Events Books

In two words: Read This

I enjoyed reading this provocative heart warming book...The Exile of the Author is a result of what Israel did to hundereds of thousands of innocent Palestinians in 1948...The author is honest and criticizes the Palestinians and their leadership as much as he critices Israel and it's leadership.

Fawaz Turki describes his exile from Palestine, growing up in Beirut, his families unthinking chains to tradition, and his journey to establish peace within himself. Not only does this book educate all of us on the immigrant experience, it is a book that should be read by every Arab-American. It helps the reader to gain understanding of identity politics. This book urges an examination of Arab cultural traditions and makes the point that change with purpose serves for individual and collective enlightenment

I loved this book that I read it three times. It is timeless, enjoyable, and should be read by everyone. It tells the Palestinian story in the most detailed manner. It speaks to all of us and challenges us to shake off our stereotypes and hatred. I learned so much about myself reading this book. It will make you laugh and cry.

In the third iteration of his memoirs, Turki concentrates on two aspects of his life: changing from Arab into American and alienation from the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In Turki's case, becoming an American is a funny, quite degenerate, and certainly ribald process. It makes for a moving transformation, especially when contrasted with his earlier dislike of the United States. As for the PLO, Turki denounces its "corruption and incompetence" as well as its "tired cant and lame banalities." But don't think he only has harsh words; in Turki's hands, even turning away from the PLO has a humorous edge (indeed, his game on the Arab League's pompous ambassador in Washington is sidesplitting). Turki also condemns what he sees as the terrible traditionalness of Palestinian society and calls for nothing less than a revolution: "the liberation of Palestinian society will only come about when the Palestinians themselves recognize their neobackwardness and begin an Intifada against it." It wasn't many years ago that every Palestinian proclaimed himself a PLO supporter. Hamas and Islamic Jihad first broke the monopoly on the fundamentalist side. Now more liberal elements are ready to tell the world just how awful the organization is, providing details detractors could hitherto only have imagined. In contrast to grudging Americans like Edward Said, Turki eagerly embraces the United States and rejects PLO brutalities; this is a major development. Indeed, his candor and thoughtfulness marks a significant breakthrough.

Middle East Quarterly, December 1994

I just bought a copy of this book because I saw the lecture Dr. Maguire gave on CSPAN and was riveted. The book is unbelievably important in these times when the United States claims to be doing things for international justice. But when you read this and see how Pol Pot got away with so much and what's going on in Asia you won't be able to understand why we were so consumed with a man like Saddam Hussein (oil). Everyone should read this book.

Peter Maguire's mix of personal travelogue and historical study works well, with the author lingering on the question of impunity and the ineffectual international community, whilst interviewing victims and perpetrators of Khmer Rouge crimes on many visits following his first trip to Cambodia in 1994. That first exciting yet unnerving visit in 1994 is something the author and myself have in common, as we do the loss of a close Cambodian friend in recent years. His loss was Sok Sin, well known as every journalist's 'fixer' and Maguire's tale of his demise is poignant. His interviews with the suvivors of Tuol Sleng such as Bou Meng, Vann Nath and Im Chan contrast sharply with the soul-less KR photographer Nhem En and guard Him Huy, whilst DC-Cam and Youk Chhang rightly emerge as a beacon of light in the chaos that is Cambodia. He also tracked down Mai Lam, the Vietnamese colonel who'd turned Tuol Sleng into a Genocide Museum though ultimately their discussions were stymied. I found the book stimulating, frustrating, insightful and vexing in equal measures, with Maguire admitting up front that he ultimately failed to come to any clear-cut conclusions. However, the journey to get to nowhere is an interesting one.

This remarkable book takes the reader deep inside the minds of a culture so hard to penetrate that I am returning this year to Cambodia just to attempt to understand the obvious - here is a country in a state of denial. "Facing Death in Cambodia" very effectively analyses Cambodia's culture of compliance, a nation meek to authority, and seemingly paralyzed by a recent past so convulsive that to even think about it is an invitation to "bad karma" - even among survivors and the unindicted killers of their children who sometimes share the same street. Mr Maguire excells at the job of rendering the 75-79 story in human terms. His portraits of the familiar figures like the photographer of those shattering Tuol Slong ID pictures are very important to our understanding of what sort of mental gymnastics many at the heart of the genocide are capable of. The heroic Vann Nath, whose miraculous survival is powerfully and touchingly explained in the book, emerges as a beacon of clear sightedness.Yet even here there is paradox - the survivor is eager to greet the photographer almost as an old friend. The author's tenacious search for the mind set and value system of the killers, and how D.K.'s perverted ideology can be effortlessly justified in Cambodia's "culture of impunity", make for provocative reading. I was particularly impressed by the author's descriptions of lurking violence. The weserner's stereotypes of the smiling Khmer do not long survive exposure to present reality. When Mr. Maguire takes you through the marketplaces and cafes of Phnom Penh, don't expect a comfortable ride. In one shattering passage,we are told how quickly peasant vengeance in the street over seeming trifles turns to horror in a blink. Overall, this book is one of the most important documents of Cambodia's modern history. Mr Maguire has no illusions that this beautiful, tormented country's battle to start over is going to be over soon. Here is a writer of compassion and power, and his book is an excellent one.

This is a clear and concise book about the horrendous regime of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge (1975-1979)and the aftermath. The author asks the question: why haven't leaders of the Khmer Rouge been prosecuted for the mass murder they perpetrated on their own people. He finds a partial answer by looking at international politics and the machinations of Cambodian leaders, the UN, and the US and everyone's lack of priority in seeking justice in Cambodia.

