5 comments about Dinner with Mugabe: The Untold Story of a Freedom Fighter who Became a Tyrant.

1. With apologies to the above reviewer for twisting her review title, I agree with portions of the review. I found the book seemed to be an attempted psychoanalysis of Mugabe. Perhaps this would be a good idea by a professional psychiatrist or social worker but not from a journalist. For example at one point the author condemns Mugabe's immaturity for ordering his cabinet members to wear suits and ties to their meetings rather than t-shirts and other casual wear. The author states that due to Mugabe's immaturity and insecurity that he cannot be innovative and allow "traditional African wear" (combat fatigues and t-shirts!) I would assume that Mugabe only wanted to emphasize the serious nature of a cabinet meeting. When the author interviews Mugabe she does ask good questions relevant to the changes that have taken place over Mugabe's reign in Zimbabawe but again, in addition to quoting his remarks she then psychoanalyzes nearly every utterance. There are many other examples like this in the book.
   
   Other than that repeating annoyance the book was quite good. Heidi Holland has constructed a biography of Mugabe that provides insight into his seemingly nonsensical change from a visionary, pro-democratic leader into his current destructive tyranny. The book was filled with information on what caused Mugabe's change over the years and contains many interviews with relatives, co-workers, mentors, political friends and enemies and I felt it was a very worthwhile read for that reason despite the psychoanalytical shortcomings.



2. A great account of Rhodesian politics and Robert Mugabe's era. Fascinating to read the events of the past and know that he's still in power - the story is still being told.
   
   The author's approach of analyzing Mugabe's behavior, uncovering & discussing the 'motivators' that are the root cause of his acts, is very well done.



3. The writer starts with a mysterious dinner that she was not invited to in her own home. The mystery guest is Mugabe prior to his leap to power. Holland also states how she nearly lost her job by putting Mugabe's photo on the front page of a magazine that she was writing for. She ends with a recount of her last interview with Mugabe with only several questions that she asked him (including "Did you ever love someone?" His response was, "I must have. I have married twice.")
   
   Facts are missing in "Dinner with Mugabe." "Mugabe" by Martin Meredith outlines the facts behind the corruption of Mugabe's administration, including within his family. Holland talks (repeatedly and over many, many pages) about her accusation that Mugabe began to lose his moral compass when his first wife died-even though he had already had two children by his current wife when his first wife died.
   
   It's a poorly written book with very hard hitting few facts that you couldn't get from various websites.
   
   Save your money and buy "Mugabe" by Martin Meredith



4. This is a very interesting book and a poignant reminder of how Zimbabwe could have been a success story. The author is familiar with the history through her life as a radical and supporter of black rule in Rhodesia when she, and her husband a surgeon, lived in Ian Smith's outlaw colony. She interviews people who knew Mugabe well and then corrects their misrepresentations from her own knowledge. This is a very valuable technique and, with a man as private as Mugabe has always been, is as close as we will get to the inside story.
   
   Robert Mugabe was a studious child, educated by Jesuits and abandoned by his father at an early age. His mother, something of a mystic, was always convinced that he had a special destiny. The author describes Mugabe's mother, Bona, as "a cold, stern nun of a mother."(page 7) He has been emotionally crippled all his life although, with his first wife Sally, a flamboyant and colorful Ghanaian teacher, he had a loving and loyal marriage. She is described by some of the interviewees as warm but by others as imperious and corrupt.
   
   There is a very interesting interview with Mary Churchill Soames, Winston Churchill's younger daughter and wife of the last colonial governor of Rhodesia. Lord Soames became very close to Mugabe who, in a moment of truth just before the election of 1980, which put him in power, asked Soames to stay on for a lengthy transition period to help rule the country. "And Mugabe then said, 'I want you to stay because I need to be able to talk to somebody. I don't know anything about governing a country and none of my people do either.'" Soames told him that it would be impossible and Mugabe was on his own. When Lord Soames died, Mugabe and his wife arrived at Lady Soames' home uninvited to attend his funeral. This was an example of the rare personal empathy that Mugabe could establish with certain people.
   
   There is also a chapter on Denis Norman, a wealthy white farmer who had no interest in politics but who was prevailed upon by Mugabe to take several ministries to solve problems created by incompetent members of his cabinet. Here was another white man trusted by Mugabe, who insisted on European dress by all his ministers and who emulated English manners and education. In fact, the author comments that his education policies (similar to those in India, in my opinion) left the country with too many white collar workers clamoring for government jobs and not enough auto mechanics and other technical trades.
   
   Unfortunately, in another of the disastrous mistakes made by almost everyone in Zimbabwe, the white voters supported former dictator Ian Smith's party in the legislature, enraging Mugabe who had actually treated them quite fairly, even allowing Smith, who had imprisoned him, to live freely in the country and to seek office and serve in parliament. This was a serious mistake, compounded by Mugabe who then dismissed Denis Norman from his post as Agriculture Minister. He told Norman that the whites had chosen to treat him as a black and he would reciprocate, although he later called on Norman again and again to solve problems.
   
   The story continues to 2000, when Mugabe was losing his power to a new generation and was besieged by "war veterans" while he watched white farmers donate checks to his political opponent on television. The result was the disastrous occupation of the commercial farms and the descent of Zimbabwe to ruin. It seems to me, after reading this book, that Mugabe is no more in control of his country than is Assad of Syria. Both are basically run by warlords and secret police.
   
   The book is excellent and the lesson to me is that there were many opportunities for a happy, or at least happier, ending. Mugabe is an educated man, if emotionally stunted, and he did reach out to some of his white opponents for help early on. Some helped him and became friends. Many of the white residents foolishly voted for his enemies and fed his paranoia. I don't know what the chances for success in Zimbabwe were originally, but it seems that everything that could go wrong, did so. This is a very well written account of what happened. He is a monster now, but he wasn't always.



5. Although Heidi Holland met Mugabe only a couple of times, she still provides some good interviews and insights into Mugabe. He has unfortunately proved to be one of the worst leaders of the past couple of decades. Look at the results of his presidency--100,000% inflation, massive food shortages and an 80% unemployment rate. Zimbabwe is an embarrassment to Africa and it didn't have to be that way. Here's a detailed critique of what went wrong, where it went wrong and who is responsible. Mugabe is an intriguing figure because he began his career largely heralded by everyone as a freedom fighter like Nelson Mandela. To see how tragically it turned out, leaves many questions; it's a void Holland is clearly trying to fill.
   
