Events Books

In 1947, Hanson Baldwin, the military correspondent for The New York Times asked whether the United States could "prepare for the next, truly total war...without becoming a `garrison state.'" According to Princeton Professor Aaron Friedberg, by the middle of the 20th, "the imminent threat of war produced pressures for the permanent construction of a powerful central state." Friedberg argues, however, that the size and scope of the federal government was held in check during the Cold War by a tradition and ideology of anti-statism. Although this book merely synthesizes previously- published works, it effectively argues that the apparatus of the American state grew less during the Cold War than might have been have been expected.

Friedberg examines "five main mechanisms of power creation: those intended to extract money and manpower and those designed to direct national resources toward arms production, military research, and defense-supporting industries." Friedberg explains: "In the span of only two decades the United States was engulfed in three waves of crisis as depression, world war, and cold war followed each other in rapid succession. The onset of each emergency produced a powerful impetus toward state-building." The early-Cold War debate about defense spending demonstrates Friedberg's point. He writes that "the American people wanted a state that was strong enough to defend them against their foreign enemies but not strong enough to threaten their domestic liberties," defending the country was expensive. In 1949, when President Truman wanted to hold defense spending for the next fiscal year, to $14.4 billion, the Secretary of Defense instructed the service chiefs to base their estimates "on military considerations alone," which resulted in a "wish list with a staggering $30 billion price tag." Truman's final budget message estimated the annual cost of sustaining his planned long-term force posture to be $35 to $40 billion. According to Friedberg, President Eisenhower's "commitment to holding down defense spending was a logical outgrowth of his essentially anti-statist philosophy of political economy," and, in June 1954, he warned that a massive new buildup would involving transformation of the United States into "a garrison state." In 1960, John Kennedy asserted that Eisenhower's "excessive attention to the budget" had "resulted in a serious weakening of the nation's defenses." Compulsory military service also generated intense debate. Senator Robert Taft warned that the adoption of universal military training would transform the United States into a "militaristic and totalitarian country." According to Friedberg, "the strongest and most consistent congressional opposition to came from the Republican party, and in particular from its conservative midwestern wing. It was in this part of the country that principled anticompulsion arguments struck their most responsive chord." According to Friedberg: "The widespread animosity to statism that characterized the early post-war period...played a critical role in blocking the creation of new, powerful governmental industrial planning institutions." Friedberg explains: "Even in the face of an enemy, and to a remarkable degree even in wartime, the American system has proven itself to be highly resistant to centralized industrial planning." Friedberg writes: "[T]he push for privatization, and the ideological language in which it was couched, also raised troubling questions about the legitimacy of the military's large-scale industrial activities, even those with long traditions. In the context of a worldwide contest with communism, private ownership of the means of production came to be regarded...as morally superior to any alternative form of economic organization." According to Friedberg: "The postwar privatization of American arms production was the end result of a protracted process of debate and political struggle...At the most general ideological level the burgeoning anti-statist sentiments in the 1940s and 1950s tended to strengthen the hands of the privatizers and to discredit those who advocated anything that savored of socialism." In discussing the structure of the U.S. research and development system and its performance during the Cold War, Friedberg asserts that the "large, open, and loose-limbed American system was well suited for promoting innovation, and it tended over time to outperform its more rigid, closed, and hierarchical Soviet counterpart." According to Friedberg: "[F]or nearly a half century, the pursuit of qualitative superiority [in military technology] was a central, persistent feature of the entire American defense effort." Friedberg explains: "Before the Second World War had ended and the Cold war began, senior American scientists and top military planners were already agreed that the preservation of a `preeminent position' in weapons technology must be a central goal of peacetime defense policy." "The clear emergence of the Soviet Union as the most likely enemy in any future war added urgency and a clear focus to the discussion of the role of technology in American strategy." Friedberg reports: "`Atomic weapons used tactically are the natural armaments of numerically inferior but technologically superior nations,' declared one congressional enthusiast in 1951." He explains: "The Eisenhower administration elevated the substitution of firepower for manpower to the position of key organizing principle of national strategy. Atomic and thermonuclear weapons of every conceivable yield were...at the heart of Western defenses;" and "For the West, by the mid-1950s, preserving technological supremacy had become even more essential and urgent than it had appeared only a few years before." According to Friedberg: "Critics and enthusiasts alike agree that the American research and development system was highly productive of technological advances, that it tended over time to outpace its Soviet counterpart, and that the superior performance of the American system was connected in some way to its structure."

Was there ever a real likelihood that Cold War America would turn into a "garrison state?" The clear answer is: No. References to the garrison state were rhetorical devices used most often by congressional opponents of the concentration of power in the executive branch in Washington, D.C. But Friedberg is absolutely correct that anti- statist rhetoric had powerful antecedents in American history and, therefore, resonated deeply with the public. The specter of creating a garrison state was ominous, even when it was intentionally exaggerated.

Friedberg has written the best book on international relations since John Gaddis' "Strategies of Containment". Like Gaddis, Friedberg is one of a handful of authors who possess a sophisticated knowledge of both American diplomatic history and modern theories of international relations.

With the aid of his groundbreaking archival research, Friedberg shatters existing paradigms by showing that American culture played a leading, perhaps dominant role in the forging of the United States' Cold War grand strategy.

Friedberg's book is indispensable reading for every scholar and student of international relations. It is a classic that will be read and reread for generations.

