Events Books

This story of a city government responsive to community people and empowering them to build better communities through small grants and support is inspiring and hopeful...both for our neighborhoods (especially those so often left out) and people, as well as for a kind of government that partners with people to make things happen. Stimulating and gives ideas that can be replicated elsewhere. Mary Nelson

Neighbor Power is an excellent book! Smart. Funny. Inspiring. If you're interested in Seattle---or if you're interested in community building---or if you're interested in how local government works (and sometimes fails to work)---or if you're just interested in people and you like hearing good stories---read this book.

As a resident in a transitional neighborhood, I find the example and stories in this book inspiring. The book is informative with examples of individual contributions making a difference as well as the power when people organize.

This book is both inspiring and full of practical information. I recommend it to anyone interested in working at the grassroots level to make cities better places to live.

It was cheering to learn that, in a city obsessed with reaching impossible consensus before acting, things are actually getting done here. I also learned some delightful details about when, where, and how certain Seattle landmarks were born.

If you're an activist, you'll find some concrete, useful theories and techniques on how to accomplish your goals. I'm no activist. But reading about these small, very important changes--made by common citizens--could make an activist out of anyone.

4389 Never Too Late A Prosecutor's Story of Justice in the Medgar Evers Case, by Bobby DeLaughter (read 29 Nov 2007) This book by the prosecutor of Byron De La Beckwith was the highlight of my November reading, and one of the highlights of my reading so far this year. Beckwith murdered Medgar Evans on June 12, 1963 in Jackson, Mississippi and was tried twice in 1964 but the jury hung each time. DeLaughter prosecuted him again--since he was never acquitted he could be tried again.The book tells all of the things which went into the successful prosecution, and the fact that there were blacks on the jury this time does not seem to have been the key factor in the result. DeLaughter sets out in full his closing argument to the jury and it does deserve to be ranked as one of the great closing arguments of the century. This was an excellent and poignant book,

Medgar Evers was an American Hero. A young, articulate African American man, he had the courage to be head of the NAACP in Mississippi during the darkest days of the Civil Rights Movement. He was shot in the back in his driveway by an avowed "rabid racist" named Byron de la Beckwith.

Beckwith was tried twice for the crime; each time the jury was hung.

A quarter of a century later, an intrepid reporter named Jerry Mitchell of the Jackson Clarion-Ledger shook Mississippi to the core when he uncovered new evidence that pointed to Beckwith's guilt. Myrlie Evers, an amazing woman who was widowed by Beckwith's bullet, took that evidence to the Hinds County District Attorney's Office and asked that the case be reopened.

At first, the DA was sympathetic but skeptical. Then a brilliant Assistant District Attorney, Bobby DeLaughter, began investigating the possibility of indicting Beckwith.

This is the true story of DeLaughter's dogged, relentless search for justice. The story was partly told in the film "Ghosts of Mississippi" in which DeLaughter was played by Alec Baldwin. However, DeLaughter's real life account of the trial is far more captivating, amazing and, ultimately satisfying than the movie's version.

This book has the passion and riveting surprises of the best of Grisham or Turow, combined with the emotional impact of "Eyes On The Prize" and "The Long Walk Home." DeLaughter, a fluid and powerful writer, takes us deep into the heart of evil as he investigates a powerful Klansman.

In the end, this book is a triumphant and uplifting reminder of how the legal system can still bring justice.

Highest Recommendation.

As a new lawyer, this book really helped me realize so many things as to what a lawyer should do before, during, and after the trial.

I am a Filipino, there is no racial discrimination in our country... yet I cried many times while reading this book.

If you read this book you will really learn to appreciate the value of human dignity.

Bobby Delaughter was a prosecutor of the right timbre, morals, and courage at the right time to help bring justice in a 30-year old murder case. This riveting book tells how, in the face of extreme odds, his faith was brought to the forefront, to show that God really does care and uses people such as Delaughter to produce what He desires most - justice. In this book, we see not only a story of Mississippi's catharsis in turning from a place of race-baiting politicians and of organized Ku Klux Klanism to a place where justice can truly be done, but also a story of the touching emotional struggle of the victims and prosecutors alike. As prosecutors face great opposition from not only racists and self-seeking politicians, but also from well-meaning but skeptical black and white citizens and even an arrogant FBI, they rise above the ordinary at great personal and political cost. As an attorney, I coined the phrase, "sometimes truth is very hard to come by." This story embodies that principle. The efforts of Mr. Delaughter and his D.A. boss should be applauded and lauded as a great triumph, not just for the machinery and tools of this great country's ever-grinding legal system, for they are but lifeless concepts apart from the souls that man their stations, but also for those with virtue and conscience, who are the fuel and oil without which there would be no production of justice.

I had been interested by the story of Medgar Evers and the difficulty the state had in prosecuting his alleged killer for some time. When the State of Mississippi reopened the case for a potential third attempt at prosecution I was hopeful that some sense of justice might be achieved but not at all convinced that the then alleged killer would be found guilty of Medgar Evers' murder. Bobby De Laughter has written an insightful, thoughtful and intriguing book. As I read his account of the various threads of the story, the leads the DA's office had to develop to prosecute this case after so many years and the elements of good fortune that allowed this case to be pursued successfully I could not help but feel the presence of Medgar Evers. The goodness of the man and his persistent quest for justice is echoed in the actions of Mr. De Laughter, Ms. Myrlie Evers, the many dogged investigators and committed professionals who played their part in making the third trial come together.