   Holland writes well--the words are fluid and vivid and so it's easy to see how her years of reporting for the BBC, the Guardian and many other reputable news organizations has helped. The book is broken into 15 chapters with an index and bibliography for further reading. I do have one complaint, that I wish this were written by someone who had spent more time with Mugabe instead of relying mostly on interviews and a couple of brief encounters with him.
   
   However, I am glad this book was written and even more glad that it was published in America! I heard Heidi interviewed on the BBC and was dismayed that the book was available for sale only in South Africa. (Note: The book was rushed into production here so the British grammar remains. IE: magnetised instead of magnetized.) Yes, we are interested in the subject here too and are horrified by the still unfolding tragedy of Zimbabwe. If only there was something more we could do to help, but what?

4 comments about How Can I Keep from Singing?: The Ballad of Pete Seeger.

1. David King Dunaway has done a wonderful job in updating his classic biography of Pete Seeger. Dunaway, with excellent narrative skill, tells not only Seeger's life story, but also gives us a mini-history of the progressive movement in this country for the last eighty years or so. Seeger's involvement in the labor movement, the civil rights movement, the peace movement, and the environmental movement are all covered in depth. Also the struggle to be able to sing his songs in a supposedly free America is explored in the tales related to the riots at Peekskill, the McCarthy era, the blacklist, and right-wing bigots picketing his concerts.
   
   The best part of all of this is that Pete Seeger, at age 89, is still actively writing and singing. I had the pleasure to see him in concert, along with his grandson Tao Rodriguez-Seeger, and Guy Davis two nights ago at the Sellersville Theater. He can still get a crowd to sing along with him. While his voice is perhaps not what it used to be (but as Arlo Guthrie told him "neither is our hearing"), the magic is still there.
   
   This book captures as much of that magic as the printed page can hold, and is a great book for people of all ages to read. I highly recommend it if you are interested in reading about a real, authentic, inspiring American hero.



2. If you worry about individual rights, government trampling of the Constituion and cause oriented people you'll be interested in this book.



3. "The Ballad of Pete Seeger" is a great book. It not only gives a lot of new information about Pete Seeger; but also is a history of the US and the world with new insights that covers almost 90 years.



4. Since 1971, I have been a fan of Joan Baez, whose anti-war songs I liked, and still like. At the same time, I had a friend who was a fan of Bob Dylan. Often, when I visited my friend, we would first play Joan Baez and then Bob Dylan. (Unfortunately, my friend died in 2004.) He and I were knowledgeable in folk music and soft rock. At one point,in the late 90's, I asked him if he knew of a good version of the song "Down By The Riverside", and he recommended the version sung by Pete Seeger. I am not joking when I write this, but this is the first time I had ever heard of Seeger. Of course, I bought a CD with that song, and it turned out to be part of the album LIVE AT NEWPORT and is very well done. I also learned that both Joan Baez and Bob Dylan were influenced and inspired by Pete Seeger, as were Peter, Paul, and Mary, of whom my late wife was a fan. This in turn made me develop an interest in Pete Seeger and his life and work. When I learned of this book, I decided to buy it, and have just finished reading it. It is one of the best biographies I have ever read. Pete Seeger is described as courageous and steadfast, even under the most difficult of circumstances. The book describes how he is literally persecuted by Joe McCarthy and company as well as the J.-Edgar-Hoover-run-FBI. Of course, it becomes evident that Joe McCarthy is a senseless witch hunter, and that J. Edgar Hoover runs the FBI as if it were his own private property and business (which indeed he did). Seeger stands tall at all times, is not intimidated, and eventually makes a great name for himself as a musician. He earns the like of his fans and, of course, singers like Joan Baez and Bob Dylan who are full of praise for him. Indeed, his life is a ballad which goes on and on for the cause of harmony and peace. Seeger stands tall to this very day, as the book clearly describes.

5 comments about Robert F. Kennedy: In His Own Words.

1. I was hesitating between giving this collection 3 or 4 stars.
   
   It was great to hear Robert Kennedy giving voice to these words, some of which have become quite famous in the years since they were spoken. And it is quite interesting to hear some of the speeches selected--such as the one he gave stepping off the plane after Martin Luther King Jr was assasinated.
   
   However, I think this collection could have been better. There are too few speeches here (I believe 9 of Robert's and Teddy's eulogy) and they are spaced very close together. Would have been interesting to hear some of his speeches over a more extended period of time to see how his thinking about issues or his speaking style evolved.
   
   Also many of the speeches are just presented as excerpts. The only part presented of the famous "GDP" speech is that excerpt--I would have liked to hear the rest of that speech.
   
   Finally, the production quality of the insert is not very good. Brief notes on the context of the speeches are given but the references to the speeches are often erroneous. It would also have been nice to have the text of the presented speeches.
   
   In the end there are not many alternatives to this CD and it does present an overview of the great RFK speeches, as superficial as that overview may be.



2. When you first listen to this, it takes a while to get into it. The first speech at the 1964 democratic convention has a poor audio quality and RFK takes a while to get warmed up before we hear the famous Shakepearean ode to his recently deceased brother JFK. Some editing would have helped that one. Then we hear RFK give a heartfelt, but sincere speech on the need for young people to repudiate bigotry at Ole Miss in 1966. Still pretty relevant. The 1967 speech on ghetto conditions shows amazing insight for a White man who was born rich.

   But the tour de force here is the improvised speech to Black Indianapolis residents upon the assassination of Martin Luther King. I've heard excerpts of this before, but to hear it in what appears to be its entirety is extremely moving and one of the best recorded speeches I've ever heard aside from MLK himself and Nelson Mandela's CD. To hear how RFK was able to speak so sincerely and hopefully on such a tragic occasion will really make you beleive in the nest of human nature and that alone is worht the price of admission.

   Next we hear a more measured and formal speech on the aftermath of the King killing recorded a day later. Still worht a listen about the futility of violence, all the more ironic considering that RFK himself would soon become the victim of such violence.