The author, along the way, adds his personal experiences and interesting observations about Phnom Penh and Cambodia in the 1990s and up until 2003. He interviews a large number of Cambodians, including guards and survivors, about the goings on at the notorious S-21 prison. As many as twenty thousand entered the prison; fewer than a dozen survived. There are photos of some of the murdered and the survivors and several historic photos of Khmer Rouge soldiers. The author delves into the mentality of the mass murderers and present day Cambodians who still suffer the trauma of that horrific era.

Chapter two in this book is one of the best brief descriptions of the Khmer Rouge takeover of Cambodia and its consequences that I have read. All in all the book is a readable introduction to the sordid history of the Khmer Rouge and the half-hearted international efforts to cope with mass murder and its perpetrators.

Smallchief

I've often wondered about the genocide in Cambodia. The amount of material available on the Holocaust is emmense. We basically went to war to stop the "Ethnic Clensing" in the Balkans. But in Cambodia, almost noting, even while it was going on it seemed to be largely ignored. The famous pictures of the piles of skulls seemed to have no effect.

When this was happening we had just ended our participation in the Viet Nam war. I asked a Viet Nam protester why they weren't protesting what was happening there, why are we building a Holocaust museum when something of almost horror was happening in Cambodia. There was no answer.

For a time I thought that it might be an issue of race/color. The Jews were white, the Cambodian brown. Then the happenings in Rawanda got a fair amount of press coverage. And I can only conclude that it was just a matter of time. Viet Nam took all the energy the protestors had, perhaps combined with such a contempt/hatred for our own government that they couldn't see the evil in the Khmer Rouge. Maybe it was the left's "love" for communism that made them blind.

Peter Maguire's book puts a personal and human face on this genocide. He has talked to the people all over Cambodia, he has analyzed the international response and concluded that "international law, human rights, and international criminal courts are little more than sonorous fictions without political will."

There is no political will to even think much about Cambodia, not while it was happening, not now.

I am not surprised that this book has unanimous 5 star reviews. John Treadway is a legendary figure in Balkan studies, and is quite rightly regarded as the world authority on the Montenegrin history of this period. He is uniquely able to make the study of Montenegro in the run up to World War One both scholarly and accessible, an all too rare feat in historical writing these days. Buy 10 copies of this book and give them to any historians you know to teach them how to write history properly. Christopher Catherwood, author of THE BALKANS IN WORLD WAR TWO (Palgrave, 2003)

John Treadway has been the most authoratative, brilliant and generally outstanding scholar of Balkan history in recent years, and this is the wonderful book that made his well deserved reputation. You simply cannot understand the Balkans without reading this magnificent book.

Brilliant study about Montenegro and its relationship with Austria-Hungary but also with Russia and Balkan countries, especially Serbia. This excelent book is based on critically confirmed facts and scientific knowledge. Professor Treadway stresses eternal wish of Montenegrins and their king Nicholas I Petrovic Njegos to restore medieval Serb Empire of Dusan Nemanjic: "Ambitious for his dynasty as well as his country and incited by the nationalism of his people, Nicholas dreamed of uniting all Serbs under his aegis and sitting upon Dusan's throne in Prizren" [page 201] I recommend this book to everybody who cares for knowledge.

Treadway has been extremely succesful in writing the dramatic history of Montenegro, its smart king and its brave people. After reading this fine historybook on the "black mountains" the reader will better understand the current trouble on the Balkans. Treadway describes in a detailed way why the two Balkan wars have taken place and what has been the political and geographical outcome of it. The Austrian-Hungarian influence on the European continent at that time as well as the Russian influence makes one see how history repeats itself today. For the current student on Balkan history, for the student on politics in the Balkan and for people who are interested in Montenegrin history this book is an absolute must! Highly recommended

I was lucky enough to have been a student of Dr. Treadway at the University of Richmond. This book was on the reading list for his class European Diplomacy from Bismarck to Hitler. Treadway's intense teaching style as well as his insightful sense of humor are seen in this work. The events leading up to World War I were both complicated, and filled with lots of "what if's..." Treadway concerns himself with the "Powder Keg" of Europe, the Balkans, and presents a unique and facinating overview of the events surrounding the Annexation Crisis, the Scutari Crisis, the two Balkan Wars, as well as the history of Montenegrin relations with Austria-Hungary, Russia, Turkey, and other Great Powers. How did this small country with virtually no resources come to play such a large role in European diplomacy and politics? Treadway answers this question, making his way to June 28th, 1914 and the assassination of Francis Ferdinand in Sarajevo at the hand of Mlada Bosnia. Anyone interested in the causes of World War I would be interested in this book, moreso because it is written from the perspective of "the mouse that roared," the small country of Montenegro.

Juan Gonzalez was the first journalist to grasp the impact of the environmental disaster of 9/11. His article on October 26, 2001 said what some of us already sensed: Contrary to the 'good news' being sold like sugarcoated poison by government officials who wanted Wall Street back up and running, the air was dense with astronomical levels of asbestos, lead, dioxin, mercury and hundreds of unpronouncable contaminants including some that had never previously existed.

Fallout is in this tradition of groundbreaking journalism.

Unfortunately Gonzalez is so ahead of the pack that when I showed his article to my son and exhusband, whom I was trying to convince that our son should not remain at Stuyvesant High School, four blocks north of the World Trade Center, they dismissed it as a red herring.

Fallout is a compelling account of this environmental disaster which may ultimately claim more lives than the attacks themselves.