Harold Lasswell developed the idea of the garrison state in the late 1930s and early 1940s. He proposed that "under conditions of continual crisis and perpetual preparedness for total war, every aspect of life would eventually come under state control." In 1947, Hanson Baldwin, the military correspondent for The New York Times asked whether the United States could "prepare for the next, truly total war...without becoming a garrison state." George Orwell popularized the notion with his 1949 release of 1984, a harrowing view of totalitarian control by the garrison state. To a large extent, these arguments fuel Aaron Friedberger's premise that "war and the threat of war required the creation of military power, and, over time, the creation of military power led to the construction of strong, modern states." (3)

From this premise Friedberg contends that the growth of the American state was held in check during the Cold War by a tradition and ideology of anti-statism. The Cold War produced pressures for the permanent construction of a powerful central state. "In the American case," Friedberg argues, "these pressures came comparatively late in the process of political development... they were met and, to a degree, counterbalanced, by the strong anti-statist influences that were deeply rooted in the circumstances of the nation's founding. (3-4) Friedberg identifies the mechanisms for state growth between 1945 and 1960 as "the product of a collision between these two sets of conflicting forces." (4) He effectively demonstrates that the apparatus of the American state grew less during the early years of the Cold War than might have been have been expected.

Friedberg examines "five main mechanisms of power creation: those intended to extract money and manpower and those designed to direct national resources toward arms production, military research, and defense-supporting industries." (5) In each of these areas he finds anti-statist influences holding state-building in check. "Mounting popular and congressional resistance to taxes and controls compelled the Truman administration to lower its sights and to accept the necessity of a slower and, in the end, smaller military buildup." (121) Friedberg concludes "Eisenhower's commitment to holding down defense spending was a logical outgrowth of his essentially anti-statist philosophy of political economy." (127) Friedberg finds that "in the absence of sustained public opposition, the pressures for universal military training would probably have proved overwhelming," except that it raised doubts over legitimacy. (167) Like the rejection of universal military training, Friedberg also identifies the demise of centralized defense industrialization policy as "at least as much a product of domestic anti-statist influences" as a "logical, inevitable response to the advent of nuclear weapons." (199) Anti-statist influence not only resisted centralized planning and industrial dispersal, but it also strengthened the hand of privatizers, discrediting "those who advocated anything that savored of socialism." (247) Finally, Friedberg maintains that "each of the essential structural characteristics of the American Cold War research and development system was strongly influenced by ideological considerations and by the workings of American domestic political institutions [both identified as anti-statist forces]." (296) Friedberg identifies the strengthening of civilian rule in the Department of Defense, resistance to centralization, heavy reliance on private contracting and government sponsorship of domestic vice purely military technology as anti-statist influences that reduced the size, scope and effect of America's garrison state. With remarkable clarity Friedberg is able to conclude that domestic constraints on state expansion--including those stemming from mean self-interest as well as those guided by a principled belief in the virtues of limiting federal power--protected economic vitality, technological superiority, and public support for Cold War activities. He identifies the strategic synthesis that emerged by the early 1960s from this collision between anti-statist ideology and security imperative as functional and stable; it enabled the United States to deter, contain, and ultimately outlive the Soviet Union precisely because the American state did not limit political, personal, and economic freedom.

Friedberg is not a historian, and at times his lack of attention to culture, race, gender and class make this abundantly clear. Several broad assertions, while supported in the text, lack specificity. For example, Friedberg describes American business's post-war ideology in their own simplistic terms, "Free enterprise was good; too much government was not only bad for the economy, it was a profound threat to traditional American liberties," (50) without putting those statements in an anti-New Deal context.

In Friedberg's well documented 351-page text synthesis, one sees Samuel Huntington's influence (The Soldier and the State, 1957). Friedberg provides a nice tonic for Huntington's pessimism and places the entire civil-military, liberal-statist conflict in perspective. He takes a much more positive view of American liberalism's retardation of military professionalism and other state influences. Essentially agreeing with Huntington, Friedberg comes to a different conclusion: that this was not a bad thing. Of course, Friedberg has the luxury of viewing the Cold War from its successful conclusion whereas Huntington contemplated its ominous beginnings. Because it gives us insight into our current reaction to September 11, 2001, and hope that militaristic trends as expressed in the current war in Iraq will not leave permanent scars on the American state, In the Shadow of the Garrison State deserves attention at all levels in the collegiate setting.

For those interested in the dynamics and interplay of domestic and national security issues, this book is fantastic. Friedberg frames and then details key power transforming institutions and elements such arms, technology, supporting industrial complex, money and manpower, and how they formed the basis of both a powerful deterrence and a relative stable, non-garrison state that excelled economically.

Not a book for all readers, but for those pundits and novices of national security or Cold War history, this is a must have book. Sure to become required reading for top notice public policy and political science departments in leading universities.

This is an interesting read that makes astute observations about the effect of American marketing. Statistics and studies are cited, though some observations are more empirical in nature. The book becomes even more engaging when the author adds some personal stories.

It's a short book and a quick read. The content is suitable for laymen who want a new perspective of how America approaches marketing versus other countries in the world.

This book captures the sentiment of non-Americans worldwide. It's great that Johansson discusses both sides (that of American Companies, George W. Bush, Ad agencies, AND that of consumers around the world). It's time to discover better marketing techniques, methods that are not as In Your Face.