   I've read books that complied RFK's speeches, but that does not match actually hearing them. Do youself a favor and get this. Now all that needs to be done is to release a DVD of the 1988 documetnary RFK in His Own Words.




3. RFK: In His Own Words gives the listener a taste of the atmosphere during the turbulent and dynamic times of the 1960s. It depicts RFK as one of those rare leaders who had the ability to inspire an entire generation not only in the United States but around the world with his eloquence and appeal for a better life for all. He challenged the way we think about ourselves and each other and sought to close the gaps between rich and poor, black and white. RFK: In His Own Words begins with his memorable speech in tribute to his brother at the 1964 Democratic National Convention and contains several speeches addressing the many societal issues of the 60s, mainly the divisions resulting from racial tensions and the public opposition to the war in Vietnam. You begin to get a grasp of RFK's political views and you witness his maturation as a politician and statesman. From his statement announcing his candidacy for president to his touching and largely impromptu announcement of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to a stunned audience in Indianapolis and his appeal for compassion and love and not hatred and division. It concludes with an emotional eulogy at his funeral by his brother Senator Ted Kennedy that leaves you with thoughts on what could have been if not for the tragic loss of yet another Kennedy brother who has been taken from us at a time when his leadership was most needed.



4. This is a single CD approximately 50 minutes long that provides highlights of some of RFK's best, and most memorable speeches. There are 12 tracks including RFK's speech at the democratic national convention in 1964 and his speech announcing the assasination of Martin Luther King.

   This is an excellent introduction to the RFK's political beliefs, and reminds the listener why he continues to captivate the nation's hopes. The CD jacket provides a brief historical background to each of the speeches and is helpful for those with less knowledge of the current events of that time. I would also recommend a compilation of speech excerpts put together by his son Maxwell Kennedy entitled "To Make Gentle the Life of this World." Neither source provides the complete text of his speeches, but they distill the essence of what he offered America in his time.




5. This book is an excellent compliation of Robert Kennedy's speeches. The speeches give an excellent overview of the times and issues Robert Kennedy was living in and his responses to same. His frequent references to classical literature not only serve to augment his points, but to include the listener/reader in his knowledge base. Robert Kennedy was a man who was universally recognized as a diligent worker and one who not only set, but met personal goals. His determination was evidenced from the football field (where he played with a broken leg in college to secure the coveted Harvard letter) to the presidential platform, where he held his own with some rather formidable competitors/opponents. His knowledge of and appreciation for classical literature is a true nod to his intelligence. He became self-educated in adult life classical works. He also became self educated and personally involved in the lives and issues of minorities and persons living below the poverty line. The contrast between these areas of his self education further emphasize the complexity of this man. Robert Kennedy comes across as sincere in his efforts and his work record will certainly support that finding. Robert Kennedy was by far the most interesting of the brothers of his generation and his work record was exceptional in his tenacity and dogged determination.

5 comments about James Monroe: The Quest for National Identity.

1. This is one of the best biographies on the not only the life of James Monroe but on the development of the United States role in world affairs. The author clearly assesses not only the role that Monroe played but also the exogenous factors that led to the development of the country. By framing this through Monroe's life we can clearly see his development along with that of the country at clear and critical junctures. From the early days of the revolution to the diplomacy of Europe to his time as governor of Virginia Monroe clearly shaped the outcome of the United States. While not the philosopher that Jefferson or Madison was the legal theories and common sense diplomacy espoused by Monroe was necessary to set the path for growth that the country needed in the early eighteenth century.
   
   
   Overall it is a thoroughly enjoyable read that will answer the questions of those wondering how the identity of the nation was formed.



2. Lack of information? This is a good Biog. It does get a little wordy, especially concerning Monroe's foreign affairs work. Personally, I like to study the revolutionary mind, and read about the founding fathers' philosophy concerning politics and life. I just don't think there is as much information about Monroe as some of the others. He seems to have been a somewhat private person. Over all though this is pretty good work. Probably about as good as it gets for the amount of info available.



3. I read this book as part of my goal to read the established biography of every President. This was really an outstanding biography on what is clearly an underrated President.
   
   I would consider Monroe the Eisenhower of the 1800s. He did a lot and doesn't seem to get a lot of credit for it. I don't think credit was what Monroe was after.
   
   He played a key role in both the military and political history of the country and the author did a great job in depicting both. I especially liked the authors discussion of Monroe's role in reaching agreements with G.B., France, Spain, Russia, Portugal, etc.
   
   Obviously we all know about the Monroe Doctrine, but the author went into great detail in other key areas and detailed his relationships with other important men from his era.
   
   It may be longer than most would want to read, but if you want to read a really great book on a great President that is well constructed, flows well and is detailed enough to highlight the key and not so key aspects of a Presidency. This is the book on Monroe you should read.



4. I am presently reading a biography of every U.S. President in order. From browsing the reviews of Monroe biographies, Ammon became the obvious choice. I can gladly say that I was not disappointed. Ammon's biography of Monroe is comprehsive, well written, and superbly researched. Ammon's writing style is refreshingly easy to read and the information is very well organized. Monroe emerges as a very important President and, while not as brilliant intellectually as his two predecessors, certainly well suited to be chief executive and arguably the most important influence on American foreign policy until Theodore Roosevelt.
   
   My criticism of Mr. Ammon's volume is that, despite adeptly describing the political life of Monroe and its importance to American history, the biography never succeeds at leading the reader to understand Monroe on a personal level. Perhaps this task is not possible given the research available, but this is the first presidential biography that I have finished feeling that I did not have an adequate understanding of the personality traits behind the subject's actions.



5. This highly readable book focuses on the foreign policy elements of Monroe's career almost to the point that it is more of a book on diplomacy than a general biography. The portions that detail his partnership with his Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, especially the genesis of the Monroe Doctrine, are where it is at it's best. Unfortunately it gives short shrift to his relationship and feelings to his own slaves, even while giving a very good account of his activities around the Missouri Compromise.

5 comments about First Person.

1. I am very interested in Russian politics and especially in Vladimir Putin. This book caught my eye because it is 28 hours of interviews with him about many different subjects. It was a quick read and my only complaint is that I read it so quickly. One of the more personal books I have read about Putin. I recommend it highly.