This is a great read, so compelling I could not put it down. In many ways this book reads like a mystery. So much of what was needed to prepare the case against Byron De La Beckwith was lost during the long period between the killing and the final trial. Twice shut out, the stakes couldn't have been higher for the prosecution in this third outing. The book is no less suspenseful because the verdict is known. Although an intensely personal account, Mr. DeLaughter clearly and consicely explains the legal hurdles the prosecution faced and incisively analyzes the behavior and motivations of the defendant. Mr. De Laughter is widely descibed as very private, but in his writing he and his experience are so accessible the reader feels as if s/he is there every step of the way. This is an intelligent and inspiring work that should not be missed.

I would like to see every American Jew read this book. It is a seminal work on de-mything American denominational Judaism. American Judaism has changed and the old cry of assimilation = no more Jews is the biggest myth.

Arthur Blecher, rabbi and therapist, proves himself a good historian, management consultant, and writer too. Incisive and clearly put, his analysis exposes a number of myths that impede Jewish life under its relatively recent denominational structure in America. Contrary to common assumptions, the American Jewish population is not declining, nor is intermarriage a threat. If the Reform and Conservative denominations would accept intermarriage as they are beginning to do with same-sex Jewish couples, it would eliminate embarrassing hypocrisy and the alienation of Jewish as well as non-Jewish spouses and their children. Rabbi Blecher also points to the importance of the Internet as a place for Jewish learning and gathering. I was surprised at how much I learned about the history and current workings of my religion. Mazel Tov!

First, I confess I have not finished the book yet, but did not want to wait to encourage others to enjoy it! Dr. Blecher has a rare gift for intellectual curiosity, perceptiveness, and the courage to speak his mind. When I became engaged to a Jewish man, I agreed to raise our children in the Jewish tradition, but did not want to make a false conversion for the sake of appearances. Everyone asked me if I was converting, though fortunately my in-laws were astute enough to accept that I would be a wonderful wife without doing so. I am overjoyed to encounter a rabbi who sees our commitment to passing on Jewish identity to our children not as a failure or second best, but as a sign of hope for Judiasm.

I am also very pleased to discover Dr. Blecher's careful, impressive scholarship. So many books contain only a superficial nod towards actually doing your homework in service of gratifying the author's ego. It is a joy to spend time in the company of such a learned mind! This book combines a deep knowledge base with fresh ideas about the future of Judaism. I love to see books that make us question our assumptions, particularly when an author is not afraid to challenge an establishment.

His purpose is to make Judaism more meaningful, to invigorate discussion, and get us all thinking. He offers a new perspective on the role of rabbis, synagogues, and Jewish families in their communities. I would love to see this book provoking long needed national and international self-examination for all of us interested in exploring what it means to be Jewish, and what it means to offer this tradition to our children.

As one who lost ties to my Jewish identity as a result of the dogma which did not fit, or make sense to me, The New American Judaism provides new hope for a better cultural and spiritual connection. It opens the door to the transformation of the practice of Judaism to those of us who have been disenfranchised by the "traditionalists." I found it very refreshing and reassuring that there is hope that my cultural background may be reconnected to its spiritual roots.

The New American Judaism presents a fascinating approach to Judaism today. Face it, for most Jews comtact with organized Judaism ends at 13 and starts again with marriage and children. For those who do not marry Jews there is a fear that they will be shunned by the community, particularly if the spouse does not either convert or swear to raise the children exclusively Jewish.

Dr. Blecher challenges many "myths" being pushed in the mainstream Jewish world such as the children of interfaith marriages are less likely to identify as Jews and that interfaith marriages themselves harm the Jewish community.

While much the New American Judaism focuses on demonstrating that these "myths" are repeated without any imperical evidence, Rabbi Blecher provides the reader with solid and positive data and anecdotal evidence to show that indeed Judaism is thriving and that interfaith marriages enhance rather than detract from this fact.

Blecher's book should bring American Jews and non Jews in Jewish families (and their families) to a place in which they can see a new and postive and extremely INCLUSIVE approach to Judaism in the US.

John Taylor's " New Views of the Consitution of The United States" is a brilliant refutation of the Federalist and strong central government. Taylor, the most articulate exponent of Jeffersonian Republicanism, is at his finest here. In New Views he refutes the doctrines of Madison and Hamilton in the Fedrealist which declare the United States to be a " consolidated nation" and having a supreme national government, instead of a federal one. He points out the contridictions of the authors of the Federalist, and de-mystifies it's hold on the interpretation of the Constitution. He also destroys the arguement that the Supreme Court has the exclusive right to " interpret" the Constitution and has the final word. He outlines a Jeffersonian view of limited government, and it's role in a federal republic. His predictions of civil war and geographical
domination of one section of the union over the other are prophetic. Anyone who believes in states rights, republicanism, and democracy should read New Views. This friend of Thomas Jefferson deserves the look. He espouses pure Jeffersonian Reoublicanism.

Twentieth Centurions often credit modern conservatism with being the brainchild of Russell Kirk, Barry Goldwater or some other recent conservative, but John Taylor of Caroline clearly demonstrates in this classic work that conservatism has had long established roots in American society. First published in 1823, we find that government usurpation of the rights of states and individuals is not exactly a twentieth century revelation.

The language of 180 years ago, coupled with Taylor's agonizing repetitiveness, make this a somewhat tedious and difficult read, but one that is certainly worth the effort. The basic theme of the book is how nationalism was proposed and defeated in favor of federalism at our Constitutional Convention, however, there has been, from the beginning, a behind the scenes push to propagate a system of nationalism by what would be considered today, a liberal governmental faction. Taylor meticulously explains how this objective was set into motion and its consequences of the deterioration of states rights and personal freedoms. It doesn't take much effort for the knowledgeable reader to see how that battle has been furthered in the years since Taylor first exposed the nationalism gameplan.