An old MBA buddy of mine Fedexed me a copy of this book (he and I were disgruntled grad students, disappointed in the way American firms seemed to have culturally insensitive ways of marketing). After our MBA several years ago, we were indoctrinated with the mantra "shareholder wealth!". We sadly cling to this idealogy to this day (food on the table anyone?). He's now in marketing, while I am in Finance/Public Policy.

I opened the FedexPak and lauged at the cover of the book (very in your face indeed). I was happy that it didn't read like a textbook, it reads like a long conversation with the author. Johansson has strong (sometimes biased) solid opinions about the state of marketing around the world, linking what was never obviously linkable: Marketing, Anti-Americanism, and Globalization. He makes you realize that we (as individual consumers) are forever surrounded by marketing media (and it's true!) and we take for granted our ability to "control" the marketing that we receive. After telling us that Marketing is no longer the friendly innocent shopping helper that we believe it to be, he shows us why American-style Marketing indirectly fuels other countries' hatred of Americans. It's not just about oil, or weapons, or Christianity. It's about Marketing. Sad but true again.

This is a very timely book. Be careful though, once you read this you'll develop a healthy level of paranoia everytime you see an advertisement, hear a jingle, or watch a commercial. You'll ask yourself, what are they really selling?

J. Johansson's introspective look at the state of marketing and the cultural sprawl it is causing throughout the world is a worthwhile read. The arrogance of American marketers, illustrated by the Bush administration, has caused havoc for humans throughout the world. Marketers such as Nike and McDonald's have taken advantage of globalization and free trade with standardizations they perceive as efficient while the of the world perceives them as imperialistic. Their assumptions on the desires and wants are falsely measured - leading to increasing resentment towards the nation which harbors and promotes capitalism.

My favorite sections of the book are Johnansson's own personal experiences growing up in the States - how he has seen the country change from what it was in the sixties, how his MBA students really don't leave understanding global marketing, how marketing practices lead to greater social inequalities and homogenized, stale thoughts. The lowest common denominator has been created by brand strategists. He provides an interesting comparison of the practices in Europe and Japan vs. American and relates it back to much of the recent WTO protests.

This is the perfect follow-up to Naomi Klein's No Logo. Towards the end of the book, Johansson provides a way out and shows us that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. I suppose the results of this November's election is tied to whether we reach that point.

A great insight into undercover narcotics investigations and patroling. I could not put this book down, a great read! Thank you for writing this exciting book!

From beginning to end INCONCEIVABLE DANGER had me hooked. I'm usually not one to read police stories but, this one is most definately the exception. Easily a one day read; INCONCEIVABLE DANGER leaves you breathless, wanting more and hardly able to wait for the next book by this outstanding author. BRAVO!!!!

...THANK YOU, OFFICER FORD, FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO YOUR COUNTRY AND YOUR COMMUNITY.

This is an action packed book that kept me in suspense. Just when I thought I was figuring out what was going to happen next, a surprise to me would occur. This book is truly suspenseful, exciting and keeps you on the edge of your seat all the time you are reading this book. It is a fine book of literature written here. I really enjoyed it. Jim

Inconceivable Danger takes you into the world of an undercover police officer who pursues a kingpin drug dealer known as Skyscraper; the most dangerous and ruthless criminal Dale and his partner had ever tried to arrest.

One mistake with this criminal meant certain death for any officer.

This book is action packed and a great thriller for all readers who like crime stories.
The sacrifices made by Dale and his partner are what legends and heroes are made of.

This story takes you into the mountains of southeast Oklahoma where contact with the suspect reveals the most vicious monster ever conceived by the two officers.

Inconceivable Danger promises to be a satisfying read for even the most discerning crime story readers. The author makes no apologies for the death and violence contained within it's pages; it is not for the faint of heart.
Dale Ford spent twenty years as an active police officer working undercover for five of those years as a narcotics investigator. He also served five years as an Officer and Chief of Southern Corrections Prisons and Asst. Chief of New Directions all women's Prisons.

Officer Ford continues to serve his community in 'off-duty' police assignments.

This original book draws into historical studies to illustrate the evolution of economics institutions. The application of economics, history and game theory is very creative and a definitely achievement of the book, in the tradition of North's "Understanding the Process of Economic Change" or other recent followers like Acemoglou's "Economic Origins of Dictatorship and democracy".

The book is divided in four main sections and 14 chapters. First, the author explains institutions as systems in equilibria, applying history and game theory. Then, he enlightens institutional dynamics as historical process (focusing on endogenous change or how history affects institutions and cultural beliefs) only to conclude with a method to apply in sociological and historical studies.

This is a seminal work and Greif's is able to clarify how market institutions work and evolve, how control and oversight institutions are created and how this questions relate to economic history and theory. Moreover, he illustrates them with real examples, like the evolution of medieval trade. It is a careful, readable and historical approach to economic development, applying economic and game theory to explain institutional patterns and change. Interesting!

This is a very good book of historic institutionism, It deserves possession.

This is one of the best examples of the analytical study of institutions in history. Highly recommended for courses in political economy and institutional analysis.

No question that this book that sums up 10 years worth of articles by one of the most remarkable scholars of his times is a must-read for anybody interested by economics and economic history. That being said the book has its defaults. Some are linked to the difficulty to gather good sources from the medieval Muslim world, but the readers will regret that no statistical approach was attempted even for the European side of the research.