2. Die Frage "Wer ist Mr. Putin?" bewegt seit Boris Jelzins überraschendem Rücktritt am 31.12.1999 die Welt. Die ausführlichen Gesprächsaufzeichnungen von drei russischen Journalisten aus dem Frühjahr 2000 geben nur teilweise eine Antwort auf die Frage. Sie verbergen ebenso viel, wie sie aufdecken.
   Es wird in den Interviews noch einmal eine Besonderheit Putins deutlich, die viele Beobachter schon zuvor bemerkt hatten: die bizarre Zufälligkeit von Putins steiler Karriere und seine politische Unerfahrenheit im Augenblick seiner Amtsübernahme. Dies würde im Russischen durch die Konstruktion "slutschajnyj tschelowek" (zufälliger Mensch) wiedergegeben werden. Normalerweise bedeutet im traditionell hierarchiebetonten und elitistischen russischen politischen Diskurs eine Charakterisierung als "slutschajnyj tschelowek" das Absprechen jeglicher Kompetenz für die Lösung der jeweiligen Aufgaben. Diesen Nachteil schien Putin sowohl mit seiner mythologisierten Vergangenheit als KGB-Mitarbeiter (die hier auch weitgehend im Dunkeln bleibt) als auch mit dem Image eines früheren Vertrauten des verstorbenen ehemaligen Bürgermeisters von Sankt Petersburg Anatolij Sobtschak wettzumachen. Vor allem wird in dem Buch noch einmal deutlich, wie eng die Ernennung Putins zum Premierminister und seine Profilierung in dieser Funktion mit dem Tschetschenienkrieg verbunden war. Und dies, obwohl die Anleitung der in Tschetschenien tätigen "Machtorgane" (silowye organy) an und für sich direkt dem Präsidenten obliegt. De facto schien Putin mehr noch als seine zahlreichen Vorgänger bereits vor Jelzins Rücktritt das Zepter in Rußland in die Hand genommen zu haben.
   Obwohl eine Reihe von Putins Aussagen in den Interviews in bezug auf Demokratie, Rechtsstaat und Marktwirtschaft durchaus ermutigend klingen und er sich im Großteil des Buches als ausgewogener "Mann der Tat" gibt, bleibt ein Eindruck von Unberechenbarkeit. Auf das Thema Tschetschenien angesprochen, wechselt der sonst beherrschte Putin zu apokalyptischen Visionen ("globale Katastrophe", S. 136), radikalem Isolationismus ("Wir brauchen keinerlei [internationale] Vermittler." S. 158) und missionarischem Eifer ("meine historische Mission", S. 133). Er scheint den Leser für dumm verkaufen zu wollen, wenn er sich als selbstloser "Mann fürs Grobe" ausgibt: "Ich ging [im August 1998] davon aus, daß ich [das Auseinanderfallen des Landes] selbst um den Preis meiner politischen Karriere [verhindern] muß." (S. 133)
   Die ganze Passage zum Tschetschenien-Abenteuer wirkt phantastisch: Putin beschwört das Bild eines vom winzigen Tschetschenien tödlich bedrohten Rußland. Die von ihm an anderer Stelle angemahnte "Präsumption der Unschuld" vergißt er, wenn er - ohne das Vorliegen einschlägiger Beweise, zumindest zum Zeitpunkt des Interviews - die Tschetschenen für die Bombenanschläge in Moskau, Bujnaksk und Wolgodonsk verantwortlich macht. Selbst wenn er mit seinen Anschuldigungen Recht behalten sollte, so steht die Zahl der mutmaßlich von islamistischen Terroristen getöteten russischen Zivilisten in keinem Verhältnis zu den tausenden zivilen Opfern der russischen "antiterroristischen Operationen" seit 1994. An anderer Stelle gibt sich Putin, abweichend von seinen früheren Andeutungen, ähnlich uneinsichtig, wenn es um die Rolle der NATO in den Ost-West-Beziehungen oder um den Jugoslawienkonflikt geht. Auch seine merkwürdig distanzierte Beurteilung der Tätigkeit seines früheren Ziehvaters Anatolij Sobtschak wirkt befremdlich.
   Während Putin hoffen kann, mit seinen unsensiblen Statements insbesondere zu Tschetschenien und Jugoslawien beim durch jahrelange Gehirnwäsche emotional aufgepeitschten russischen Durchschnittsbürger auf offene Ohren zu treffen, dürfte er sich mit diesem Buch in bezug auf seine aufgeklärte russische und potentielle westliche Leserschaft keinen Gefallen getan haben.



3. First person is an easy and interesting book to read. The format, question & answer, actually made the book more interesting. We only really learn what Putin wants us to learn about him. However, Putin seems to answer in an honest and straight-forward manner. A must read for anyone interested in world affairs, world leaders, or Russia.



4. I found this book provided a much needed insight into Putin and it assists when trying to cut through the politics of popular culture. With an extremely challenging road ahead for this country it is important not to loose sight of the men who assert power



5. The American Presidential system, for all its faults, is relatively open. Because this is not the case in Russia, any information we can get on President Vladimir Putin has to be particularly welcome. First Person, the product of six interviews conducted by Russian journalists with the Russian leader, gives us that information in Putin's own words.
   
   Putin likes beer and dislikes Chechen separatists; he is saddened by Stalin's excesses and proud of his own work in the KGB; he is sorry that the Soviet Union put Hungary and Czechoslovakia to the sword but delighted that today's glorious Russian Army is teaching the Chechens a lesson. Putin, like Mother Russia herself, is a mass of contradictions.
   
   Unlike Boris Yeltsin, Putin is a sober and industrious man. This is no bad thing in a land where vodka abuse has slashed ten years off the life expectancy of the ordinary Russian since the collapse of the evil empire. Although abstemious, Putin frankly admits that he is, at heart, a product of Soviet indoctrination.
   
   This is not that surprising from someone who worked for the KGB for 20 years and ended up taking over Yeltsin's entire secret service network. Russia today is as shadowy and secretive as it was when John Le Carre wrote his novels about Putin's KGB workmates. In those days, the KGB were our definite bad guys. Now however, the Russian Mafia have made the big league, the Caucasus are in flames and the Russian nuclear navy is more a threat to its crewmen than it is to the United States and her allies. Times have changed.
   