Americans today tend to look upon the misdeeds of government and ask, "How can they get away with doing that?" Taylor clearly illustrates how it all began and that there is nothing new under the sun. But he also goes further in explaining various ways of "righting the ship" so to speak, and discusses the consequences of each differing course of action.

Oh, if we could only find a congressman today who possessed the clear headed tenacity of John Taylor of Caroline. A person who would fear not the consequences of unpopularity and stand tall to examine the true principles upon which our founding promoted.

If you are conservative, this book is a must read and will arm you with ammunition to clearly discuss states' rights and original intent. If you are a liberal, this outstanding book will help cure your mental condition and lead you down a path of understanding.

As an endnote, I don't normally comment on the quality of the book itself, but this one warrants comment. The book is printed on quality acid free paper and comes with a cloth bookmark. A nice touch.

Monty Rainey
www.juntosociety.com

New Views of The Constitution, by John Taylor is one of the best reads from the early 1800's on the issue of democracy and the constitution. I have an original first edition and it is one of my most prized books. Read it, if you can find it, and you to will have a new found respect for the development of our great nation's history of democracy.

This is the seminal work on the Constitution and its true meaning. Taylor was the greatest political thinker in U.S. history and a critically important advisor to Thomas Jefferson ... his advocacy of interposition by state legislators to arrest and reverse unconstitutional encroachments upon the reserved sovereign liberty and powers of the states and their people, as advanced by Jefferson and James Madison in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, remains the most effective means of restoring and maintaining a limited federal government accountable to the boundaries established in the Constitution.

Martyn Babitz, Esquire - author of THE ILLUSION OF FREEDOM: How To Restore The True Constitution And Reclaim Liberty Now

~New Views of the Constitution~ is a remarkable exposition of states' rights federalism or what scholars dub the South Atlantic republicanism. John Taylor of Caroline stands out for his prudent and principled statesmanship. He stood alongside the illustrious John Randolph of Roanoke as the leaders of the Tertium Quids. He was an avid constitutionalist, a strict constructionist, and a republican at heart. For much of his life, he stood up against the depredations of the aristocracy of paper and privilege. After his Senatorial career, he retired to farming on his plantation, and continued to engage in active dialogue with his political allies and opponents. He penned 'Tyranny Unmasked' which critiqued the protectionist system of the Hamiltonians, he also authored 'Arator' which conveyed his agrarian thoughts with some political tidbits, and in 1823 he published this book 'New Views of the Constitution' shortly before his death.

Justice Joseph Story, a champion of judicial nationalism, scoffed at the book for its title and never read it. "I once saw a book advertised New Views of the Constitution. I was startled! What right a man to start new views upon it?" Though, Taylor wrote his book to answer the perennial question, "What is the American form of government-national or federal?" Utilising recently published notes from Robert Yates which were sealed as was most the proceedings at the convention for years, John Taylor sought to give clarity and insight on the Constitution. Taylor makes it abundantly clear that the nationalising tenets of the consolidationist-monarchist camp were aired and summarily defeated at the convention following ratification. The ratified Constitution was the consensus produced which was wholly "federal" and not "national." Hamilton's nationalist motions were all struck down in the Convention. "Although, neither the Virginia plan nor Mr. Hamilton succeeded in the convention, they embraced a mass of talents, too proud and powerful for humility and submission; and they resorted to the engine of construction, to be directed by many an Archimedes," notes Taylor. And this is precisely what Hamilton did, as he tried to conflate the teleocratic principle of "general welfare" expressed into the preamble into a grant of power. The so called "general welfare" clause was merely the expressed interest in which delegated powers were to serve, and is hardly a grant of power in itself as Hamilton would postulate. The language of the Constitution was to be subverted by the nationalists through construction: they would malign the "necessary and proper" clause, they manipulated the so called national supremacy clause, and lastly they animated the "We the people" clause in the preamble with an esoteric democratic nationalism as if the American people were one consolidated mass. If one studies the debates, and the deducible nature of sovereignty which flows from the States, it should be readily apparent that the United States was framed as a federal republic and not a national unitary state. John Taylor championed a true federal polity and the Constitution which he saw as compact among sovereign States. The States delegated certain, expressed enumerated powers to the general government, and the interlocking structures set by the Constitution embodied the whole federal polity. The Tenth Amendment clarified the consensus at the 1787 Convention: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Taylor was keenly aware of the lessons of history, and that "the Roman republik" having been subverted into centralised imperium "was secured by republican words." For this reason, he would not stand idle as centralizing sophists tried to engage in such chicanery, so as to disfigure the American republic.

All things considered, John Taylor of Caroline offers a remarkably insightful work and this neglected classic is pivotal in gaining valuable introspection on the study of the constitutional debates and the convention of 1787. The "Sage of Hazelwood" was a great American patriot, a principled republican and a champion of states rights. His exposition is a keystone for true federalists and defenders of states' rights.

"Sovereignty is the highest degree of political power, and the establishment of a form of government, the highest proof which can be given of its existence. The states could have not reserved any rights by articles of their union, if they had not been sovereign, because they could have no rights, unless they flowed from that source. In the creation of the federal government, the states exercised the highest act of sovereignty, and they may, if they please, repeat the proof of their sovereignty, by its annihilation. But the union possesses no innate sovereignty, like the states; it was not self-constituted; it is conventional, and of course subordinate to the sovereignties by which it was formed." -John Taylor of Caroline.

Attorney Martin Garbus, in the social tradition of Clarence Darrow, has laid out in concise but stark terms the damage that the now-dominant, right-wing ideologue Supreme Court justices have done to constitutional and human rights. He forecasts that if their 5-4 past decisions are prologue, then the future for the next 25 years is not bright for those who believe that no one is above the law.