Furthermore, the book is particularly poorly written and often enough it seems as if Greif was just making his sentences complicated to make his work sound smarter than it really was. It is unfortunate and many students will hate him for that. Still the conclusions are often brilliant and the book is well worth buying.

This book predicts the future in a way that no other does. I think 20 years from now, the world will look back at this book as one of the great works of the 21st Century.

The Internet Candidate came from out of nowhere, blindsiding everyone with its revolutionary ideas and Childress' clear understanding of the world we live in today. To read this book is to read a masterpiece, carefully crafted to be understood easily by everyone, but with deeper subtexts that forecast a great change in our political climate here in the United States. This book puts ideas into play that would help every single person living in America today. These ideas are easily implementable with the help of tools such as the Internet along with the support of people everywhere.

Other authors have written books that may hint at some of the ideas that The Internet Candidate contains, but these authors only hint at them, afraid to be bold and let their opinions be known. Albert Childress is a man of action, unafraid of writing ideas that others would just be too afraid to even go near. These ideas are the ideas that the politicians up in Washington D.C. don't want the public to understand. These ideas would improve the quality of life for everyone, and take the power away from those elite few that just don't understand the needs of the people.

If you only read one book in the next twenty years, make this one it. The Internet candidate will profoundly change your political views, and with enough support the ideas presented here have the potential to create a more effective government chosen directly by the people, that works directly for the people.

This story is a short, thought-provoking read. Childress' clear, informative writing style adds to the grace and professional elegance of The Internet Candidate. Anyone who reads this book will be amazed at the exciting ideas Childress has for the future of politics and our nation. This book can inspire anyone to have hope for what the future holds and it certainly inspired me.

Good Book! Short and easy to read. Very novel concepts. The internet for grassroots politics, very appealing!
One author speaking his mind.

"'Introduction to Fall Protection' by J. Nigel Ellis, is a masterpiece in the art and practices for fall protection. Excellent resource packed with useful information. The great value in this book is that it simplifies an otherwise tough subject! It will, no doubt, save many lives. How much more worth could you get than that?"

"'Introduction to Fall Protection' by J. Nigel Ellis, is a masterpiece in the art and practices for fall protection. Excellent resource packed with useful information. The great value in this book is that it simplifies an otherwise tough subject! It will, no doubt, save many lives. How much more worth could you get than that?"

Introduction to Fall Protection, Third Edition
J. Nigel Ellis, Ph.D., P.E., CSP
514 pages

This book is an excellent source of comprehensive technical information written in an easy to read and easy to understand style by a leading authority in the field of industrial and construction fall protection.

The 12 chapters, 7 appendices, and 80-page glossary of terms and references are logically arranged. Over 240 illustrations and tables help readers understand concepts. The 9-page index helps one quickly locate material.

I like the format and the fact that it almost doubled in size, as compared to the 2nd edition. This contains a wealth of useful information relating to falls and fall protection.

The book addresses various Fall Protection Codes of Practice including the OSHA standards and the ANSI standards.

It is most helpful guide in learning about falls and fall protection, and is valuable reading for all people and organizations concerned with falls and fall prevention, such as contractors, people in trades with fall exposures, property owners, builders, and attorneys.

This book is on the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) list of Safety Resources recommended for use in preparing for the Associate Safety Professional (ASP) or Certified Safety Professional (CSP) exams.

Book Review by Richard Dresser, CSP, CET, Deerfield, IL, USA. (...)

The Importance of Properly Using Fall Protection.

Fortunately, serious injuries from falls occur only rarely, because falls only occur rarely. The chance of a person falling while exposed to heights is remote, which may lead to complacency.

A person may not use fall protection for many reasons.....I've been doing it this way for years and nothing happened; I'm too tough; I didn't know; it takes too long; it is uncomfortable; etc. The person receives positive reinforcement by the fact that they didn't fall. Every time a person doesn't fall while performing a job unsafely increases the positive reinforcement, and makes it more likely the same task will be again performed unsafely.

This book helps us realize the importance of knowing why to use fall protection (education) and how to install fall protection (engineering).

The principles in the book should be used to train all workers exposed to falls. If a person doesn't catch on, retraining is necessary, or perhaps enforcement. This should be done before the biggest negative reinforcement happens, serious injury from a fall.

I am the site safety manager for steel erection for a large steel erection company. We are following a 100% fall protection over 6 feet. Very interesting with ironworkers that are used to working at much greater heights without fall protection. I am able to use the principals I learned from Dr. Ellis' book!

Leon Trotsky asked George Novack to study this topic, give the lectures involved, write this book. George always saw this as his task in memorial to the OLD MAN, and his duty to take up the cudgels of Marxist Philosophy. Once real Marxism is revived in the world, George Novack will become know as the leading Marxist Philsopher after the Russians, Lenin, Trotsky, Plekhanov and all the revisionist, pseudo marxist, academic fools will be known for what they are. This is a book that registers the transformation of a man, what being a revolutionist can bring into your life. It is simple, clear, but not superficial, and it begins your trip through the many texts George wrote continuing what Marx Lenin and Trotsky taught. Maybe you can get the flame and continue the battle forward.

While Amazon may not always have this book available for regular order it is always available from booksfromPathfinder which you can find by clicking on new and used books on the top o fthe page!