   Russia is in obvious need of law and order. Traditionally, law and order was achieved in Russia by generous applications of the heavy hand. Certainly, Lenin, Stalin and Peter the Great, Putin's hero, were never afraid to bite the bullet - or to use it for that matter. Putin can probably be no different. Russia is bankrupt, law and order has broken down, Yugoslavia and her other traditional allies have been brought low, neighboring Poland is on the verge of entering NATO and Islamic unrest is rising on her southern flanks. And Japan wants her Northern islands of Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan, and Habomai back.
   
   What is to be done? One solution would be to sell these islands back to the Japanese for the highest attainable price and to link it to massive Japanese aid for the Russian Far East. This would help to stem the demographic and military threats China poses to Siberia. A similar deal will probably have to be done with the United States. Russia will have to scrap her nuclear arsenal in return for another king's ransom and let NATO do as it pleases in the rest of Europe. Putin will have to surrender land and power projection capabilities for hard cash.
   
   With its flanks in some kind of order, Putin could then concentrate his resources on saving Russia. But there's the rub. Putin and the problems besetting him just do not have modern Western equivalents. The nearest American President to him is Honest Abe Lincoln, who, like Putin, also worked his way up from humble beginnings. Although Lincoln also fought a major war on his Southern flank to preserve his nation's unity, he had the advantage of being able to marshal a vibrant, disciplined and modern economy behind him. Putin has no such luxury. He has his KGB contacts, his dispirited army and, as the sinking of the Kursk showed, the world's media and human rights groups breathing down his neck. Putin must now worry about media ratings as well as Chechen suicide bombers.
   
   Even Putin's moral hold on power is tenuous enough. His Presidential campaign was beset by large-scale fraud. More than 1.3 million new voters appeared between the State Duma elections on 19 December 1999 and the presidential election in March 2000. These were not "dead souls", as described in Gogol's famous novel of that name, but "new-born souls" who were given the vote and who all voted for Putin. More than 50% of Chechens, who survived Putin's bombing campaign, also voted for him. Either that or the vote was rigged!
   
   Electoral fraud is only one of his more minor headaches. Putin must use books like this to don a human face much the same way that Al Gore and George W. Bush have to display their witticisms on the Oprah Winfrey show. American wannabe Presidents can joke and cajole their way through such shows - as can Japanese leaders like the late Mr. Obuchi. They can do this because they are leaders of modern and vibrant economies. This interesting book is the beginning of such a process in Russia. However, it would be best if Putin concentrated on his nation's many economic problems. Oprah Winfrey can wait.

5 comments about Napoleon: The Path to Power.

1. Highly recommended for two types of readers:
   
   1) For students of Napoleon, this is an extremely important contribution. Dwyer fleshes out the transition of Napoleon the Corsican youth to the most powerful man in France in 1799 as First Consul; a path not even expected late into 1799 given Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès, the person that solicited Napoleon's support, expected that designation. Dywer's most important contribution to this ear is to strip away much of the propaganda that surrounds Napoleon to reach the true character of Napoleon; much of this propaganda was created by Napoleon himself to serve his political ambitions, which leads into the second niche Dwyer brilliantly services. . .
   
   2) "Path to Power" serves as an excellent analysis of political ambition acted upon by a successful military leader. Military leaders who have political ambitions along with political scientists trying to understand how political capital can be developed by military leaders are both well-served.
   
   The sometimes incredibly detailed deconstruction of previously reported falsehoods make this book a difficult read for general leaders who are probably better served with a more general biography of Napoleon; though I would argue to wait until other historians who write narratives of Napoleon have a chance to develop a work using the findings Dwyer lays out in this much more accurate portrayal of the young Napoleon and his rise to power.



2. I am a relative newcomer to Napoleon, having read only Paul Johnson's short biography in the Penguin Lives series, so I can't really assess Dwyer's arguments against recent scholarship and historiography, except to say that he supports his case with an impressive amount of research. Is the book written with the grace of David McCullough and Edmund Morris or even, to use a more academic example, James McPherson? No. But this is a readable academic-type biography, certainly worthy of the Yale imprimatur, and it whets the appetite for more about this imposing figure of European and world history.



3. 
   Most historians have to chose between writing a readable narrative or one that will be heavily documented. Dwyer doean't have this problem His writing is able straddle both styles. He has created a readable, heavily documented history of Napoleon's rise to power. I don't know the literature of this period, but the book has the feel that it is definitive to date.
   
   While the text is not on the page turning level of Alexander Hamilton, The Most Famous Man in America: The Biography of Henry Ward Beecher (the first 2/3) or Diamonds, Gold, and War: The British, the Boers, and the Making of South Africa, it is engaging and keeps the interest of the general reader.
   
   Most interesting to me were the Italian and Egyptian campaigns, and Napoleon's relationships with his parents, siblings and wife.
   
   One of the overriding themes is Napoleon's propaganda which certainly sets the stage for what we have today. There were no TV crews in Egypt so Napoleon had a blank slate to write on. He could send dispatches to his brothers' newspapers, and who c/would dispute him? He could march his troops, triumphantly into Paris, who's to know it wasn't a total victory?
   
   Dwyer assembles a lot of information and I look forward to what I presume will be volumes 2, 3 and maybe even 4.



4. In "Napoleon: The Path To Power," Philip Dwyer successfully brings to life the first three decades in the existence of Napoleon Bonaparte. Readers who have a pre-existing knowledge of Bonaparte and his time will be the ones who will benefit the most from reading Dwyer's book. To his credit, Dwyer neither glorifies nor demonizes Bonaparte.
   
   Dwyer clearly explores the contradictions in the character of Bonaparte. Bonaparte started as a Corsican nationalist, then morphed into a servant of the French Revolution, and ended up as an imperialist who became supremely confident in his own personal destiny. Bonaparte transformed himself into what he has been remembered for because of his unmatched exploitation of the opportunities that he saw before him. Dwyer also shows with much conviction the active role that Bonaparte played in his own mythmaking.
   
   Although Bonaparte was talented, intelligent, and passionate, he was also a ruthless man. Bonaparte regarded people as pawns in his political and military calculations, to get rid of if they could no longer be useful. As Dwyer observes with much pertinence, that callousness towards the lives of others is not unusual in the character of a leading public personality. The more power a public figure amasses, the greater the indifference he / she will often display.
   
