivered. Plus lists and schemata of his experiments, portions, machining techniques, wiring diagrams, etc. and Ted's own secret classification scheme and evaluation of his handy work: Altogether, a truly astounding window into a very, very disturbed mind.
   
   The book details how a truly evil mind, operating passive aggressively behind a screen of contrived sanctimonious principles about the evils of technology, and on the margins of society, works. All of the well-known clichés about genius being a close cousin of insanity and about its huge capacity for evil apply here. But it must also be said, if only in passing, that another unstated subtext of the book leaves us with a larger more disturbing message about our society in general that cannot continue to be ignored:
   
   It is that the growing isolation, disconnectedness and alienation in American society is becoming the incubator if not the mainspring for turning large reservoirs of passive aggressive hatred, resentment, and thoughts of entitlements and revenge into an engine that drives impulses towards terrorism.
   
   Whether it be a one man terrorist cell as in the case of a Ted Kaczynski or a Timothy McVeigh, and Rudolph Roberts, or a group coalescing around a committed but perhaps misguided idea, such as the white supremacists groups and militia of the Mid-West, larger and larger numbers of people are starting to feel that there is no legitimate avenue of expression or release from what they perceive as the oppressive conditions of our society?
   
   Whenever and wherever passive-aggressive hatred and resentment meets with a "felt sense of entitlement" and this sense is combined with a religious-like (and sometimes even religious) justification that can be used as cover, the jig is up: Any kind of action no matter how evil can then be justified in the name of a supposed higher moral principle.
   
   One can argue that with this tried and true formula, the threats of internal terrorism from the likes of Ted Kaczynskis, Timothy McVeighs, and Rudolph Roberts is equal to that posed by outside groups like al Qaeda.
   
   In the end, Kaczynski's main request, to publish his meandering anti-technology tract was yielded to anyway, but after 25 years, untold mayhem, death and injuries. And then it was agreed to under duress. Why not have a forum and a newspaper devoted exclusively to the open expression of any and all cockamamie ideas and grievances? Would that not serve as a release valve for some of the pent up frustration of the increasing number of alienated activists? This in some weird sense can be seen as enlightened democracy too.
   
   Three stars



5. I found this a fascinating read although not particularly well-written. Some of the chapters read like a series of statements rather than a flowing text. Like many other reviewers, I expected more information about Ted Kaczynski and the actual investigation; still, I was enthralled with the personal reaction of a Lincoln native to Ted Kaczynski's arrest.
   
   I found Waits' shock and dismay entirely believable and human. It is easy, in hindsight, to say, "Why didn't people figure it out?" It is difficult to remember that 25 years doesn't take place in a tidy 100-page summary. We are talking about 9,000 24-hour days during which one man's behavior and the occasional incident take place amidst a thousand incidents, conversations, foibles, habits . . .
   
   I think Chris Waits felt the need to "exorcise" Ted Kaczynski's ghost--to try to understand exactly what he missed while he was getting married and working massive logging jobs, etc. The book is him looking back and trying to piece together these odd disjointed events that seemed, at the time, rather innocuous. Of course, once he puts it all together, it looks obvious, but that's because he has created a tidy narrative for the reader.
   
   Lastly, I didn't think Chris Waits was grandstanding throughout the book. The book is written by Chris Waits AND Dave Shors. Part of the book's uneven tenor, in my opinion, occurs because the reader is not always hearing Chris Waits' voice. Rather, Dave Shors is writing in Chris Waits' "voice". I'm not sure I could guess what Chris Waits REALLY sounds like (other than from his journal entries and a few places that sound like interviews). I think these factors should be taken into consideration when judging the book.

5 comments about Hunting the American Terrorist: The FBI's War on Homegrown Terror.

1. Hunting the American Terrorist: The FBI's War on Homegrown Terror
   
   An amazing journey through a top FBI case. Can't wait until the next book by these authors comes out--HOMELAND INSECURITY!