This book is must reading for anyone who is concerned about fairness and compassion in the meting out of justice by the federal judiciary. It is an easy-to-read constitutional history of the most significant cases and their effects on Americans.

There are a few errors that should have been caught during the review and editing. For example, on page 56, the name of Richard Mellon Scaife is given as Richard Scaife Mellon, and on pages 110-111, the date of Baker v. Carr is incorrectly listed as 1959, rather than the correct date of 1962. It is correct in note 42. And a final example will suffice. On page 132, Justice Byron White is incorrectly identified as his 19th century predecessor Justice Edward White. However, these errors do not detract from Mr. Garbus' cogent insight and call to action of all who believe, as he does, that "We need justice now[!]"

On a personal note, as a Louisiana native and student of its history, I was aware of the Colfax, LA, riot and murders of April 13, 1873. However, I was not familiar with United States v. Cruikshank (1876) that arose from the attempted criminal prosecution of the Colfax murderer s (p. 90). And I was certainly not aware that Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and O'Connor had resurrected this Reconstruction-era bias as a precedent in Morrison v. United States to rule on May 15, 2000, that "Congress had no power to punish private violence motivated by gender" (p. 90). Another pernicious Louisiana case, Plessy v. Ferguson (May 18, 1896), has been cited by the Rehnquist and Roberts courts to "provide the basis of future decisions on issues ranging from abortion to civil liberties to race and gender persecution" (p. 70). Plessy v. Ferguson is the Supreme Court case sanctioning segregation in which the Court ruled that "separate but equal" facilities were constitutional. Plessy was not overturned until Brown v. Topeka Board of Education in 1954.

With the recently re-aligned Supreme Court, I wanted to know what is going on and what could happen to our legal system. This book gives it to you in clear language with a high level of depth and detail. Trial lawyer Martin Garbus, who has appeared before the Supreme Court many times, explains the sweeping changes that can be handed down from the Court and just might shake the foundations of this country. It's a really good read, and I'm glad I picked it up.

In 2000, when the Supreme Court crowned George W. Bush President of the United States, friends of mine argued that Bush would be a one term President and would create little damage to our foreign policy, or to any of our institutions. They were wrong on all counts. In his book, The Next 25 Years: The New Supreme Court and What It Means for Americans, Martin Garbus outlines just how deep and long term the effect of Bush' s Supreme Court appointments will be for our country. With the appointments of Samuel Alito and John Roberts, the court has moved seriously to the right rejecting precedent and chipping away at some of the court's most important rulings regarding privacy, religion and states' rights. Garbus outlines recent court decisions taking the reader through the conservative arguments. He demonstrates how these decisions are part of a conservative plan implemented by the Bush administration's court appointees which will undo major liberal decisions since the Warren court. His analysis is alarming and should be read by everyone who is concerned about the future of our democracy.

This is a wonderful book. Like his previous book, "Courting Disaster," Martin Garbus tells what really happens in the Supreme Court. He also describes the Court from a political viewpoint and goes through each of the court subjects and shows how each judge comes out. It's detailed, knowledgable and a pleasure to read. I'm not a lawyer, and I loved it.

It is hard not to be frightened by Martin Garbus' new book. I've been a fan of the legendary Garbuis since his early books (TOUGH TALK and TRAITORS AND HEROES), which covered his swashbuckling career as one of the nation's pre-eminent first amendment lawyers. His clients -- from Lenny Bruce to Vaclac Havel to Spike Lee -- are a list of the powerful and important, and Garbus' work defending them is fascinating. But this book is something different.

Instead of revisiting past cases, Garbus looks to the future -- specifically, what the next quarter century holds for America given the makeup of the incredibly conversative Roberts court. Given the ages of the most conservative members -- Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas -- these guys will be around and voting as a bloc for a long time to come. If you think the Rehnquist years were bad, you ain't seen nothin' yet. What Garbus sees happening as a result is very upsetting -- nothing less than a conservative revolution to undo every progressive decision on the Supreme Court since the New Deal. No more reguolatory laws controlling Wall Street, no more environmental regulation, no more protection for workers and minorities, no more protection for abortion (though this will not be attacked directly), no govrenment agencies regulating American business, nothing whatsoever to balance the private sector run amok and the evils of prejudice and discrimination.

It's a nightmare vision, but it's no nightmare -- it's all to real. And Garbus elucidates the developments, and the history bhind them, in a clear, simple and dramatic way. If you want to know what's going to happen on the Supreme Court -- and therefore in all of our lives -- in the next 25 years, this book will show you the very scary truth. Take it as a call to action. and make sure we don't let any more conservatives on the court for a long time to come!

I first heard of this book when the author George Farah appeared on "Democracy Now," and I was interested in learning more about the CPD. This book does a very good job of discussing the various ways the two parties work to maintain a two party system, often hurting the interest of the American voter. My only complaint is that some of the latter chapters discussed the positive alternatives we could make, which I felt was unnecessary and didn't really add anything to my knowledge of the debates. Plus it includes a joke John Kerry made which made me laugh, although it wasn't about how he was trailing in the polls and needed to "ketchup." Why ketchup related jokes were not part of his campaign, I'll never know. Digression aside, as I stated in my title - everyone should read this to better understand the politics behind the supposed "informational" debates which are less a representation of our freedom and democracy, and more another example of how the rich and powerful keep becoming the rich and powerful.