   To summarize, "Napoleon: The Path To Power" is a nice addition to the library of any person fond of history.



5. This is a book for the serious Buonapartiste - particularly his secret detractors. The Sorbonne-educated historian has given us PART ONE of his work - a work of over 600 pages - and I found the deluge of historical materials to be both overwhelming and deftly handled, the resolution to this paradox being that Dwyer is guilty of what he demonstrates behind Napoleon's ascent: a clumsy spin doctoring of the "facts."
   
   This also is the reason I find fault with the very conception of the book: we long have reconciled ourselves to remaining trapped within the vortices of history, myth, and cultural creationism when it comes to this particular biographical subject. Unable to break the historian's taboo of psychoanalytic consideration of its subject, this book ultimately is a doomed enterprise as yet another attempt at "understanding" the man.
   
   I wait for the biography that tells us something new about how the man's context, the history/myth/culture that he found himself in, struggled against, and, in this case, to great extent, found itself transformed in his wake. Our obsession with the little giant certainly would favor this approach.
   
   Peter Glidden, Ph.D.

5 comments about Crashing the Party: Taking on the Corporate Government in an Age of Surrender.

1. Several years ago during one of Mr. Nader's presidential campaigns I looked at his website to see what was happening. It was riddled with typographic and other editing mistakes, so I voted for another candidate. Whatever the merits of his positions might have been, it seemed to me he was unable to run even his own office and therefore unready to head the Executive Branch of the U.S. government.
   
   It pleases me to write that this book is ably edited, and a careful read-through by me turned up zero typos. On the flip side, there also are zero footnotes, and this book contains a lot of assertions which I would like to have checked sources on. There is a useful index if you're looking to relocate something within this book.
   
   An informative list is included for further reading, although the listed periodicals appear to be chosen for their "progressive" stance as opposed to careful thinking and pursuit of the facts. What's missing from the periodical list? For starters, The Christian Science Monitor, which frequently contains content in support of the progressive agenda but without much of the "hate speech" and black-and-white rendering occasionally seen in Crashing the Party -- which, by the way, does quote from a Monitor editorial.
   
   By "hate speech", I am referring to a tendency to resort to generalizations, stereotypes, and preconceived notions. In this book the target of such speech isn't an ethnic group, religion, gender, or sexual preference; instead it's "corporations". Assertions that "corporations" are evil are not as productive as they might appear. For one thing, the term "corporation" is more than overly broad; it's downright inaccurate. Many businesses today are not corporations but in fact are limited liability companies. It's important too that not all businesses -- whether Inc. or LLC -- are evil, but Crashing the Party doesn't concede this until page 146, where Nader writes that "there are many companies of lesser size and greater conscience", and then doesn't concede the point again.
   
   Crashing the Party describes many problems which are very real, yet I believe that these are best tackled without the hate speech. In a similar manner, Mr. Nader describes many unfortunate behaviors which have their root in economic forces and lack of creativity, but are described instead as moral shortcomings and ethical lapses. A coincidental appearance of impropriety should not be interpreted as proof of moral turpitude, as such a leap robs the assumer of all hope for progress.
   
   As long as I am mentioning leaps, several reviewers blame Mr. Nader's 2000 presidential run for the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States and associated deaths numbering in at least the tens of thousands. This is foolish reasoning. Mr. Nader's only failing on Iraq is not falling for the extortion inflicted by so many commentators: "a vote for Mr. Nader is a vote for __________ (insert anything which means destruction and anarchy)".
   
   With its weaknesses, this book is nonetheless a constructive read. I couldn't give it five stars, but less than four would mislead. With that said, the book is not a quick read and is not as useful on contemporary topics as his more recent book, The Good Fight : Declare Your Independence and Close the Democracy Gap. If you have not read The Good Fight and you value your time, I suggest skipping Crashing the Party in favor of this other book by Mr. Nader with fewer words and more substance (although still no footnotes).
   
   I am impressed by Mr. Nader's astounding personal knowledge of current and recent events, a result of decades of advocacy and tireless public service. Although I will never agree with each of his positions across the board, I find Mr. Nader's writing to be very fresh and rather informative. Concerning the weaknesses in some of his reasoning, perhaps I will find the time to write my own book and set a few things straight. As for Mr. Nader's keener observations? They are absolutely brilliant.



2. This is the ultimate book in understanding the importance of breaking free from the lesser of two-evil mentality. Journey with the Nader 2000 presidential campaign through all the obstacles the two-party duopoly inflicts on third party and independent candidates. It provides critical education about the rigged electoral system the Republicrats have cunningly crafted. This book shows that with courage and optimism one can stand up and fight with the corporate owned two-party system.



3. Nader is brilliant, decent, and incorruptible.
   Nader's high ethical standards and great ideas should be a guiding torch to our government.
   Thanks to him, there is some accountability in Washington. His persistence to fight for the public stands strong in defiance of the black out by the media and the dirty smear campaigns by the politicians. If Nader was corrupt he would've been recruited by the elites and could've occupied the White House or other high positions in government and top corporations.
   Nader is never for sale and will continue to stand for the little people as an icon of truth and integrity.
   I would highly recommend his book for every citizen that has concerns for his country, and for every person that values ethics in business, government, and life in general....



4. This is an excellent book on the issues that face American politics today, the views of Ralph Nader and his story relating to the 2000 election year and his campaign trail.
   
   The book raises awareness to the issues of corporate welfare practiced by both the Republican and Democratic parties, how the Democrats have morphed into a pseudo-Republican party, under the heavy influence of corporate lobbyists, ceasing to represent the working class and masses as Roosevelt and other great Democrats have done in the past.
   