2. The Terrorist is not something of strictly Arabic manufacture. "Hunting the American Terrorist: The FBI's War on Homegrown Terror" is a look at what many Americans don't know exists - those who would call themselves American citizens and do harm upon their own people. A look at these bizarre individuals and the acts they have visited upon us, such as Timothy McVeigh and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombings, it also gives the optimistic light on how these individuals are cracked down upon daily. A frightening and eye opening look at a subject not often talked about, "Hunting the American Terrorist" is a must for anyone who would truly understand Terror.



3. 
   Written by Terry D. Turchie and Dr. Kathleen M. Puckett this book chronicles the hunt for several American terrorists. Unlike traditional terrorists who operate in cells and therefore by sheer numbers could make mistakes leading to their capture, the American terrorist proceeds as a "lone wolf." Folks like Theodore Kaczynski better known as the "Unabomber" and Eric Rudolph, the bomber of several abortion clinics and the 1996 Atlanta Olympics are two examples of this different kind of terrorist. While these individuals may share ideological beliefs with various organizations, they never fit in with those organizations primarily because of their personalities. As such, ostracized and alone, they carry a one person war against their targets.
   
   Being one person as opposed to a group makes them harder to catch assuming they don't make mistakes. This means that psychological profiles are of huge importance and must change as the suspect and the case evolves. That is where the work of co-author Dr. Kathleen M. Puckett and others involved in profiling or behavioral sciences becomes so important.
   
   While the Unabomber began in 1978, the person still wasn't caught when Terry D. Turchie took over the case in 1994. It had been a little over a year since the latest violent attacks and the task force was no closer to solving the case. The book chronicles the next seven years of the hunt as Mr. Turchie leads the task force. Seven years that were fraught with some success, bureaucratic power struggles, and inaccurate profiling until Special Agent and Behavioral Expert, Dr. Puckett was added to the task force among other issues. As the Unabomber Task Force evolves to hunt this new type of criminal, it makes waves inside the FBI and outside making the bureaucracy almost a bigger problem than the Unabomber.
   
   While Mr. Turchie chronicles the bureaucratic side of things, in the second half of the book Special Agent Dr. Kathleen M. Puckett shares her thoughts from the behavioral analyst point of view. One of the things made clear is that the analysis must change as the events happen. The original profile offered by analysts at Quantico regarding the Unabomber was fundamentally wrong from the very start. Sixteen years later, the profile hadn't changed when Mr. Turchie took over the task force and that grossly incorrect profile had failed the case for years. Through her section, Dr. Puckett chronicles the case and how she looked at things differently than others did over the years.
   
   Also covered in smaller pieces are the hunts for Eric Rudolph and Timonthy Mcveigh. Also covered and discussed is the study Dr. Puckett provided for the Counter Terrorism division, regarding the profile of the lone terrorist. A phenomenon that could create an international lone terrorist just as easily as an American lone terrorist. The implications of that are chilling.
   
   This 294 page book including index provides an interesting look into some of the most notorious cases in American history. While there is a tone of self congratulatory praise running through the work, the book through text and photographs explains well how two high level insiders considered the cases and the events and people surrounding them. It is not a totally objective view of events nor is it intended to be as accounts by insiders are always biased towards the authors. The book recounts in interesting detail the author's perspectives on these cases and serves as an example of how such these types of investigations will most likely be conducted in the future when another one strikes.
   
   
   Kevin R. Tipple (copyright) 2008



4. This real life crime book documents the personal experiences of Terry Turchie, the FBI field agent in charge of the UNABOM Task Force comprising of over 350 interagency personnel.
   
   Terry wrote the 65 page Search Warrant used to capture Ted Kacyznski at his Montana cabin retreat, and he was the first agent to enter that cabin with his fellow CSI expert. What they uncovered there, led to the trial and ultimate conviction of one of the most insidious home grown terriorist in recent memory.
   
   Mr. Turchie's co-author, Kathleen Puckett, PhD was the criminal profiler on this same Unabom Task Force that spanned almost two decades until Terry led the FBI team into that lonely and remote Rocky Mountain cabin.
   