Jenna Orkin
World Trade Center Environmental Organization

Finally someone has the guts to print the truth about the toxic air at Ground Zero. For those of us who were there and who are experiencing the medical consequences of having been exposed to these toxic chemicals, Gonzalez's book explains in understandable language why we are sick and what we are likely to experience in the future. Americans need to know the truth, especially the thousands of men and women from around the country who volunteered their time at Ground Zero and are likely to suffer the medical consequences of having done so, either now or in the future. Fallout is a must read for all Americans.

This is an extremely disturbing book. Perhaps because along with the well-documented facts concerning the unprecedented toxic environmental fallout from 9/11, it is the shocking realization that it's not just the NYC and federal goverment cover-up of this story -- it is the citizens themselves collectively turning away from the horrible reality of this disaster.

The national media has not pursued the obvious leads -- the common sense questions -- but Mr. Gonzales has. And the logical conclusion of this story, in the not-too-distant future, is a public health nightmare that will have the media self-righteously condeming Giuliani and Whitman in hindsight as bearing responsibility for perhaps thousands more deaths.

The story from 9/11 that the media immediately created was of the heroes and victims. We remember them, and try to forget the horror of the collapsing towers. But if we are a truely a courageous nation, we will look clearly and not turn away from the terrible reality that ground zero represents. That is what I think this book is really about -- there are facts and consequences of 9/11 that have not yet been dealt with. And closing our eyes and wishing them away simply won't work.

Americans are being deceived. In this stunning piece of investigative reporting which should be awarded a Pulitzer Prize, Juan Gonzalez reveals the horrible truths about the environmental impacts of the 9-11 disaster. Asbestos abounded. The many heroes who helped to clean and console may face excruciating deaths thanks to suppressed and inaccurate information.

Our sacred institutions are rotten. Every American citizen should read this brief but incendiary work which speaks truth to power unflinchingly. If we do not quickly institute major changes which make our leaders and representatives truly responsible for telling the truth to the American public, however unpleasant, we may be facing the end of American democracy as we have known it and believed in it.

Where are the Thomas Paines and Thomas Jeffersons of the twenty-first century? We desperately need your voices and leadership!

I live 5 blocks north of Ground Zero and have attended hearings and forums and read hundreds of articles, studies memos and reports about the post 9/11 environmental issues in Lower Manhattan. But my jaw dropped when I read Juan Gonzalez' book - here are the missing pieces, the things I'd heard but was never able to find in print - and lots of insider information that only someone as dedicated to this story as he was could have. It is a clear, readable summary of the case against the EPA, OSHA, NYC DEP - and, de facto, an indictment of all those newspapers whose reportage consistently minimized the issue. Not since the Vietnam War has there been so much media "disinformation."

If you live or work in lower Manhattan and/or have any interest in the true story of how our government knowingly and intentionally jepordized the lives and health of the rescue workers, residents and workers downtown after 9/11 while ensuring that their own health was well protected, this book is a "must read."

Juan Gonzalez is to be commended for his courage in bucking his editors to continue to cover this story.

It's a book for my masters program, I have no opinion, it's a requirement.

An essential book for every American both young or old, male or female, Democrat or Republican. A delightful discovery on the need of God and guns (or perhaps swords) in the United States and the intolerance of a government in charge of all but answerable to noone. An undeniably perfect fit for todays culture.

Discover your roots from the men that gave their lives for the signing of the Constitution; true heroes. Their resolve was unquestionable and the love for country without reproach.

They brought us so far. We've walked away. Read it and weep. BK

The Federalist was an astonishing political document. Written for public consumption during the debate over adoption of the U.S. Constitution, it combined immense learning and sophistication with shrewd insights into the nature of politics in a republic. It's an essential text for anyone interested in American political history or constitutional theory. In fact, the Federalist should be essential readingt for any educated American: it remains an unparalleled example of realistic political analysis being placed in the service of political ideals.

After more than 200 years, the Federalist has lost little of its relevance. The sections on judicial review and Presidential nominations, for example, could have been written about current controversies over judges. Likewise, the discussion of Presidential war powers, or the emphasis on checks and balances as essential to the preservation of liberty, are eerily topical in an age of pre-emptive war and one-party control of Washington. Even when the analysis is wildly dated -- as with the Commerce Clause or slavery -- the reader can see how far Constitutional doctrine has wandered from the "intent" of the Founders.

The Federalist is also superb as literature: the writing is droll and eloquent, once you get used to the long, convoluted sentences. The introduction by Benjamin Wright is excellent and helps to place the text in political and intellectual context. I don't know why I wasn't forced to read the Federalist at law school! Six stars.

Note: Contrary to one review below, God is hardly mentioned in the Federalist, and then only as a rhetorical flourish. The Federalist has countless references to ancient Greece and Rome, but none to the Old or New Testaments. It is a thoroughly secular document. Religious nationalists and other conservatives should actually read it.