   And the results are ecological damages, social injustices which have removed equal opportunities, centralization of power, corporate owned business which has eliminated much of the community based revenues, a disrespect for diversity and citizen participation and the monetary interests of plutocrat - the corporate elites - removing personal and global responsibilities. Inflation has risen, workers make less, poverty has increased, minimum wage is lower today in relation to inflation. Americans work longer hours for the same pay. Farmers have been devastated by large corporate industry, public works and schools have been given less and less funding and are crumbling, corporate welfare programs that take our tax dollars amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars ever year continue to rise with government giveaways of taxpayer assets including public forests, minerals and new medicines. Affordable housing are at record low levels, while the large corporate banks show record profits. Consumer debt is at a al-time high. Personal bankruptcies are at a record level. Personal savings are dropping to record lows and personal assets are extremely low. Corporate welfare dominates while small inadequate budgets provide the publics health and safety issues. Environmental regulations are removed for corporate interests. Wealth inequality is greater than at any time since World War II. The top 1 percent of the wealthiest people have more financial wealth than the bottom 90 percent of Americans combined, the worst inequality among large Western nations. And with all this, the corporate lobbyists continue to receive more privileges and immunities for their wrongdoing, while the workers, the labor parties, the populists - farmers, the environmentalists, the feminists, those that work towards civil rights - all are diminishing in great degrees.
   
   The argument against Nader is his pulling of votes away from the Democrats, resulting in Republican elections. Yet this argument is a lame duck when you put Socratic inquiry to the Democratic party and see the morphing there of into another Republican party. The two party duopoly has been called the DemRep party and the corporate control, the plutocrats, are buying the government which can result in an aristocracy and totalitarian system, this time base on radical privatization instead of state owned communism, however the end results are the same. The third party, the Greens, offer an alternative, a vote against big-money politics as usual. The duopoly offers a politics of fear - the lesser of two corrupt parties, while the third party offers a politics of home and democratic renewal And even if not the elected party, if offers itself as a constant watchdog of the Democratic party to make necessary changes.
   
   I think Nader gives a good account of the media, the third party partisan bias in American politics, the problem with the corporate directed Commission on Presidential Debates - the CPD, his campaign trail, his opposition, party funders, party loyalists and etc.
   
   On page 289 take from the New York Times: "The Green Party recognizes that every major social-justice movement in our history was made possible by a shift of more power to the people, away from the power that the few control. And it's way past time for a shift of power today from big business to the people. When slavery was abolished, shift of power from the plantations. Women's right to vote installed, that was a shift of power. Freedom to form trade unions by workers, shift of power form the industrialists to the workers. When the farmers started the progressive political movement, shift of power from the banks and the railroads to the farm areas and gave us political reforms for all Americans to enjoy to this day 100 years later. Power is the central contention of politics; that's what it's all about. If we don't have a more equitable destitution of power, there is no equitable distribution of wealth or income. And people who work hard will not get their just rewards. And the main way to shift power, if you had to have one reform is with public funding of public elections. Clean money, clean elections. Clean money and clean elections to stop the nullification of your votes by special interest money. Just thing about it; you go down to vote, you expect it to count, and the votes are cut off at the pass by fancy fund-raising dinners all over the country where fat cats pay off politicians for present and future favors and the politicians shake down the fat cats in a kind of combined symbiosis of legalized bribery and legalized extortion."
   
   "Civilization as if people are first is not just about opportunities; it is about limits and boundaries around antisocial, criminogenic behavior whose limitless logic eventually would spell omnicide for this very limited home we call Mother Earth." page 315



5. This is a good recount of the inside story of our nation and it's one party political machine. Nader talks about how hard it is for third party (or in my view second party since the first two are basically the same) candidates to make any progress in our political system. It is the democrats who lost 2000 by giving up the recount vote, not Nader. Too bad he decided to go off and do his own thing this time instead of working on forming the Gree Party. But the book is definately a must read for anyone interested in our political system.

5 comments about Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different.

1. This is arguably the finest work that I have ever read on the Founding Fathers of our country. Wood strips down the layers and then conveys what made these remarkable men who they were. It is such a compelling work that I have just completed it and I am preparing to start over again. I recommend this to anyone to wants a clear picture of our Founders painted for them. This isnt paint by numbers. Its a masterpiece.



2. The book itself is insightful and well-written, as well as well-organized. Wood goes through several of the Revolutionary Characters and gives an in-depth view into each man's personality and what exactly made each one tick. He expertly depicts each man's limitations and motivations.



3. As with another of Gordon Woods' works, 'The Radicalism of The American Revolution' I'm sorry to say that, in both instances, I've been somewhat disappointed by the analytical style with which Wood approaches his subject matter. Unfortunately, for me, this is somewhat akin to reading a didactic analysis of a great story rather than the great story itself and I found myself struggling with boredom and counting the pages to the end of each chapter so that I could get on to my next book in my current obsession with the American Revolution. While I do not question Prof. Wood's academic capabilities, I do think that he tends more toward historical analysis than historical narrative. This analytical style leads inevitably to conclusions and statements that sometimes appear somewhat subjective. One example is the inclusion of Aaron Burr in this collection of character analyses. On one hand, Wood acknowledges that Burr is not generally considered a 'founder' of the United States yet repeatedly refers to 'the other founders' when comparing Burr with Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, etc. as if Burr were among them. His subsequent analysis of Burr's character as completely lacking the qualities of the true founders begs the question of why Burr is even making an appearance in this book in the first place. Another criticism I have is Wood's tendency to make passing references to individuals not generally well known to most readers, (such as the 18th century English literary figure, Samuel Johnson, to whom Wood refers three times as 'Dr. Johnson' and once as 'Samuel Johnson') without explaining who they are. This is a common flaw one finds in works by some academics who seem at times forgetful that they are writing for a readership that is somewhat broader than the professorial cliques within which they move. It is a rare scholar indeed who possesses both academic ability as well as a talent for engaging the reader. Prof. Wood appears decidedly better on the first point than the second.
   
   Also recommended: Washington's Crossing, Paul Revere's Ride'David Hackett Fischer' Alexander Hamilton 'Ron Chernow' America, The Last Best Hope 'William J. Bennett'



4. Here's what I think spawned this book: A brilliant historian with such a wealth of knowledge about the American Revolution had all these thoughts and opinions in his head, and he just had to get them out. So he wrote them down, and poof, there was "Revolutionary Characters" by Gordon Wood.
   
   I made the mistake of reading this book soon after it was released, and I just wasn't ready for the depth of the material because it had been a while since I was in college. After reading biographies on most of the key participants, I recently looked at this book again and got more out of it. It's a very interesting analysis of eight significant figures of the era -- I believe Aaron Burr was included over John Jay because he's more interesting, not because he was more important.
   