   The detailed account of this arrest, as well as Turchie and Puckett's involvement in the capture and arrest of Eric Rudolph, the "Atlanta Olympics Bomber," is a fascinating and riveting story of real crime fighters in todays age of domestic terriorism. In 1999, Mr. Turchie was promoted to Assistant Director in charge of Domestic Counter Terriorism until his retirement from the FBI.
   
   Terry is one of those unsung heroes, that Americans can be proud to have had serving in the ranks of our primary law enforcement agency in the United States.



5. Although the insider stories of how decisions were made on the UNABOMBER task force were certainly interesting, the self congratulatory tone of the primary author make it a difficult read; unless of course you can read while rolling your eyes. For example, Turchie claims that his aggressive tactics drove the Atlanta Olympics bomber, Eric Rudolph, underground for 5 years. PLEASE! Another book by a Georgia investigator explains that local sheriff's deputies knew where to find Rudolf when the arrest warrant was issued but were ordered to wait for the FBI to arrive so they could claim the arrest. No mention of that part of the story in this book!
   
   I wonder what else was left out......

5 comments about Unabomber: On the Trail of America's Most-Wanted Serial Killer.

1. The book was intersting, but a bit to brief for my liking. The actual story of the Unabomber life took less than 150 pages. The book details each of his bombings and suggests the reasoning behind the target and M.O. Douglas also takes you through his thoughts in the investigation. Many readers feel Douglas is a bit arrogant in his writing. I do not agree with that opinion, nor do I feel this book is written that way.

   The rest of the book was not very interesting outside of the inclusion of the full manifesto of the Unabomber. The manifesto contains nothing shocking, but contains what you might expect an outsider hermit radical to say. I'm sure there are better books about the Unabomber than this, so I suggest you try a more detailed account.




2. Douglas may present a clear chronology of events relating to the investigation of Unabomber. However, that is the sole limit of the books's worth. The remainder of the book is a staging ground for Douglas' brand of psycholinguistics, the analysis of a person's patterns of expression and thought in order to provide a psychological profile of the person. Instead of accomplishing that, though, in any meaningful way, Douglas perpetrates a sort of freehand poetic literary criticism on the so-called Manifesto. He completely fails to gain any insight into Unabomber's own statement of policy in "Industrial Society and Its Future". On page fifty-three, Douglas boils down his view by claiming simply that the Unabomber's fixation on wood and nature "...probably served as his rationale for setting the bombs off, his substitute for whatever deeper psychological problems had actually caused him to commit the crimes. A lot of violent terrorist activity is the result of political beliefs, but at the same time, I've never seen a violent terrorist yet who I didn't feel had deep psychological problems and a serious character disorder." Oh, yeh. Lest we forget, Douglas goes on: Unabomber "diabolical" too.

   Douglas essentially claims that the Unabomber's activity is irrational and eludes sensible thought. That is Douglas' most egregious fundamental flaw. If he's serious in that claim, then he is less insightful than he himself seems to think he is. On the other hand, Douglas' apparent perspicasity in his craft leads me to think that he has another goal in mind: distributing disinformation to the segment of the citizenry who haven't yet bothered to read, consider, and ponder Unabomber's veritable position. That can be accomplished only by directly encountering "Industrial Society and Its Future", not the perverted and oblique interpretation of it which Douglas works so stridently to champion under a charade of sophisticated psychoanalysis.

   Basically, and to his credit, Unabomber provides an analysis of the sociology of technology. His central point is that being human and organization-dependent technology are inherently antagonistic and mutually exclusive entities. This basic tension provides the battleground for a choice: remaining human or allowing everyone to be psychologically, physiologically, and anatomically re-engineered in increments to fit the needs of the aloof and impersonal organizations that determine the course of industrial society; instead of allowing humans to put an upward limit on the intrusion into the psychological sphere that is demanded by the ever-increasing velocity and volume of conveniences that ultimately, and ever more quickly, become indispensable for the functioning of society and any given individual's participation therein. (E.g., ATM, FAX, refridgeration, pharmaceuticals, genetic recombination, etc.)

   A careful reading of Unabomber's own words is very much worthwhile. He's talking about us, you and me, not some creature on another world.