We want our founders to be demi-gods and our original texts to be divinely inspired. For an example of this nonsense, please see the first review on this page.
I want to offer a vision of The Federalist in historical context. I will argue that to see it thus enlarges its greatness will allowing us to admit its faults.
In many ways, the developments that led to the Constitution of 1787 started as soon as colonists reached our eastern shores. We had at least 150 years of experimentation in writing charters and in representative governance behind us by 1787. After the Declaration of Independence the States either wrote new constitutions or reaffirmed old charters. The national government wrote the Articles of Confederation and we lived under that from 1781 to the late 1780s.
The Federalist should be seen as part of that ongoing development. More specifically, it should be seen as part of the ratification debates in New York. Largely written by Madison and Hamilton, these papers reflect the compromises that the founders made in regards to the Constitution. Madison had wanted the President to have a veto over any state laws. Hamilton had favored a President for life during good behavior (read #78 in re the appointment for life of federal judges to sense the fervor that Hamilton felt for the benefits of lifetime tenure). Neither man believed in the necessity of a Bill of Rights. Madison eventually saw the political necessity of such amendments. During the first United States Congress he wrote up the Bill of Rights and guided them through passage. This way he could make sure they did not grow too numerous.
As a whole then The Federalist should be seen as rhetorical and political arguments for passage of a Constitution that the authors had some doubts about.
Of course, as Publius they could express no doubts. Madison, Hamiltion and Jay used this pseudonym which was a typical rhetorical device of elite writers at the time. (See Saul Cornell's The Other Founders for a nice discussion of the variety of rhetorical strategies used by writers during the ratification debates.) The idea was that hiding their identities would allow readers to focus on the quality of their arguments. As a result, there are many passages that can strike the modern reader as duplicitous because Publius pretends to know nothing of what went on during the convention. Madison and Hamilton, of course, were instrumental throughout the Constitutional Convention.
Publius works his explication of the need for the Constitution by critiquing the Articles of Confederation then by going thru the new document, article by article supposedly answering all objections. His counterarguments are largely of two types. In the first type, he will state a political principle so "obvious" that any "candid" reader will instantly agree to it. Publius then builds his arguments from there. The famous paper #10 is one such chain of argument. Or Publius will demolish the arguments offered against the Constitution by pointing out that the article objected to is contained in some or many of the States' constitution and have resulted in no such problems. Many of these arguments are justly famous. Number 10 is very much worth reading. (Although I still find it curious that when Madison asserts that a man's property holdings has a great influence on the way he thinks it is celebrated as political realism but when Marx says much the same thing it is decried as class warfare. But that's just me.)
But the reader really does get a sense at to how much thought went into the various checks and balances and the competing claims of the states and the new national government. To me this is where the glory of the book lies. We as a people thought our way out of the failure of our first experiment in nation building. We avoided civil war (for a while) and did not become the victims of foreign manipulation. We don't have to make our founding fathers and mothers demi-gods. In their fully flawed humanity, they dazzle aplenty.
Finally, it should be noted that The Federalist as a piece of political rhetoric avoided some issues entirely. The main problem that most Anti-Federalists had with the proposed Constitution in re jury rights had to do with the following phrase: "such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed" (Article 3, Sec.2, Para. 3). Whig thought at that time insisted on juries being as local as possible. Blackstone stated that jury trials should be held within the county of the crime. This guaranteed that local knowledge of the crime, the defendant and the victim would be maximized in the jury pool. Trying cases in distant jurisdictions or without juries had been some of the main provocations of the British prior to the revolution. Men like Patrick Henry saw that phrase in the Constitution as a clarion of the tyranny to come from the new national government. The Federalist does not speak to this issue at all. Instead, Hamilton focuses on arguments about whether jury trials are guaranteed for civil cases and even has Publius argue that maybe we should limit jury trials a little because juries are so bad with complicated issues, blah, blah.
Should all Americans read this book? Yeah, probably. Are we the worse if they don't? Again, probably yes, but what we really need as a people is more of a sense of our history. I would rather have more people read a good series of books on our history as a whole (I recommend the Oxford History of the United States as one excellent ongoing series).
But if you want to get to know two great minds at work on political issues that are still relevant then this is your book. Forget Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau. Their philosophies are antiquarian in a way that Publius is not.

When you read this, you can't help but wonder where all the great minds have gone. This assessment of basic human rights and freedoms should be required reading for all kids, and repeat reading for adults with any appreciation of history and/or politics. Its lessons and statements are universal, and should not be examined as simply a part of US history, but rather how the lessons may be applied elsewhere in parts of the world that are still stuck in the Dark Ages.

Finding myself in the middle of transitation and choas...not knowing why...feeling alone..and confused as to why all of the things that were happening were happening..I found this book at the local library..have now purchased it..as my husband and I want it as a permentant part of our household reading..gives clear and easy to understand explanation of the big "why" question and the "why me" is answered..it made us feel and know that we indeed were not victims just normal folk going thru some "stuff" and it is "stuff" that everyone goes thru at some point in there life..Now if it happens again we will have the resouce to handle it ...Great book cannot recommend it enough...

A very thoughtful journey through life. I discovered the process of transition in ways that I never understood but that became crystal clear to me as I turned each page. I wept during some chapters because Robert Brumet wrote exactly what I was experiencing. I am no longer afraid of endings and new beginnings!

This is one of the most insightful and helpful books I have read relating to the subject matter. It is clear and concise and gives extremely helpful strategies in dealing with life's changes. I actually read it twice and it is an excellent resource to go back to.

This book is great. It draws on so many different perspectives to help people deal with the sometimes difficult transitions of life. It gives examples from the bible, as well as various authors and even eastern perspectives. It has been helpful to me during a time of transition in my life.