I am a little behind in my reading, but I have been thinking about this text and feel that No Debate challenges the status quo, but additionally, has already influenced the shape of current debates. UTube has found a presence not seen before and multimedia will continue to reinvent modern elections. What I particularly liked about the book (I am not done) is the author's suggested action items. This book does not whine and leave us wondering "what should we do?". Instead, Farah offers intelligent alternatives and I believe we are seeing some of this put into motion already. What will be next for the this author?

George Farah writes about the current organization that orchestrates the Presidential debates, including its history and the details of how it operates. According to Farah, the Commission on Presidential Debates is not the nonpartisan organization it claims to be, but instead is a bipartisan, corporate sponsored front for the Republican and Democratic parties controlled by the campaigns of the Republican and Democratic nominees. The author points out in great detail the hypocrisies, lies, and manipulations the two parties, the Commission members, and the campaigns engage in to maintain the domination of the two major parties in the debates. He concludes his book by presenting the formation of the Citizens' Debate Commission and the principles under which this new Commission would operate. To those who are interested in how our political system operates and how we might improve it, this book not only offers insight, it offers an alternative to the current system which is a blight on a free and democratic society. The book includes two appendices. The first is a document from the 1996 presidential campaign entitled 'Memorandum of Understanding' which is the agreement reached between the Clinton and Dole campaigns as to all the particulars of how the debate will be conducted. These memorandums are rubber stamped by the Commission on Presidential Debates. The second appendix is a press release from the Democratic and Republican parties indicating the formation of the Commission on Presidential Debates. This document is replete with a lot of civic high mindedness for the formation of this organization which in reality serves the two major parties and not the interests of the American electorate.

This is a must read for anyone who has found American politics to be oddly and uncomfortably narrow. Have you ever wondered why you don't get to see some of the candidates you want see, like Perot, Nader, and Buchanan? Have you ever wondered why you don't hear about some critical issues, like free trade, government waste, immigration, child poverty, and media concentration? Have you ever wondered why you only hear a series of boring, memorized soundbites, rather than actual discussion between the candidates? In this book, No Debate, George Farah shows just how the Republican and Democratic candidates secretly collude to control, manipulate, and ultimately ruin the most important public forum for the education of the American people - the presidential debates. The presidential debates are the gatekeeper to the election, and when you keep candidates and issues out of the debates, you keep them out of American politics. Farah's book is a truly fascinating exposé of the major party candidates' behind-the-scenes manipulation of the debates, replete with stunning quotes and entertaining anecdotes. Did you know that Perot was included in the 1992 presidential debates because President Bush - who ultimately blamed Perot for costing him the election -- demanded that Perot be included? The book reads with remarkable clarity and refreshing speed, and ends with a proposal for reform that is, in fact, being pushed by leading conservative, liberal, and centrist civic leaders. If you care about democracy and you're tired of being deceived, No Debate is a must read.

Remember that totally boring debate between George W. Bush and Al Gore in 2000? Why so much agreeing with each other, why was there no REAL debate going on? Well this book takes that issue head on, and it's about time someone did. These debates are shown for what they truly are, which is orchestrated soundbites. The two party duopoly has monopilized this venue so that other parties/issues cannot invade their control of the subjects and issues of the election.

Mark my words: if this control of the debate continues than less and less voters will show up to the booths. And also, if John Kerry is stupid enough to agree to a protocol for the debate as was done in debates past, he will certainly lose the election because you have to catch George W. Bush off gaurd to see what he's really made of.

Looking at the range of literature on drug prohibition, Spooner cuts the fluff for a more exact rational.

. We would be amiss to state the pamphlet as redundant upon a single reading. It sounded quite repetitive to me the first time I read it. But, when I tried to summarize the theme, I found that the points Spooner makes include several distinct areas of discussion. And, it builds to a climax. He ultimately points out the real rulers of this country, "... these soulless blood-money loan-mongers... And now these lenders of blood-money demand their pay; and the government, so called, becomes their tool, their servile, slavish, villainous tool, to extort it from the labor of both the North and the South."
. Spooner repeats in places for emphasis, but the thread of his argument sweeps on through the various objections that one might raise along his route.
. If you think it repeats, try to outline it. You'll find that each section presents his point in another light.
. As a matter of fact, any attempt to state the theme in a paragraph would lower it to a statement of personal opinion rather than the masterful essay which it is.

Dan Marks
Republic of Texas
.

This is certainly a different way to look at an American citizen's relationship to society, the US Government, and the Constitution of the United States. I find it brilliant, if a bit redundant by the end. Spooner applies all of the various tests to which a lawyer submits a contract, to the relationship between citizen and Constitution. If you buy the precept that this is a pseudo-contractual relationship, then you will find that it is, as Spooner puts it, a "Constitution of no authority."

If you feel that this is not a contract, or that it is some sort of special contract, well then this book will probably just bore and/or annoy you. I am not sure how to understand the Constitution, or my participation in a tacit social contract, and found this book entirely compelling and wonderful. I buy many copies and hand them out to my long-suffering friends.

It has been said in other places that Spooner raises a rather obscure point regarding the legitimacy of the U.S. Constitution. This point of view now writes him out of the history books. Another writer describes this particular work as the single most subversive piece ever written in the United States -- an opinion shared by those who are narrow-minded about giving up their individual liberty.

If the Constitution has no authority, what does? Is it power, like might making right, that controls and restrains our liberties? Or is it the individual, who must live under the rules of the coercive collective, through ballot counts of a minority of the population, the "voters"?

And if the Constitution does have authority, does that authority include authorizing our government to abuse our rights as citizens and as people?