   And let us not forget what Douglas carelessly sweeps under the rug: Theodore Kaczysnki was arrested in the course of the execution of a speciously expedited search warrant that originated by his brother, David, ratting him out. The government's role in the story should be considered under the optic of a triple treachery: the government policing agencies, fraternal back-stabbing, and Douglas' attempt to obfuscate the truth about Unabomber's quite rational motivations as articulated in "Industrial Society and Its Future". Read Unabomber before you read anything about him.




3. I had never heard of John Douglas until one day my sister told me about this great book she was reading. She gave me a copy of 'Obession'. Now I am hooked ! What great reading all of his books are, from start to finish. I am now a fan. Looking forward to more books from this author.



4. I felt like I was reading the notes for a book about the Unabomber, not a real book with a beginning, middle, and end. Usually true crime books make a sequential pass through the crimes (in this case 16 bombings) and end with the arrest, and sometimes the trial of the perp. Not so "Unabomber" where the author seems more interested in proving that his profile of the bomber was correct, rather than describing the hunt for the criminal. The 16 bombings are described in Appendix 1, "An Overview and Chronological Summary," rather than in the text of the book.
   
   A manifesto on criminal profiling certainly wasn't what I expected from "Unabomber," but that's what I got.
   
   Potential purchasers should also note that the book itself is only 150 pages long. Appendices and an advertisement for "Mindhunters" by John Douglas take up the latter 150 pages.
   
   The book proper is padded out with stories that have little to do with the 'alleged' Unabomber, ('alleged' because "Unabomber" was published before Theodore Kaczynski was tried and convicted). These stories are interesting, especially the case of George Metesky, the 'Mad Bomber' of the '40s and '50s, who had a grudge against New York City's Consolidated Edison (Con Ed).
   
   (George Metesky is the only bomber I've felt the faintest amount of sympathy for, maybe because I spent so many years working at an electric utility!)
   
   The author also spends quite a bit of print defending the legitimacy of profiling as a forensic 'art.' His team's profile of Theodore Kaczynski (disgruntled genius with ties to academia) was accurate, although the Unabomber task force neglected it in favor of another profile (blue collar aviation worker). Neither profile was essential to the capture of Kaczynski. His own relatives recognized his style of writing in the Unabomber manifesto that was published by the "New York Times" and "Washington Post," and they turned him in to the FBI.
   
   If you'd like to read the unabomber's manifesto yourself, the full text is included in Appendix 3. It's 96 pages long and very dull.



5. Despite a delay with the postal service I received this book in a reasonable amount of time and it is in great condition.

1 comments about The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and Its Future.

1. First let me state that I in no way support, condone or admire any of the terrorist actions taken by the author as the Unabomber, I was intrigued enough by the Wikipedia posting of this pamphlet to get the hard copy, so as to sit down and spend some time inside the mind of someone outside the realm of our normal everyday life. And I realize that as a result of buying this, I am now, no doubt, on at least one Government watch list, such is the world we now live in, but information is information and for the moment at least, I have the right to read what I want to.
   
   This is not an easy pamphlet to read, it really does meander all over (endless footnotes and citings), as Kaczynski's mind seems to have and yet I found myself in unwilling agreement with some of his arguments (or rants, if you prefer) against the effects of a technological society on the rights and well being of the individual and the planet. Now the reader must bear in mind that this "work" was done over some time, but started long before the Green Movement was most Westerners new religion, so to say that the author was in some ways prescient about the global tipping point we find ourselves at and the true root of it all (technological society/Big Business) at least in Kaczynski's mind, is troubling, after all, isn't he criminally insane? How can he be "right" or "correct" about anything, or more to the point, how can his "manifesto" find any resonance with those of us professing to be sane in an increasingly insane world?
   
   Perhaps this work called to the Luddite or the closet conservative in me, but regardless of it's origins, I thought it worth the read.
   
   Enter at your own risk... here there be dragons.

No comments about Technological Slavery: The Collected Writings of Theodore J. Kaczynski, a.k.a. "The Unabomber".

5 comments about The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society & Its Future.