This book is the compilation of a lecture series in which a scholar lad bare a fundamental shortcoming underlying how science is understood and viewed in modern society and -- true to form -- offered an improvement.

Mr. Novack carefully cultivated his skill in fulfilling one of the unwritten rules of science: he proved a profound understanding of rigorous concepts by rendering them in everyday terms. The result is gems like this one.

So why is philosophy important? There is much wisdom in the proverb, "nothing is more practical than a good theory." If you can't think your way out of a paper bag, how can you change the world? The contradictions and misconceptions of "globalization" must be understood on their own terms so as to be able to break through them and establish a new order.

This is precisely the type of push-pull interaction that exemplifies the dialectical nature of reality Novack explained so clearly in this volume.

Read it. Reason is what will build the foundations for a reasonable world. If you, too, are disgusted by how much creative energy is wasted by designing and advertising useless products, if you're revolted by the logic of a society that can justify bombing the world's poorest nations, killing a dozen or a hundred of their citizens daily, as a perfectly reasonable way of keeping its economic indexes from slipping a fraction of a point: then George Novack is for you!

George Novack claims in the beginning of the book that, "in fighting against the mad chaos of capitalism for a socialist system free from class exploitation and oppression, wars, crises, imperialist enslavement and barbarism, we Marxists are the most reasonable individuals alive."

The book begins by explaining the necessity for revolutionists to ground their strategy in a materialist, scientific approach to reality. Materialism is the fundamental method of science; to begin with the facts-no preconceptions, biases, or prejudices to interfere with understanding the world as it really is. Only those who understand the how capitalism really works can lead the way to overcoming it.

Novack explains the development of the two fundamental forms of logic-formal and dialectical-from their origins among the classical Greek thinkers. Formal logic, developed most completely in antiquity by Aristotle, divides up the world into objects that have limited and fixed definitions. Within the system of formal logic objects can change in many ways, but there is no way of analyzing the necessity for anything to perish, or to give rise to anything really new. Formal logic treats the world as if it were a perpetually fixed structure, an aggregation of essentially unchanging objects.

Dialectical logic, on the other hand, while it recognizes the limited usefulness of formal logic for dealing with familiar objects on a day-to-day basis, goes beyond it and penetrates deep into the processes of change. Dialectics, starting from the ideas of Heraclitus and other ancients and culminating in Hegel's system at the beginning of the 19th century, analyzes the clash of opposing forces that drive changes in the form and nature of matter. Small changes in form accumulate, ultimately precipitating a radical transformation in the quality of an object. Dialectics treats the world as it is: in motion and dynamic flux. Stability is always relative, and hinges on a balance of opposing forces. There are striking contrasts between inner reality and external appearance; hidden potentials bring forth new elements. This way of thinking is characteristic of science, but only Marxism has applied this method to the science of human society and history.

This small book, by the American revolutionary George Novack, is a great intro into the philosophical underpinnings of Marxism. A must for all people beginning a study of Marxism. For all young Communists out there, this book provides a way to systemize and understand all those theories we've read about, and act as a jumping off point for further reading and study. Only drawback: It's open to capitalist accusations of being "outdated" since it was written in the 40s.

This Book Has More Meat In IT Than A 2-FT Long Philly Cheesesteak Sandwhich. Every time I see this book lying around the house, I pick it up and lose myself in it. It's absorbing for its information, not its easy readability. Author Dan Smoot is a man in the know. His profile near the back lists him as "a former member of the F.B.I. headquarters staff in Washington...and [who]authored the bestselling "The Business End of Government". The book, "Invisible Government" is a companion to those of us who realize how absurd it is that the mega wealthy would accept the democratic principles of the US Constitution (which supposedly gives governing power to the people). With chilling support, Smoot writes that the real government (the Invisible one) is composed of certain secret and pseudo-secret societies such as the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) and the Trilateral Commission. Members of these societies (and he gives lists and names plenty of very familiar people) are then placed within the US Government in very key positions and control world events, with the president merely a puppet, a public face man who smiles at the public and is the receiver of their trust-and their wrath when things go bad. (Who could doubt this, given the George W. Bush tenure?) Smoot tells us about the founder of the CFR, Col. Edward M. House, and that the CFR is only the US branch of the secret society, with the main branch known as the RIIA, Royal Institute of International Affairs, founded in Great Britain under the stewardship of certain members carrying on the mission set forth in the will of Cecil Rhodes, see my review of Rhodes: Race for Africa. Col. Edward M. House wrote a novel in 1912 entitled "Phillip Dru: Administrator" in which House details numerous laws that eventually became laws in the US over the next 20 years, including the income tax, the federal reserve, social security, and giving women the franchise. House was President Woodrow Wilson's closest advisor, who lived in the White House and was NOT a government employee. Thus began the puppet presidencys, beginning with Woodrow Wilson. There is too much more to tell, but to doubt this book is to stick your head in the sand, which is a natural sport for mankind, allowing such things to happen in the first place. For an easy read on the whole nine yards of what is going on, why and how, see the book, Don't Weep for Me, America: How Democracy in America Became the Prince (While We Slept).

Smoot's book "The Invisible Government," is a great historical record that is informative, disturbing, and well documented.
If your're interested in the elitist policies, the history of globalization, and the shadow government behind it all, then, this book is for you !!