Mr. Brumet's book is extremely timely now in today's busy and ever changing times and is a true Unity classic. Having been out of work for over year and having lost the one thing that I thought defined me, I am extremely thankful I found this book when I did. Mr. Brumet explains why transition occurs, the process of it and the paradoxes that often present themselves as we go through the transition process. I truly enjoyed his juxtaposing the story of Moses in illustrating his transition philosophy. Each chapter has a short summary highlighting the main points of the chapter for easy reference.

at first i was not impressed with the overly ornate, plushy cover. i'd already seen the similar books on the military service branches...and figured THESE were just more books (aimed at pumped up seekers of pseudo-heroism) that were cashing in on the post-911 tragedy (nothing more transparent or disgusting than reactionary, one-dimensional flag-waving 'patriotism'...<>)

BUT this is a totally honorable, excellent volume. it is correctly focused on the breadth and depths of this profession. from fires to rescues, this book paints as good a picture as can be had!

my grandfather, a wilmington DE firefighter, would've loved this book.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

A great book about a great calling by a group of great authors and photographers. You're sure to enjoy it for years.

For everyone who has ever heard the siren's song of being a fireman, Firefighters from Hugh Lauter Levin, is a cavalcade of every facet, faucet, fact and artifact of firefighting; from the horse-drawn to the horse-power; the total picture of a valiant profession.

"Firefighters" is by far the most interesting narrative and visual accounting of fire service history that I have ever seen. It is perfect for anyone with an interest in the fire service. Each author does a great job with their chapter...including just the right amount of text complemented by many visuals that bring their words to life. Considering the quality of the book, and that every sale benefits the families of firefighters who have died in the line of duty, I couldn't have made a better choice than to buy "Firefighters" as addition to my living room coffee table. You should buy the book...I'm glad I did...and you will be too.

I had no idea of the scope of this book when I was ask to make my contribution on the History of Black Fire Fighters. This is a great book. The photographs are sharp and clear and the text very informative. I am amazed.

Given the times in which we live, it is easy to why hindsight continues to be the preferred tool of analysis for many of our leaders in Washington. For the remainder of us however, foresight, though not always accurate, is a more important goal despite the always unpopular political ramifications. That is where Dr. Doug Bandow comes in. Foreign follies almost cries out, 'I hate to say I told you so,' setting-up a tragic review of America's foreign (and domestic) policy follies. Should you decide to pick-up this excellent book, perhaps you will make the wise decision to seek out Dr. Bandow's columns ([...]) for a more holistic analysis of the state of U.S. foreign policy. Indeed, the business of foreign affairs is not about one's favorites, but rather the analysis that must often be complete, and most importantly, accurate. Anything less needlessly places lives at risk--something Dr. Bandow and a handful of other analysts are obviously keenly aware of.

Published in 2006, this collection of essays ranges from the late 1990's to its year of publication, and I was quite astonished to discover two things fairly quickly into the work:

First, the author is a conservative--a true conservative--and firmly opposed to what he calls "promiscuous intervention" or elective wars or global rampant empire-building. I was expecting a left of center diatribe against the follies of the Bush-Cheney Administration. Not so. The author is consistent--he railed against the follies of the Clinton-Clinton Administration first, and this followed over.

Second, as an estranged moderate Republican who believes in fiscal conservatism, a small government, and not supporting dictators or decadent despots like the debauched Saudi "royal" family of swindlers, pedophiles, and perverts, I was stunned to find my conservative roots reaffirmed, and the neo-conservatives, the false conservatives, soundly lambasted for their chicken-hawk enlargement of the military-industrial complex.

The author opens early with the statement that America is no longer a Republic, and I completely agree. The author, affiliated with the Cato Institute, has given me a new and deeper appreciation for that organization's intellectual and constitutional line of reasoning.

The early part of the book is a superb collection of varied arguments for completely avoiding foreign adventurism that enriches a few in the military-industrial complex, at three great costs:

1) Loss of lives and limbs among our brave troops;
2) Loss of natural treasure we cannot space on others
3) Loss of morality and rise of vulnerability to hatred occasioned by our foreign presence

The latter point merits special emphasis. The author's views are totally consistent with my own reading and world experience:

1) Morality, as Will and Ariel Durant tell us in their The Lessons of History, is a strategic asset of incalculable proportions. Others, such as Max Manwaring, in The Search for Security: A U.S. Grand Strategy for the Twenty-First Century tell us that security--long-term security, can only come from legitimacy, legitimacy in the eyes of both our own citizens and denizens in every clime and place where we venture.

2) Bin Laden is on solid ground to use terrorism against us, an asymmetric method that is necessary for smaller actors, and the author is clear in validating the degree to which we merit and invite such terrorist attacks by intervening and by supporting debauched dictators like the Saudis. The author states clearly: "We must reduce the sources of foreign hostility to the US." The author quotes Pape, author of Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism among others on how suicidal terrorism is correlated with US occupations overseas, *not* with radical Islam per se. He goes on to say, as my colleague Robert Baer has documented in See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism and Sleeping with the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude, that "American commitment to the Saudi royal family is a moral blemish and a practical danger. See also Ambassador Mark Palmer's denunciation of our support for 42 of the 44 remaining dictators in Breaking the Real Axis of Evil: How to Oust the World's Last Dictators by 2025.

In 1999 the author penned this statement against the Clinton Administration that applies equally today to the Bush-Cheney Administration: "Indeed, where the President and his aides are arrogant, ignorant, and incompetent, others must lead." I agree with this author of the strategic logic of terrorism against US misbehavior, and point the interested reader to Pape's book above.

I am heartened to read this conservative author's sensible denunciation of both the lies of Bush and Cheney to all Americans, and of the idiocy of the neo-conservatives in striving for increased unconstitutional executive power, and in believing in an "immaculate presidency" that can do no wrong. He clearly labels Bush as wrong and as owing all Americans an apology. He properly dismisses the "stay the course" propaganda by pointing out that when you are on the wrong road, you get off at the first available exit.