1. Although this is an excellent read, I doubt that Ted Kaczynski would encourage his work being sold in any way. Go to google, and search for "Unabomber Manifesto." You will find countless online publications of this that are free.



2. This manifesto is not totally original but he has some good, well articulated points. It is worth reading for those interested in social issues and problems, like Civilization and its Discontents, Brave New World and the other standards. It is perhaps a troubling thing that this writing is being discussed and obtained via the internet / technology. At the same time, ironically, the manifesto has reached a much larger audience via computers. Taking a frank and critical look at our use of technology is the first step towards any possible change, and "FC" invites this honest questioning within the reader.



3. While reading 'Industrial Society and Its Future' online, I am immediately struck by the sophist and hypocritical understanding of leftism. While discussing hidden inferiority and control of power the reader can't help but make psychological projections against the author. The man's biography is of much greater interest than this work. His struggle with a very complicated and layered self hate (that I see in this essay) may very well be the result of CIA experiments he underwent (during the 60's) while a genius student at Harvard.
   
   'The Information Bomb', by Paul Virilio is an exciting viewpoint for those concerned about technology's (and less explicitly, the left's) assault on humanity.



4. "Industrial society and its future", better known as the Unabomber Manifesto, is a text written anonymously by the eco-terrorist Theodore Kaczynski, also called the Unabomber.
   
   Kaczynski more or less forced several national newspapers to publish the manifesto in 1995, promising that he would call off his bombing campaign if they did. He had already killed three people by mail bombs, and wounded many others. This campaign of terror was directed at people involved in real or perceived environmental destruction. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post published "Industrial society and its future". At the time, nobody knew the Unabomber's real identity. The manifesto was ostensibly written by a mysterious organization, known simply as FC ("Freedom Club"). Unfortunately for Kaczynski, his own brother recognized his distinctive style of writing, and the Unabomber was arrested by the FBI in 1996. He now serves a life sentence.
   
   The Unabomber Manifesto calls for the complete destruction of industrial society and high technology. Before reading it, I assumed that the author was a violent anarcho-primitivist or in some other way "leftist". He is not. Kaczynski's political philosophy is difficult to pin down, but he sounds more right-wing than left-wing. He seems to like militia groups, romanticizes the Wild West, prefers biological to social explanations for human behaviour, and attacks "political correctness". Indeed, a large part of his pamphlet is an attack on leftism. However, he is not conservative. Kaczynski never claims that "family values" were somehow better during the dark ages. Rather, he wants to have complete freedom for the individual, or at least for small groups of individuals, to pursue whatever goals they may choose, something he believes is impossible in a society based on technology. Perhaps Kaczynski could be seen as a very odd libertarian?
   
   "Industrial society and its future" will no doubt disappoint those who assume that it's an exciting defence of violence and terrorism, or the amusing rants of a madman. Actually, the text is rather heavy and intellectual. The author believes that industrial society is incompatible with human nature, and hampers the fulfilment of something he calls "the power process". He argues at length that industrial society cannot be reformed. It must be destroyed by a revolution (although not necessarily a violent one). Otherwise, the system will begin to modify human beings by genetic engineering, since only a changed human nature can possibly survive in a more centralized, totalitarian and robotized society. This will lead to a global dictatorship of one kind or another. The author hopes that the system will start to break down by itself long before that, and this will make it possible for revolutionaries to increase social tensions and thus hasten the system's downfall.
   
   The Manifesto is surprisingly non-dogmatic in its approach to possible lines of future development. It doesn't even predict an imminent disaster, but says that the collapse may still take 40 to 100 years. It also describes a possible situation in which people will come to accept even more technology, ultimately becoming completely dependent on intelligent machines! One of the points of the manifesto is to argue that history and social change are unpredictable. Thus, Kaczynski never proposes some kind of utopia of his own. Rather, he rests contended with claiming that the complete destruction of modern technology is the prerequisite for genuine human freedom.
   