Smoots isn't the greatest writer I've ever read, but the story is so important that it should find it's way to everyone's bookcase. Most people believe that only kooks believe in a government within a government, but here is a former FBI agent that found exactly that.

Some will remember the IPR - China scandle that brought communism into China right after WWII. Those that don't will be educated on it. Those that do remember, we be taken down into the motives and reasons behind the actions of the IPR and the men that backed them.

Dan Smoot's "Invisble Government" sold about 1 million copies through self-publishing alone, but it did not appear on the New York Times "Best Sellers List" of 1962.

Essentially it is a book dealing with organization called The Council on Foreign Relations founded by Edward Mandel House, one of the Dullers brothers and others devoted to bringing "socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx.", to quote House, to this country.

The writing is dry but effective. I think that had he lived, Senator Joseph McCarthy might have written this book himself since the Council is one of groups that he was getting into his sights before Eisenhower stopped him.

What Dan Smoot revealed is how it'c control of the national medias is so pervasive that true and vital news seldom gets to the populace at large. For instance, current members of the CFR include: Dan Rather, Tom Browkaw, Charlene Hunter Gault, and many others we have intrusted to inform and protect us.

His anaylsis of it's goals bear close attention for those who are interested in anwering befuddling questions about U.S. foreign and domestic policies.

Over twenty six years later "The Shadows of Power" by James Perloff, brought the CFR up to date, and the report on how this subversive organization has not been dealt with is not good!

From what one may gather after reading "The Invisible Government" is how many lives have been ruined or lost in order to fulfill the dreams of a few determined to create a "New World Order". If you think this is only the stuff of Ian Flemming or H.G. Wells, this book goes a long way to prove otherwise.

Other books, and there are many, devoted to exposing suberversion in high places frequently mention the CFR and its offspring the Trilateral Commission. While the news tends to focus on people in particular, the infulence of the CFR is seldom given proper consideration, if at all.

Dan Smoot revealed how the CFR is clearly anti-American, pro-socialists, and in league with organizations and individuals hostile to our form of government and way of life and he provided ample documentation that still serves interested parties to this very day.

For an interview with the author about his book search the net for "Radio Liberty". This host, Dr. Stanley Monteith" managed to get an interview with Mr. Smoot revealing the travails he had in getting his book out.

Mr. Smoot has done an invaluable service. And it lifted the weight of confusion and mystery about what is and is not true about rescent history of the Unted States.

In his opening pages of The Iran Agenda: The Real Story of U.S. Policy and the Middle East Crisis, Reese Erlich introduces you to the people of Iran and immediately makes you feel comfortable with them. You quickly get his sense for both the simplicity of their world and the complexity of the situation there. His discussions of the U.S.-Iranian relations since the 50's are historical and straightforward, free from the typical spin-and-bias of today's reporting. Despite the fact that his book brings you to the reality of just how far astray U.S. foreign policy has gone, it is an extremely enjoyable read.

Erlich makes sense out of all the forces that are present, be they global, regional or internal. He easily moves between religious histories, petroleum politics, ethnic minorities and media credibility with an objectivity that is rarely found in today's rush to war. His descriptions of blatant and alleged covert activities of several of the players makes one realize that there are many forms of `terrorism' currently being employed by our leaders to manipulate today's public opinion. His closing thought could not be more prophetic -

`If the governments of the United States and Iran won't make peace, the people of our two countries must.'

Bob Magnant is the author of The Last Transition... - a fact-based novel about Iran, Iraq and the Middle East...

A theocratic democracy? by Tim Redmond, Thursday September 20, 2007, San
Francisco Bay Guardian Online.

My old friend Reese Erlich is remarkably optimistic about Iran, which is a pleasant perspective. I'm glad somebody is.

In his insightful, if sometimes choppy, new book, The Iran Agenda: The Real Story of U.S. Policy and the Middle East Crisis, he offers an alternative view of a nation and a culture that has been either ignored or demonized by the mainstream press for more than 30 years. His basic thesis -- that US policy toward Tehran is moronic, driven by foolish politics, bad information, and greedy geopolitical aims -- is hard to dispute. His subtext -- that there's real hope for democracy in Iran -- is a bit of a tougher sell.

Erlich has done what few US journalists ever do: he's visited Iran, repeatedly, and taken the time to meet not just with government officials and activists but with ordinary Iranians. Almost across the board, they condemn the United States and support the Islamic state.

We're presented with "liberal" politicians -- which might be a bit of a stretch -- and radical activists, including Marxists, who offer a vision of a democratic Iran. Me, I'm dubious about any hope for theocratic democracy; as a proud atheist, I think that separation of church and state -- strict, inviolable separation -- is essential for any functioning democracy.

But Erlich's willing to give other cultures and ways of thinking a break, which is one of the main reasons he's such a good reporter. And in The Iran Agenda he presents a picture of a nation far more complex than the caricatures we've seen depicted by the administration and the evening news.

That's the real value of this book: you get a sense from a veteran journalist of what you've been missing all these years. Erlich tries to sort out the ethnic geopolitics of Iran and explain which groups are aligned with whom (and why the United States supports some of them). It's all somewhat dizzying, but that's part of the point. This situation is more complicated than most American opinion makers are willing to admit.

And for all that, it's a good read.