He segues from that to a proper denunciation of American support for a genocidal racist Israel and offers this lovely quote: "Crackpot theology is no substitute for thoughtful analysis is developing foreign policy."

The author offers an elegant essay against conscription and the draft. As a taxpayer who now seems that 75% of my taxes are misspent on elective war, secret earmarks, and fraudulent procurements that benefit a small elite while destroying the working poor and the vanishing middle class, I am now all for eliminating federal taxes and forcing the federal government to apply to the states for funding of "common" needs. War is not in our common interest, and we should not have allowed our Congress and our Executive to become spendthrifts with out money--as Davy Crockett learned--it is not theirs to give!

I part with the author only on the subject of Taiwan--he is wrong to see Taiwan as a beacon of freedom. Chang Kai Sheik was one of the greatest war criminals and thieves on the planet in his time, and a cursory reading of the literature, for example, the books by Sterling and Peggy Seagraves, will quickly document that Taiwan is both an inherent part of China, and not at all a bastion of freedom as much as limpet fish sucking the blood from the American's so naïve as to believe these cheating miscreants.

Over-all I found this author to be inspiring. He neglects to address the war crimes of the extremist Republicans, nor does he venture to comment on the very high probability that Dick Cheney, Rudy Gulliani, and Larry Silverstein (and their insurance co-conspirators) are guilty along with Donald Rumsfeld of the mass murder of most of those who died on 9-11 to controlled demolitions in NYC and a missile into the Pentagon. Evidently there are some areas where "true blue" conservatives do not dare venture. For those interested in this aspect of the *other* neo-conservative crime of the century see my lists on 9-11 books and DVDs, and on evaluating Cheney, and most especially, Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency, where my review lists 23 of the 25 high crimes and misdemeanors of Dick Cheney that are documented in the public record (for the other two, see Ron Suskind's The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America's Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11)

Because of the Iraq fiasco, it is fashionable to blame the Bush administration for being the Ziegfeld of America's foreign policy folly. True enough, Iraq may be the height of U.S. folly -- an unnecessary war against a phantom threat that has given jihadists a convenient target in their own neighborhood, created greater anti-American sentiment throughout the Muslim world, and threatens to break the U.S. Army -- but such folly is not the sole purview of the Bush administration. In Foreign Follies, Doug Bandow has assembled a collection of essays that span more than a decade to demonstrate that U.S. foreign policy run amok pre-dates the current White House, but that the Bush administration has made things worse. Bandow chronicles unnecessary U.S. interventionist policy in Europe, the Balkans, Asia, and the Middle East. Of course, he devotes an entire chapter to Iraq -- the mother of all unnecessary U.S. interventions. Not only does Bandow make the case that U.S. foreign policy -- Bush and Clinton, Republican and Democrat, conservative and liberal -- makes us less safe, but that it undermines the foundations of our republic. The real folly is that Bandow's voice is drowned by the shrill cries of partisan politicians and pundits who place self-interest ahead of the well-being our the country.

Bandow's work reveals one folly of any critique of US foreign policy is that the addled thinking is not limited to the past few years or the current administration. Drawing on his career of assessing foreign policy across the globe, Bandow showcases his astounding scope of expertise and insight - providing a cohesive point of view that brings sanity to any review of US foreign policy in the past -- and in the future. A must-read for every policy wonk, and every American.

Foreign Follies, a collection of Doug Bandow's columns and articles on U.S. foreign policy over the past decade, is an incisive diagnosis of what has gone so terribly wrong with America's position in the world. It is also an even-handed, bipartisan analysis. Bandow criticizes the faulty policies of Democratic and Republican administrations alike. He makes a compelling case that a more cautious, coherent security strategy would better serve the interests of the American people. Over the years, Bandow has shown himself to be one of America's most astute experts on foreign affairs, and it is gratifying to see his prescient analyses gathered in one place. Foreign Follies is a valuable book, and it deserves to have a wide audience.

Most people are neither "True Conservatives" nor "True Liberals/Progressives but rather a mixture depending upon the issue.
I know I am certainly that way.

We all want to think that if the other side just knew the "facts" as we know them, they would think just like us. But the world doesn't work like that. We all have our biases and filter information accordingly.

Before the introduction the author quotes Dale Carnegie: "In talking to people, don't begin by discussing the things on which you differ. Begin by emphasizing--and keep emphasizing--the things on which you agree. Keep on emphasizing, if possible, that you are both striving for the same end and that your only difference is one of method and not of purpose."

This is absolutely right-on-target.

That goal for most American's is: FREEDOM, OPPORTUNITY AND SECURITY for all.

Bernie Horn's "Framing The Future" will interest both political activists and students of American politics. Horn makes the case why, and how, progressives need to change their tactics - less preaching to the choir, more persuasion of the swing voters who actually decide elections.

A really interesting read that all Democratic candidates should see. A total blueprint on how to take back the power of words the Republicans have stolen.

Finally, a roadmap to using the right rhetoric to advance Democratic values! John Kerry would be president now if he had read this book! Horn's insight is right on the mark on how to prevent Republicans from monopolizing the high road of value-based campaigning.

PS - Don't let Rove see this one!

Framing the Future is a must read for anyone advocating progressive issues from health care to world peace, Bernie Horn does a great job of showing us how to frame progressive issues in way that people can understand and support.

Threats to civil liberties are greater than ever since September 11, 2001. Due process rights are the most obvious casualties, but privacy, church-state separation, and other civil rights are being eroded, particularly for groups outside the mainstream.