Spooner notes in his opening, speaking of the original writers of the Constitution, "If they had intended to bind their posterity to live under it, they should have said that their object was, not 'to secure to them the blessings of liberty,' but to make slaves of them; for if their 'posterity' are bound to live under it, they are nothing less than the slaves of their foolish, tyrannical, and dead grandfathers." So starts the essay.

Destroying all support for voting by secret ballot, for voluntarily paying taxes, for respecting elected officials (members of a "secret band of robbers and murderers"), for recognizing treaties, for giving oaths to support the Constitution, etc, etc,... the essay makes all common wisdom built upon our accepted, politically correct fallacies collapse under the weight of our own reason.

If you ever read this book, remember... our rights are not granted by government; rather, we institute government to protect our rights.

Lysander Spooner's trenchent essay titled NO TREASON: THE CONSTITUTION OF NO AUTHORITY is reason to think about constitutional rights, authority, the legal system vs. natural law, etc. Spooner who was a learned jurist, abolitionist, business man, and "gadfly" to the powers that be before and after this and other essays were written. His comments on the relationship between poltical leaders and the hidden actual "powers behind the throne" are serious comments that thoughtful Americans should carefully consider.

Spooner thought that the Constitution had no binding authority based on the laws of contract, association, and due process. Spooner stated that those who ratified the Constitution had no authority to bind posterity to the document since these men could not get suceeding generations to sign or agree to a contract. Spooner argued that these men expressed a hope and a sentiment rather than any iron-clad contract. Spooner stated that in a legal case of contract, a plantiff could not enforce a judgement against a civil defendant if the defendant's name was not signed to a contract. The U.S. Constitution which was ratified in 1787 could not possibly be contractually binding on future generations. Spooner also used the example of a corporations whose members signed contracts to create these institutions. However, once the original individuals died, the corporation died with them them unless successors agreed to continue the corportation by SIGNED written contract.

Spooner also makes a good case of any political document actually representing the "people." Estimates are that during the first three-quaters of the 19th. century, between one-tenth and one-twentieth of the U.S. population were elgible to vote, and yet even fewer of elgible voters actually voted. Spooner was clear that this is not representing "the people." Spooner was aware that voting was supposed to select the best men for government posts. Yet, voting was too often a self defense motive against those who may vote against one's interests.

Spooner further stated that Article I Paragraph 6 protected U.S. Representatives and Senators from arrest except except for treason, felony,etc. Yet, U.S. Senators and Representatives could meet in secret sessions, "behind closed doors," and in seclusion to make poltical deals that could make any ordinary citizen subject to arrest and trial for criminal conspiracy. Yet, the privledged members of the U.S. Congress were made immune to such legal sanctions. The same could be said for members of state legislatures. Who is the judge of unjust legislation and congressional action? Spooner is clear that appointed federal judges are the final arbiters who rarely overturn such unjust laws. Members of the U.S. Congress are seldom held accountable, and the impeachment and removal from office procedures are so awkward and slow as to be of little or no avial.

Spooner also makes the connection between wealthy interests and the government (any government). Governments borrow huge sums from these interests at extremly high interest rates and use armed force to pay for these loans via taxes. Yet, the lenders sometimes bet on a losing cause. One footnote reminds readers that the French banking house of Erlanger loaned huge sums to the Confederacy who lost the U.S. Civil War. Another example mentioned were the loans made by the Rothchilds to the Hapsburgs in 1866, and the Hapsburgs lost a war with the Prussians so quickly that the war is known as The Seven Weeks War.

There is an interesting comment in this collection of essays that Spooner started a private mail company called the Amercian Letter Mail Company in 1845 which competed successfully with the U.S. Postal Service until The American Mail Letter Company was voted out of existence. There is an interesting comment that Spooner's short-lived business was successful. Stamp collectors do not consider the stamps very valuable because so many are available which implies a good business volume.

Spooner's legal and political thinking are not outdated when one considers the concentrations of power in the U.S. Spooner made the remark that those who swear to uphold the U.S. Constituion have not read it. Whatever Spooner's criticisms of the U.S. Constitution were, they pale into insignificance given the arbitrary use of political power since Post Civil War history. Yet, Spooner's essay and the footnotes to this collection are a reminder of what thoughtful men considered. This reviewer was told that these essays have been used in law schools which may be help some jurists and attorneys put the brakes on arbitrary political actions. This reviewer is reminded of the phony publicity given to some poltical hacks who extolled their Contract with American. When asked about whether if this applied to this reviewer, the answer was "No,where did I sign it and who authorized anyone to speak on my behalf?"

Non-Leninist Marxism: Writings on the Worker's CouncilsThis is a very important book since the theories of councilist communism has been unknown in the English-speaking world.

This book contains the early texts of the founders of the council communist movement. Council Communism is the only true form of communism that contains within it the entire historical movement towards real communism based upon Marx. It started out as a reaction against the statist excesses of the state-capitalist Leninist party worshippers, but grew to become the only real workers opposition to State and Late Capitalism. While I wish that a few extra texts were included this text is a great start. In the meanwhile let us take up the banner of councilism and proclaim a communism based neither on party or state.

This book is invaluable because it has writings from the historic ultra-left/council communists/left communists; Marxist currents which have been overshadowed by the more historically prominent Marxist-Leninist tendencies. More importantly, this book is also an English-language introduction for a US population that probably knows nothing about council/left communism but supposedly knows everything about capital-C "communism" (thanks in no small part to xenophobes such as Joseph McCarthy). Such a development is sad given that the US has been no stranger to class struggle, nor has it not been a home for its very own ultra-left (the Industrial Workers of the World. Red and Black Publishers also has a book of collected IWW writings for sale). May "Non-Leninist Marxism: Writings on the Worker's Councils" contribute to the fight against this ignorance!