   As already mentioned, Kaczynski had killed three people by sending them mail bombs when his manifesto was published. Yet, the killings are mentioned only in passing, in this short paragraph:
   
   >>>Take us (FC) for example. If we had never done anything violent and had submitted the present writings to a publisher, they probably would not have been accepted. If they had been accepted and published, they probably would not have attracted many readers, because it's more fun to watch the entertainment put out by the media than to read a sober essay. Even if these writings had had many readers, most of these readers would soon have forgotten what they had read as their minds were flooded by the mass of material to which the media expose them. In order to get our message before the public with some chance of making a lasting impression, we've had to kill people.>>>
   
   Thus, the pamphlet doesn't give any insights into the personal motives or psychology of its author.
   
   Analyzing the ideas of a terrorist feels somewhat moot, but I couldn't help noticing the contradiction between Kaczynski's opposition to collectivism, and his belief that individual freedom existed in the small groups typical of pre-modern hunters and gatherers. In reality, such societies are often highly collectivist. They have to be, since lone wolves can hardly survive in a world gone wild...
   
   "Industrial society and its future" may be of some interest to those who study extreme Green ideas, such as deep ecology, anarcho-primitivism or perhaps hardcore survivalism. The work is also available free on-line.



5. The means taken to achieve the end was flawed and cruel, and it's all the more intriguing (see the argument in the section "The nature of Freedom") that someone who could compose a well thought out "manifesto" that purports to redeem the individual and save him from the machine, the society and the bourgeois had no qualms about murdering an innocent lady who worked at a computer store and others who according to his description are "mere cogs" in the social machine he was trying to disrupt and the "Human Suffering" he was trying to end. It only goes on to reinforce the notion that all ism's start with a good intention and end up being a menace of a new kind. The above points aside, the "manifesto" hits the spot on the effects of technology and industrialization on the individual. The points here are all very valid; the concerns are certainly not new; the negative effects addressed in the manifesto have been pointed out by many others in their writings. It talks about how the tentacles of the society and the technological machinery is completely overwhelming the individual, depriving him of the "power process" and thereby making the individual lose his bearing. One has to admit, his thoughts are clearly articulated (clarity, perhaps, provided by his remoteness from the society, both physically and psychologically; the conjectures about the role of intelligent machines has Bill Joy and Ray Kurzweil a bit paranoid)

5 comments about A Mind for Murder: The Education of the Unabomber and the Origins of Modern Terrorism.

1. This was a terribly disappointing book. Author Alston Chase's description of the psychological experiments which Kaczynski was subjected to at Harvard is disturbing, and he makes some interesting connections between the manipulation suffered by Kaczynski and his subsequent rage at 'systems of control'.

   But this potentially valuable insight gets lost in Chase's superficial and obsessive recounting of what he views as a social crisis bought on by 'value-free' education and philosphy. In the process, Chase condemns both academia and those who revolted against it, post-war society and those who pointed out it's failings, the US government and those who would try to move beyond a nation-state. By the end of the book, Chase has variously described Kaczynski as somehow representative of deep-ecologists, anti-globlization protestors, and even islamic fundamentalists (who, whatever their other problems, would not seem to be suffering from a 'value-free' education), all of whom (along with multiple other groups that the author doesn't like) are indiscriminately labelled 'terrorists'.




2. Though Chase does seem to suffer a need to attack what he views as the outcome of "value-free" education, I do not think the book suffers as much from this insistence as does the previous reviewer. In fact, there is much to be gained from such a study.

   Chase's book is an admirable study of both the Unabomber and the postwar currents that converged to contribute to the making of the Unabomber. Thankfully, Chase is wise enough not to offer excuses for Kaczynski's actions, but his research into what made Kaczynski "tick" provide a believable backdrop and a necessary antidote to the popular misconception of the Unabomber as a madman devoid of reason or motive.

   And rather than finding fault with Chase's attempt to tie the Unabomber's actions and theories to those of other "terrorist" groups, I found his arguments convincing, especially in regards to the pervasiveness of the positivistic, supremely rational curriculum of Western universities and the devaluing of the humanities.

   We need more thinkers and researchers like Chase who are willing to make us question our kneejerk reactions to men who make us as uncomfortable as Kaczynski.