Wendy Kaminer's latest book, "Free For All: Defending Liberty in America Today", is therefore extremely timely and relevant. Kaminer is a lawyer, author, and social critic, whose previous books include "Sleeping With Extraterrestrials: The Rise of Irrationalism and the Perils of Piety", and "I'm Dysfunctional, You're Dysfunctional: The Recovery Movement and Other Self-Help Fashions". "Free For All" is a collection of her essays on civil liberties from the past several years, both before and after 9/11. Most of the pieces appeared in "The American Prospect", though a few are included from other publications such as "Free Inquiry" and "Dissent".

The topics she addresses include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to privacy, defendant's rights, women's rights, and many related issues. A number of themes crop up repeatedly, including the following: When people favor giving up rights, they usually have in mind other people's rights. Civil libertarianism requires applying the Golden Rule to people you dislike. Civil liberties (freedom to X) often conflict with civil rights (freedom from X). Threats to civil liberties tend to come from those who want people to "be good," whether according to Christian morality on the right, or political correctness on the left. We should be especially wary of expansions of government power, especially prosecutorial power, which are likely to lead to erosion of individual freedom. And sadly, Americans tend to pay only lip service to liberties that are supposedly inalienable.

Kaminer is politically liberal, but she does not shy away from positions that make liberals queasy, because they are required by a strict civil libertarian interpretation of the Constitution. Some of her possibly controversial positions include:

* Free speech rights of abortion protesters must be protected. Furthermore, trying to shield abortion patients from protest undermines the feminist position that women can and should make autonomous decisions about abortion.

* Groups such as the Boy Scouts do have the right to discriminate against gays and atheists (and face the social consequences of doing so). Their rights to free speech and free association trump the desire to enforce equal treatment by non-government groups.

* Evangelism in schools (that is not endorsed by the school) should not be prohibited in the name of protecting children. "Sectarian religious groups that seek access to public schools are unlikely to compare themselves to pornographers, but they do rely on First Amendment rights." (p. 101) In both situations, it is the job of parents, not the state, to protect children.

These essays are necessarily snapshots in time. Most of the pre-9/11 pieces have been rewritten in the past tense, to reflect the changing face of civil liberties since that date. Two pre-9/11 essays are left in the present tense, to underscore the fact that civil libertarians were already alarmed well before the terrorist attacks. Many of the restrictions currently being used by the Bush/Ashcroft regime were enabled by the Counter-Terrorism Act of 1996. The attacks of 9/11 simply provided the first opportunity to apply them on a wide and well-publicized scale. The "USA PATRIOT" Act is merely icing on the cake.

"Free For All" is well worth reading if you interested in civil liberties in general. It provides a wide-ranging, thorough, and entertaining exploration of current issues. If eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, then Wendy Kaminer is standing guard, and letting us know that all is not well.

Thank goodness for Wendy Kaminer. A consistent thinker in the midst of our culture of conflict between fabricated absolutist alternatives.

This book is a collection of short essays on the state of American liberties which previously appeared in the "The American Prospect" over the past two years. They have been updated with additional material to confront the issues in civil liberty which have appeared after 9/11.

Censorship, religious freedom, women's rights, and homeland security are just some of the topics covered in these bite-size essays. The author's pen spares no sacred cows of either the Right or the Left. The feminist movement's campaign against pornography is vilified with as much fervor as is the conservative effort to criminalize flag burning. Both efforts are attempts at limiting unpopular speech. Kaminer shows them both to be the silly shibboleths of sanctimonious speech suppressors.

I don't agree with the author's opinions on every issue covered in the book. Her take on the criminal justice system, immigration, and social equality are a bit too left of center for my tastes. However, I am proud of her right to her opinions and her courage to care about the rights of others with whom she disagrees. If only we could all care with this much eloquence.

In this book, Wendy Kaminer, lawyer and civil libertarian, compiles many of her essays from her column in the American Prospect about censorship, religious freedom, women's rights, anti-individualism, rights of the accused, and post 9-11 curtailings of civil liberties in the United States. Kaminer makes a clear distinction between civil liberties, which are the laws protecting citizens from unjust government power and control, and civil rights, in which government power is used to protect the rights of a marginalized or minority population from other citizen groups. Kaminer criticizes both the right and the left in her attempts to find an appropriate balance, and she leans strongly toward individual freedoms except where clear, unambiguous discrimination is taking place.

This thoughtful and articulate book is particularly easy to read in chunks because each concise essay is only a few pages long. Kaminer's discussions of patriotic descent are strong and well-stated: "When you force children to salute the flag and recite the 'Pledge of Allegiance' you don't teach then to exercise freedom so much as you accustom them to the imposition of political orthodoxies." It is clear that she believes it is important not to violate fundamental principles of freedom, such as those defined in the Bill of Rights, even if doing so may result in short-term political gains: "...right and left, people who find themselves in possessions of power tend to resist restraints upon its use. ...What distinguishes a civil libertarian is a focus on preserving fair process rather than obtaining particular results." Kaminer takes to heart Voltaire's words: "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," and I'm sure she would support the ACLU's 1978 court case protecting the free speech of a new-Nazi group and Noam Chomsky's defense of Faurisson's right to question or deny the Holocaust.