Speaking for myself, reading the book has been a salutary experience. I've only begun studying the Marxian critique of political economy, and this compilation has helped me keep in mind *why* I'm opposed to capitalism in its fundamentals.

Ever since the Soviet Union collapsed in disgrace, the Left has been looking for an alternative model of socialism. This book reminds us that even before the Russian Revolution, there already was an alternative, the council communist movement. Instead of a centralized party, the council communists favored decentralized political organization. Instead of a police dictatorship, the council communists favored mass democracy. Instead of centrally planned economics, the council communists favored a voluntary association of self-managed producers. Instead of Russian imperialism, the council communists favored international cooperation.

The council communists, like so many others, were stomped out of existence by the Leninist dictatorships. This book presents, through several works by the most well-known council communists, a view of the alterative model of democratic revolutionary socialism that the Leninists destroyed.

This is an important and well selected of writings by some of the leading figures in the Council Communist tendency of revolutionary Marxism. Most of the writings included in this volume have been largely unavailable in print for some time and their return to publication is an extremely welcome development.

The books leads off with Hermann Gorter's Open Letter to Comrade Lenin, which is a powerful response to Lenin's Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder and also include's Gorter's arguments for the founding of the (original) 4th international, the Communist Workers' International. After Sylvia Pankhurst's primer on the nature of post-revolutionary society, the book concludes with Otto Ruhle's Revolution is Not a Party Affair on the importance of focus on the economic organization of the working class, not merely for reforms of traditional trade unionism, but as a vehicle for revolutionary action and, finally, with the letter from Ruhle to his comrades in the KAPD written from Russia, after deciding to not participate in the third congress of the Comintern. The latter work is an excellent note to end on, providing an inside glimpse into the cynical opportunism into which the Russian Communists were swiftly degenerating, while displaying the unbending revolutionary resolve and tremendous depth of courage the council communists displayed in confronting these developments.

There are two minor disappointments here, however, including the selections offered from Anton Pannekoek. One would have liked to have seen his later work The Workers' Councils, as well as his excellent Lenin As Philosopher. The other disappointment being the lack of any writings from Paul Mattick, who became the leading voice of council communism after the death of Pannekoek for most of the 20th Century.

I absolutely loved Greek mythology and happened across this book a library. It quickly sparred my latent interest in Egyptian history. This is one of the best books I have ever read; I couldn't put it down! I even wrote a paper on it for college.

From the author of "Worlds in Collision" (1950) and "Age is in Chaos : From Exodus to King Akhenaton", we see compelling evidence that just as Henry Schliemann may have found "Troy", Velikovsky may have found the real Akhenaton.

We find a lot of pictures and supporting evidence that the timeline of the pharaohs may have been a tad off. And in the process of finding the actual timeline, we also find an intriguing mystery. As we search through the Greek epics to find if there's really been a Troy war did Odysseus really exist, we must also ask ourselves what about the legend of Oedipus?

I will not go into the details of how this legend may be based on a historical truth as that's why you are buying the book. I can tell you that you will never look at history the same way afterwards.

For a better understanding of Akhenaton, you may want to read Sigmund Freud's "Moses and Monotheism."

Moses and Monotheism

One of the most enjoyable books I have ever read. A true-life detective story outlining the dramatic events surrounding the life of the heretic pharaoh Akhnaton and his children. As usual, Velikovsky's scholarship is first-class and his research meticulous. A far superior book to those of recent imitators, who have produced their own "theories" about Akhnaton and Tutankhamon, based largely on the (unacknowledged) inspiration of Velikovsky's work, and resting on much shakier foundations than the original.

Velikovsky equated the 2800 year old mythological Greek king with Pharaoh Akhnaton of Egypt and in his book he shows us why. He constructs the story like a detective novel, putting pieces of clues together to form the whole puzzle and he makes an incredibly exciting job of it. He writes for the lay reader but he is far from condescening. His language is a joy to read. I agree with BlairBurton that the book is wildly entertaining but I resented his reference to the author as 'the premier theorist of crackpot science.' Velikovsy's 'crackpot' theories are yet to be disproved and his predictions have the uncanny habit of being proved right so that the world of the scientific community is as shaky as the description of the earth in "Worlds In Collision!" Readers will find great rewards in reading all of his works and judging for themselves. While "Oedipus and Akhnaton" is the least 'scientific' of his works it is no less fascinating and eminently readable.

I read this book years ago and then lost my copy but the memory stayed with me. Recently, a friend gave me another copy and I reread it. It was even more compelling this time. When I first read this most accessible of Velikovsky's books, I was much impressed with the author's linkings of coincidence and the uncanny effect of each of the connections identified by the author. Upon rereading, I am even more impressed. Would that we had a generation of young readers who might be interested in such a puzzle and I would much appreciate their feedback. This is remarkable, intuitive scholarship that is very well worth the investment of time required to glimpse a first class mind at work and be rewarded with an answer as to why this one, singular Greek myth has so many elements that are not particularly Greek and here are matched with so much that is unmistakenly Egyptian. The Sphynx knew more than one secret and Velikovsky reveals it to us. Bravo!