Journalist Reese Erlich grew up in Los Angeles just south of UCLA. As a child he used to walk up Westwood Boulevard toward Westwood village, past a stockbroker's office and the Crest movie theater. At the time there was no Tehrangeles. The Westwood legal offices I visited last year to fix my Iranian passport mess used to house the ultra-right-wing John Birch Society. As an aborigine of sorts, Erlich has no grievances against the Iranians who have colonized the Westwood of his childhood. On the contrary, he seems to delight in the cultural upgrade. His latest book, The Iran Agenda: the real story of U.S. policy and the Middle East crisis, should however give the American reader a nostalgic lump in the throat. Not because of old memories of a neighborhood now transformed; but because this seasoned journalist writes in a tradition now mostly abandoned by the US media. Trustworthiness.

Erlich identifies his sources by name, and gives references which independently corroborate his statements. By contrast the average American's perception of Iran has been largely defined by "unidentified sources." The Iran Agenda begins in the real Tehran bazaar where Erlich--along with actor Sean Penn and columnist Norman Solomon--had put their journalistic "boots on the ground" to report on the Iran situation. Erlich mentions other American reporters in Iran, but he observes, "Most American reporters I met saw Iran as an evil society and a danger to the United States. While many expressed disagreement with President Bush's policies, they believed Iran was developing nuclear weapons that threatened America. In short, their views tracked the political consensus emanating from Washington. Rather than proceeding from reality, they filtered their reporting through a Washington lens. When a Washington official makes a statement, even a false one, the major media dutifully report it with few opposing sources."

Of course this is not news to we Iranians. The value of The Iran Agenda is its usefulness as a tool of argument in discussions with curious Americans who ask us to be their tour guides on the Iran subject. Most educated Iranians carry an overall knowledge of the Iran-US quarrel, from Mossadegh's overthow, to the hostage crisis, to the US Navy's shooting down an Iran Air passenger jet. The Iran-Iraq war, NPT, human rights violations, student protests, worker's union discontent, Ganji, Ebadi, Ossanlou, are all swimming somewhere in our data base. But it takes a professional like Erlich to organize these floating facts into an engaging story with a strong moral. To undo years of skilful propaganda, equal skill is needed. And Erlich is certainly a talented story teller.

While he informs us that the Kurdish PJAK guerrillas are funded by the US and Israel, Erlich simultaneously evokes a feeling of action and travel reminiscent of the colorful adventures of Tintin:

"The PJAK camps are located in inhospitable terrain. During winter months, the snowy roads are accessible only on foot or by tractor. Luckily the snow hadn't yet blanketed the area, and we drove up easily--if slowly--over winding dirt roads. Suddenly, young women in green pants in the distinctive Kurdish head scarf were walking along the road. They were female guerrillas. PJAK claims its troops are almost 50 percent women."

Erlich's very brief history of the Kurds updated me on some interesting statistics. For example, I was under the impression that Kurds were mostly Sunnis. This is true in general, but in Iran 50% of this minority is Shiite. This figure makes a difference in my thinking on the Kurdish issue.

Erlich goes on to remind his readers of other ethnic minorities, the Azeri, Baluchi and Arab Iranians, who could destabilize the Iranian regime. Little of this is intelligently discussed in the US media. For obvious reasons even the Iranian media tend to keep the lid on news of ethnic unrest.

Not all of Erlich's criticism targets mainstream media. He has harsh words of advice for Iran's exile media in his native Westwood backyard. He mentions Amir Taheri's infamous false report about a Majils law requiring Iranian Jews to wear a yellow stripe on their clothing. "With each phony or exaggerated story," Erlich warns, "the LA newscasters and commentators [who continued to play the story long after it was falsified] think they are helping the popular struggle against the Iranian government. But repeated over time, the distortions discredit the exile media and, by extension, all exile opposition." Erlich describes another, bitterly funny incident--the Hakha affair-- as being "something right out of the Keystone Kops." I can't find a web link that explains this fiasco nearly as well as Erlich's narrative.

Clarifying his own agenda in writing The Iran Agenda, Erlich says, "...I personally don't trust mainstream politicians, lobbyists, and think tank gurus to resolve anything soon. Nor do I trust the clerics in Tehran to stop their belligerence. A pro-peace, pro-democracy movement exists within Iran. I think people in the United States need to build one as well." It seems Westwood had earthy, smart people long before Iranians arrived.

Hannes Artens is the author of The Writing on the Wall, the first anti-Iran-war novel.

At one of my discuss and book signing events for The Writing on the Wall I had the privilege to share the stage with Erlich. His enviable ability to explain the most complex intricacies of Iranian politics in just a few concise, laconic sentences, almost adopting the proverbial Spartan reputation for austerity to his illustrations, and yet enriching them with such a compelling storytelling and personal anecdotes, that the suspenseful excerpt I had read from my novel before paled in comparison, already fascinated me back then (right after the event I immediately set off to revise my script's flow). This clarity and conciseness in analysis and style is what may appeal most to novices to the intricacies of U.S.-Iranian relations, thus rendering The Iran Agenda the perfect introduction to the subject.