While Kaminer's criticisms all are well-stated and have merit, her lack of analysis or outright dismissal of the role of power, agency, and systematic biases is at times unsatisfying. For example, while she supports reproductive rights, she criticizes the Hill vs. Colorado ruling establishing "buffer-zones" around abortion clinics where "even peaceful antiabortion protests are prohibited." While her arguments about "silencing political speech" and valuing the "imagined right not to be offended over a right to give offense" are legitimatize, women seeking abortion information face far more than offensive language, often facing threats of physical violence, vigilante retribution, and public exposure, resulting in essentially restricted access. To give her due credit, Kaminer does write that "an unregulated marketplace inevitably exploits the most powerless members of society and produces gross inequalities of wealth that effectively prevent many people from enjoying the rights to which they're entitled," and it would be difficult to provide an appropriate depth of discussion about these dynamics while maintaining brevity, focus and accessibility in her essays.

http://www.theonion.com/onion3211/acludefends.html

Social conservatives, Stalinist feminists, and political correct Democrats (not to mention the Christian soldiers of the Bush administration) will find no comfort here. Wendy Kaminer is going to come down on the side of individual freedom against governmental power whatever the issue at hand.

In this collection of essays, mostly from her column in The American Prospect, Kaminer looks at issues ranging from anti-terrorist encroachments on civil liberties to anti-abortion protests, and invariably comes down on the side of individual liberty, even when she has to share close quarters with the likes of NAMBLA or "pro-fetal life" abortion clinic demonstrators. Her justification is a fine restatement of the civil libertarian position: "If the First Amendment only protected sensible speech, we'd inhabit a very quiet nation indeed." (p. 80)

Because she writes with passion and wit, and because now more than at any recent period in our nation's history, there is the danger of "An Imperial Presidency" (p. 13), we need her and others like her--whether we agree completely with them or not--as a counter to the anti-civil libertarian designs of Ashcroft, Rumsfeld and Bush. Kaminer represents in these pages the loyal opposition that largely went into hiding after September 11th.

Her main concern is for the health of the Bill of Rights, which suffered from cardiac arrest as the Twin Towers fell. Kaminer sees the resulting struggle between the Bush administration's desire to increase its power, and the individual's desire for privacy and due process, as a struggle between our collective need for security and our desire for freedom. When people are in fear they will let go of some of their liberties in order to feel secure. Consequently today is a time of particular danger because many Americans are understandably afraid.

Kaminer also addresses free speech on high school campuses, media censorship, abortion rights, victim's and defendant's rights, gay rights, Bush's faith-based program, and other cutting edge issues. Her style is readable, thoughtful and penetrating. She comes from a position of considerable authority as a social critic, a lawyer, and best-seller author (e.g., I'm Dysfunctional, You're Dysfunctional). She knows the facts and she knows the law, but more than anything she knows how to express what she feels in an engaging manner. Consider how she makes this very delicate, but true, observation: "I don't imagine that he welcomed it, but September 11 was not a bad day politically for George Bush."

Or, note her observation that we don't need a first Amendment to protect popular, inoffensive speech. We need it to protect speech that a "Lynn Cheney or Joe Lieberman" might consider demeaning and degrading. She adds, "Censorship campaigns often begin with a drive to protect children (or women), but rarely end there." (p. 40) My only nitpick is that Kaminer didn't devote some space to the farcical, hypocritical, and disastrous "war on drugs" that is also eroding our liberties. Maybe that will be the subject of her next book.

"Freedom" and "liberty" seem like two of the most over-used and under-appreciated words in our contemporary political vocabulary. Left-wingers might champion the freedom of dissenting speech (or freedom to abort a fetus), while opining about the necessity of hate speech legislation and railing against the right to own a firearm. Right-wingers might champion association rights and freedom of contract, but might rail to the death to regulate 'indecency' and stand opposed to the freedom of gays to marry. As Wendy Kaminer notes several times in this beautiful book, we tend to treat liberty as we do tax loopholes: we only champion the ones we use; to hell with the others.

Mrs. Kaminer's book, constructed from essays she has written mainly for The American Spectator magazine, shows that she, unlike most, is not that fickle. The antithesis of the partisan zeolot, Kaminer nobly defends civil liberties and freedoms WHEREVER they need defending. Whether it be defending liberty against the vicious assults they've encountered via the war on terror, or defending the rights of private conservative groups to discriminate against homosexuals if they choose, Mrs. Kaminer consistently champions liberty - everyone's liberty.

This book will most probably appeal to two groups - liberals and libertarians. While Mrs. Kaminer certainly approaches issues non-ideologically, she is much harder on right wing attacks liberty (regulating indecency on the internet, opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights, forcing the pledge, etc.) than on left-wing ones (speech codes, push for reparations, etc.) What's more, as a true civil libertarian, Mrs. Kaminer, as often as not, finds herself defending unsavory characters like pornographers, NAMBLA, criminal defendants denied due process rights, and the like - groups that tend to give conservatives more disease than liberals. But far be it from me to generalize; buy the book if you are concerned about liberty, no matter what side you stand on.

The only two complaints I have tend to do with the format as a collection of essays. First, most essays here are ridiculously short - averaging about three pages. While this is good if you are a casual reader that might read one or two essays at a time, the more serious reader will find the lack of depth that 3 page essays afford frustrating. Second, as these are essays there is a significant overlap of information from one essay to the next. For instance, the chapter of essays on post-Sept. 11 liberty are well written, but after the first few, the repitition of information gets cumbersome and, to be honest, I started questioning whether i needed to read all of them.

All in all, though, this book is a sorely needed, non-partisan, defense of liberty and freedom (and its peicemeal encroachment) in contemporary America. If we ever hope to reverse the trend, journalists like Wendy Kaminer becoems absolutely necessary.