This book is a survivor's shocking account of the persecution of the 350 000 strong Bahai faith in Iran.
Since the 1979 Islamic revolution, which saw the destruction of Bahai's holiest site in Iran, the House of Bab in Shiraz, there has been violent and sytematic persecution of the Bahais by Iran's radical revolutionary regime.
The Bahais are being persecuted soley for reasons of religious prejudices.
Thousands of Bahai holy sites, community centres, homes and businesses have been destoyed by Iran's revolutionary guards and over 200 Bahais have been murdered and executed.
Olya Roohizadegan was imprisoned for her faith, and subjected to intense physical and mental torture, to try to force her to renounce her religion.
She remained loyal to her faith and survived. In prison, she formed friendships with ten women and girls who had been arrested for teaching Bahai faith clases to children. They were all executed. Olya and her family were released and escaped to the USA were she countinues to try to alert the world of the plight of Iran's Bahais. But is anybody listening?
The persecution of the Bahais continues in Iran, and few in the world have taken up their cause or protested the abuses by Iran's Islamo-Nazi regime.

This is the BEST book I have ever read! So emotional! So touching! So truly courageous! Every time I open the book, no matter what page I begin on, I want to keep going! A wonderful work expressing the suffering of such amazing individuals!

Olya spent time in prison with the 10 Baha'i women (including one who was only 17) who were hanged June 18, 1983 for teaching Baha'i children's classes. As such she's in a unique position to tell their story.

Earlier in 1978 a religious march in the city of Qum protested a newspaper article critical of the exiled Islamic leader, Ayatu'llah Khomeini, at which the police opened fire, seventeen seminary students were killed, and the government was denounced as anti-Islamic. As religious fundamentalism swept the country, Iran's largest religious minority, the Baha'is, became vulnerable; their houses were looted, livestock stolen, shops attacked and many were taken to mosques to be forced to accept Islam by those who considered the Baha'i faith to be a heretical sect. Although Baha'is were obedient to the government and their religion does not allow them to take part in politics, they were considered a threat; burning and looting spread and Olya's house was filled with refugees. There had been phases of intense persecutions previous to this, in the 1950s, the 1920s and in the last century when 20,000 early believers were massacred.

When the Pahlavis left Iran, the streets exploded in jubilation and two weeks later Ayatu'llah Khomeini proclaimed the birth of a new state where all were to be free: "Interrogating people about their beliefs is forbidden. No one can be persecuted or punished purely for holding certain beliefs." Official recognition and freedom to practice their religion, educate their children in their faith and be represented in parliament was extended to Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians but not to Baha'is, although recognized as a separate religion by the United Nations. The belief that a new messenger of God had come to herald the long-awaited regeneration of humanity was considered a wicked heresy just as Christ's proclamation had been 2,000 years earlier. When interviewed for US television the head of Public Prosecution in the Revolutionary Court of Iran said: "We have never killed anyone because of their religion. The Baha'is we have executed were either leaders of this political sect or they were spies for Israel. We are going to continue our efforts to eliminate all their leaders, and so far we have been very successful. Then we will put pressure on the other Baha'is, and no doubt they will all come back to Islam in time."

The pogrom began in earnest; the House of the Bab, one of the most holy places for Baha'is, was destroyed; Baha'i houses were demolished and families forced to live together; many were killed or executed, often after prolonged torture; Baha'is were banned from jobs in teaching and in government; children were suspended from schools and universities; eleven prominent Baha'is were kidnapped by the Revolutionary Guards, disappearing without trace. On April 30, 1981 three Baha'is were executed. A Muslim whose car broke down close by, secretly witnessed the scene and recounted what he saw: "They were only a few steps away from death when the guards tried for the last time to get them to recant their faith. They were told that if they denied being Baha'is they would be allowed to go back to their families at once. Their reaction was incredible. Mr. Mihdizadih, who seemed perfectly composed, said: 'Now that I'm captive and you know I don't have a weapon with which to defend myself, please uncover my eyes and tell me who is the person among you chosen to give me the drink from the water of eternal life.' One of the guards uncovered his eyes and introduced himself as the soldier who was about to kill him. Mr. Mihdizadih held the guard's hand and kissed it, then with indescribable excitement he looked at the sky and said: 'I praise God that I can, in the last moments of my life, be obedient and carry out what He has asked me to do - to kiss the hand of my killer.'"

Increasingly concerned about opposition from political factions such as the mujahidin, communists and tribal populations, it was pronounced illegal for more than two families to gather in one house under threat of prison and confiscation of property. The Baha'is complied but Olya was asked to be unofficial messenger to keep everyone informed, a dangerous job with guards everywhere. Olya's children were at school in the UK and her boss offered her advice: "Now that you have finally managed to get permission to leave Iran after all these difficulties, Olya, you'd better stay in England. The government has plans for you Baha'is. You know how they have fired your friends from their jobs under false charges! The Public Prosecutor's office has called me a few times to ask about you, but I don't give them straight answers. I have told them I am very happy with your work in the office, and that seems to pacify them a bit. But one of these days I'm sure they'll manage to dismiss you. I'll be glad to issue a few months' leave of absence for you, on top of your paid annual vacation, while we wait to see what happens under this terrible government. Maybe things will change!" Olga returned after the planned two weeks because something strange had happened to the Baha'i community. Under persecution, life had become more meaningful; they felt they had something priceless that brought true happiness. They enjoyed their material loss and envied those who gave their lives. They looked upon their children as the hope for the world; adults had to play their part in being a good example and in preparing their children.

On May 18, 1982 Olya's employer was forced to fire her, the personnel manager saying at the farewell gathering: "'Friends, why are you crying?' he began. 'We are proud to have a colleague who is leaving her job because of her principles. She has not lost anything - she has gained something. Olya Roohizadegan is leaving this office with her head held high.'" That was the day Olya's Story began; a story that lead to her dramatic escape from the hangman's noose and escape to Pakistan and the West.

Olya's Story is a factual account of the experience of Baha'is in Iran after the revolution. It is significant historically, as well as in depicting true spirituality, faith, and sacrifice. Easily read, it grips your soul and envelopes your heart.