3. Mind for Murder is an excellent book by Alston Chase. This book has two main components to it. The first component deals with the life and demise of Ted Kaczynski. The author gives us descriptions of Ted's early years as a child, his high school years, and spends a great deal of time expounding on Ted's time spent at Harvard.
   
   In the author's description of Ted's early years we our shown Ted grew to despise his parents pressuring him to excel academically. His resentment was especially strong toward his father who seemed to remain aloof and somewhat nihilistic till he committed suicide. Ted also resented his mother Wanda because he felt she intentionally subjected him to psychological abuses as a child. These feelings seemed to stay with Ted and even grow as Ted embarked on his college career.
   
   The second component of this book is a cultural analysis that centers around the time period Ted would have been at Harvard and proffers reasons why Ted and others in our modern times have felt the need to resort to terrorism. The author explains how Universities like Harvard used to place a strong emphasis on liberal arts education. Education that was paired with moral virtue. This way of thinking is found in the thoughts of the ancient Greeks who thought reason had to be bound with moral virtue. However, in the 1950s with World War II just having ended and the Cold War looming the universities seemed to adopt the stance of logical positivism. The idea that if something isn't scientifically verifiable it has no meaning. In other words, moral judgments are just the cultural attitudes of the time. Ted would have encountered this line of nihilistic thinking at Harvard. Is it any wonder in later years he would adopt and expound his personal philosophy to mean any ends justified the means? This is especially poignant considering moral judgments to Ted seemed to be just a bunch of efforts at psychological control by the system.
   
   Chase later gives us insightful details of how Ted was used at Harvard by Henry Murray for a psychological experiment. Ted and some other Harvard students at the time were participants in an experiment to submit these persons to dreadful psychological interrogation experiments. The Govt. at this time was very concerned with finding out how to treat or even coerce political prisoners into doing what they wanted. Even going so far as to study and try to learn how to keep the masses under control. Chase gives us historical insight into the Govt. intentionally trying out "new" drugs like LSD on college students, prison inmates, and anyone else it so fancied because surely the Russians had a secret "mind control" drug like this to coerce confessions out of POWs. Ted resented his being tested (even if he was being paid for it) and came to view the techno-industrial system as guilty of imposing unnecessary suffering on the masses. Mind control, feeling like a cog in the machine, depression, irritability, lack of leisure, pollution, were all some of the things Ted blamed on the techno-industrial system. The only way to stop these unjust grievances was to lash out against the system. Even killing if necessary which is just what Ted did.
   
   This is a sad book in some ways but it's a more important work in many other ways. It tells what happens when value gets subjugated below reason. It tells how the culture suffers when ideas like deconstructionism, logical positivism, and structuralism so permeate our culture that nothing has any meaning. Until academics and the culture in general start accepting the fact that reason is only half the puzzle; there is always yin with yang, objectivity with subjectivity, and mind with matter in any accurate depiction of reality. Until we understand these principles and adopt a more holistic approach to reality we are perhaps bound to repeat these same mistakes-the devaluing of society to utter meaninglessness. Worst of all, the suffering of innocents by acts of terrorism and the dependence on antidepressants will continue to be a prominent part of life.



4. A Mind for Murder is a compelling look into what contributed to the creation of the monster known as the Unabomber. It begins in the earlier years of Kaczynski and logs personal event and how these events contributed to his psyche as a murder when he grew. One of the most compelling insights in the book is how he is thought to be insane and a madman. Kaczynski Knew what he was doing and did not what to be declared as insane because his environmental/anti-technology cause would be thought a joke. He took a plea bargain in order to keep the defense from declaring him mentally unstable. I was a amazed at the book and the great insight and detail it portrayed. If you are interested in Domestic Terrorism this is a must read.



5. This book is useful as required reading for college students if the professor would like to help get the students past the trivial debates about whether Ted Kaczynski was a serial killer, ecoterrorist, or what. Far too often, attempts at criminological writing reduce to an essay on a "How crazy were they?" and this book helps correct that, making sense out of an episode in American history which frequently baffles explanation. For a taste of the author's writing, one should look for much of the same writing easily found on the web as a series of articles in The Atlantic.