Contrary to many of us who write about Iran these days - guilty as charged - Erlich, a seasoned field veteran who has reported on Middle East crises for NPR, Radio Deutsche Welle, Mother Jones, The San Francisco Chronicle, and Dallas Morning News - to just a name a few - has frequently shuttled in and out of to Iran over the last years - once even accompanied by actor turned activist Sean Penn. Drawing upon this wealth of resources and experiences, Erlich provides us with a manifold kaleidoscope of impressions and insights from the bazaars of Tehran, a former traditional stronghold of the supporters of the Revolution where the harm caused by U.S. sanctions and international embargos is felt most these days, to the back yard offices of courageous NGOs and civil advocacy groups, to the mountain fortresses of Kurdish insurgents, and finally to the world of make-believe of 'Tehrangeles', where the exile community keeps plotting on schemes for regime change as realistic as Dick Cheney's (they're perceived so out of touch with how people in Iran really feel that they don't even receive funding from the State Department, who usually pours out the horn of plenty on every dubious diaspora group they get aware of).

It is in describing this triangular relationship between the indigenous Iranian opposition, the pipe dreams of Ahmed Chalabi-wannabes and the exile entourage of Reza Pahlavi, craving to trade their suburban Washington DC mansions for Niavaran Palace, and the U.S. employing PJAK (Party of a Free Life in Kurdistan, the Iranian PKK equivalent) and MEK (the Mujahideen e-Khalq, officially designated a terrorist organization by the State Department) as proxies in their covert war against the invidious Mullah regime where The Iran Agenda is at its strongest and offers some valuable, new insight to even versed pundits of U.S.-Iranian relations. In fact, Erlich's book is the first to problematize and discuss in greater detail Washington's utilization of Iran's ethnic minorities to destabilize the regime and actively finances splinter groups to launch terrorist attacks against Tehran, killing dozens of innocent civilians (this dirty covert war, reminding one of the CIA's activities in 1970 Cuba, was first uncovered in a 2006 The New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh). In assessing these forms of regime change Erlich and the Iranian human rights activists he has interviewed, most prominently Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Shirin Ebadi and independent journalism-icon Akbar Ganji, are equally clear and unsparing:

"Every opponent of the Iranian opposition that I spoke to criticized the disastrous impact of U.S. policies. When the United States periodically threatens military attacks, funds dissidents, and sponsors terrorism, the administration helps fuel anti-American nationalism, said Ganji.

"'Passing this [(85 million), part of the Iran Freedom and Support Act, N.B. H.A.] budget has made our work much more difficult and the work of the democratic forces much more cumbersome in Iran,' Ganji told me.
"Shirin Ebadi explained that Iranian activists also opposed unilateral U.S. economic sanctions that began under Jimmy Carter. The sanctions prohibit most trade, investment, and many cultural exchanges. 'Economic sanctions hurt people more than the government,' said Ebadi."

Beside the book's enlightening inroads into the maze of Iranian politics and the neocons' pathological traumas with the Islamic Republic, Erlich, who has earned quite a reputation as a forceful critic of corporate media in his first book, Target Iraq. What the News Media Didn't Tell You, also mercilessly reckons with his peers' coverage of Iran. In light of American corporate media having degenerated into court writers of this administration and the current Republican candidate, together with Vice President Cheney utilizing his actual Middle East "peace trip" to heavy-handedly beat the war drums again, Erlich's frankness about the media's role in distorting the public's picture of Iran as a bunch of crazed Mullahs trying to get their hands on a doomsday weapon, are more important now than ever. His tireless efforts to confront us with the other, the real Iran, and the cursory outline of the about-to-unfold drama's major actors in Tehran and Washington make The Iran Agenda a strongly recommended contribution, both as a first overview for curious beginners, but also in offering close observers some interesting facets they may not have been aware of yet.

This is an interesting book. Anyone who is interested in an alternative to the right wing talk radio and tv news should seriously consider checking out the Thom Hartmann radio show opposite Rush Limbaugh weekdays at: thomhartmann dot com / showlisten.shtml

Whether democrat, republican, or indepedent, so many of the facts out there are completely ignored by the mainstream media and talk shows. This show is one strong example of an examination of the facts regardless of your political affiliation. I am not affiliated with the show in any way, just struck by the facts so many seem to ignore.

"As of this writing no weapons of mass destruction have been found. And, even if a cache were to be uncovered, can anyone seriously believe that weak, defenseless Iraq ever seriously intended to attack the United States?
No, we really must conclude that it was oil, the need of the United States to control the oil of the Gulf, that sent America to war.
The important thing now to comprehend is why was the oil of the Persian Gulf specifically so important to get control of?
And that is where this book should be a help. . . ."
-from the Preface

Recently I did an extensive college research paper on the connection between oil and the recent Gulf Wars, and of all the books that I used, this one was the most useful. Great for understanding the Iran-Iraq war, the media blitz against saddam in the run up of the first Gulf war, and more. I highly recommend it.

Pelletier, I think, is a bit controversial because he places the blame for the Halabja massacre about equally on Iran and Iraq, but his credentials are impeccable and his version of events is highly plausible.

Written by the CIA's senior political analyst on Iraq throughout the Iran-Iraq War, Iraq And The International Oil System: Why America Went To War In The Gulf is a stinging indictment of America's true motives behind its military expeditions to Iraq. To this day no "weapons of mass destruction" have been found in Iraq; Iraq And The International Oil System postulates that the real reason for America's involvement in Iraq is not just to have a source of oil, but to strategically control the oil of the Persian Gulf and arguably the world, Iraq And The International Oil System dissects politics, lies, real motives, the ties of U.S. and foreign oil companies and the wherewhithal of nations to manipulate one another. A sober wake-up call to dark true motives and the desperate need for the truth to come out.