   If you're expecting short bios on these eight men, you'll be disappointed; it offers no such thing. It's almost all analysis, and to further that point, two of the longest sections in the book are the introduction and epilogue, which are essentially all analysis. The book is incredibly wordy at times, and it often reads like it was written for history professors.
   
   Basically, this is a useful book for those with knowledge of and interest in the late 1700s and early 1800s. But it's not for the average reader, and it in no way compares to Joseph Ellis' "Founding Brothers," or even "American Creation."



5. Wood's argues that the difference is that these Revolutionary leaders (the usual phalanx, plus Paine and Burr as exemplars of contrast) were set apart by the first-generation gentility, expressed in 18th Century Enlightenment terms, on the outskirts of the empirical centers in London and Paris, in the formation of their public character in a country where the government became not a derivative of the populace but a lent lease from the populace who retained it.
   
   In this way, expanding literacy and political discussion and voting rights empowered and raised public opinion to the level of gentlemanly discussion (if you were a Jeffersonian Republican), or dragged discourse down to the level of the common herd (if you were a Hamiltonian Federalist), which word to describe the common mass quickly became verboten.
   
   Not that well argued or written, Woods progresses from OK thumbnail biographies to his single-chapter conclusion in generalities instead of tightly-argued theses.

5 comments about All The Best, George Bush: My Life and Other Writings.

1. Because of good 'ol President Bush, the country is in the best shape it's ever been in! Thank you, Sir George W. Bush, for making this nation truly phenomenal.



2. A solid, wide-ranging look at the life of an important American, told in his own words, "All The Best, George Bush" offers up a selection of George H. W. Bush's letters and diary entries before, during, and after his time as 41st President of the United States. Not long on substance, it nevertheless reflects the admirable values and likeable personality of one of the nation's most fascinating one-term leaders.
   
   We meet George on the cusp of adulthood, entering the Navy as a pilot, unnerved by the prospect of combat and turned off some by the gung-ho "kill-the-Japs" mentality around him. He comes off as a bit of a stick at times: "...boys I like very much - and even boys I admire have had sexual intercourse with women" he writes his mother. He describes keenly the call to duty, steeling himself for the possibility of death, which very nearly comes to call.
   
   Then it's on to Texas and the oil business, followed by brief stints as U.S. House member, Republican National Committee chair, Ambassador to China, and CIA director. Detractors noted that he never stayed long in one place, but life was moving fast and Bush certainly never lacked for interesting assignments. He was in charge of the GOP as Watergate came crashing down, and his stint at the CIA came while many in Congress clambered for its dissolution.
   
   Letters from this period, in the turbulent 1970s, are probably the most interesting in the book. Though not coming across as a deep thinker of Churchillian eloquence, one finds flashes of insight and candor that suggest some deeper waters to Bush's character than either he or his detractors would acknowledge. In a letter that starts "Dear Lads", he writes his four sons privately of Richard Nixon's failings, specifically in regard to the 37th President's famous loathing of Ivy Leaguers.
   
   "I must confess that deep in his heart he feels I'm soft, not tough enough, not willing to do the 'gut job' that his political instincts have taught him must be done. He is inclined to equate privilege with softness or stuffiness."
   
   If there is an overarching theme to the book, beyond the sometimes choking, often inspiring message of how much faith and family meant to Bush 41, it is this hang-up with privilege, a self-consciousness about his high-born background and elitist image. He even whines, early in his tenure as Vice President to Ronald Reagan, that he was being called a "preppie", which of course he is in spades.
   
   It's easy to see something aristocratic about Bush, even beyond the fact running the country became for him a hereditary business. He too often comes across as out-of-touch, prone to awkward jokes and decades-old slang in a way that sometimes undermines expressions of deeply-held feelings and heartache. Yet a real heart beats strongly beneath that Thurston Howell chest, and "All The Best" does a fine job of sharing it with readers.
   
   What makes "All The Best" most problematic is the bittiness of it, the fact the letters are not exchanges but just what he wrote to others, often with a line or two from Bush when he published this book in 1999 offering context. Occasionally, one wonders in vain what kind of response a particular letter of his elicited.
   
   You do get a lot of time with the extended Bush family, who seem to bring out both the best and hokiest moments in the book. He clearly became a more inward directed man as he got older, though the fire that drove him to the White House still burned, if only now for his children and their offspring.
   
   I liked Bush before reading this book, and liked him more after. He may have lacked the deeper ideological fervor of his predecessor Reagan, and certainly the mental agility and political sure-footedness of his successor Bill Clinton, but seemed to find his own high ground as a voice of common decency in times where such a thing was in painfully short supply. Absent the deeper approach of a memoir, a project he has forsworn, it's nice having that voice in print here.



3. For a book title, "All the Best" is a dead give away. As one might have expected, this is a collection of sanitized and self-serving commercials that sell a certain image of GHWB. The second George Washington. Man of letters, wise elder statesman, resolute warrior for truth, justice, and freedom. The book has no revelations worth mentioning, no penetrating insights, no perceptive critiques, not much of anything even remotely interesting. It reads as if a sweet little old lady had been at the head of an oil company, Director of the CIA, and President of the United States of America. Conspiracy theorists looking for clues to a hidden and sinister Masonic agenda, or even just folks looking to learn something about the decision making process at the highest levels of government will be bitterly disappointed.



4. I bought this book to learn a little about the best looking United States President in history, at least according to me. The structure of the book is different, yet interesting. 630 pages in which you get to know this Congress Man, embassador, DCI, Vice President, President, and family man. One can learn how such an important public figure juggles politics and family life. Love him or hate him, this book is touching in every sense. He writes these letters from his heart, and a good portion of the book is a journal that he kept. He shows his point of view on everything that went on during his politician days, as well as his thoughts and feelings when he had to make any kind of decision during his presidency. All in all, the book is worth every single cent. Get to know this important figure like I did, and you won't regret it.



5. George Bush (41st President, the father) wrote his autobiography while he was Vice President. After he left the Presidency, he decided to not write his memoirs (unlike other presidents) and let historians decide how his presidential years were. This is a big disappointment because it is always fun to read a Presidential Memoir when they come out, and also to learn about the different periods when they are a President. Fortunately, Bush was coaxed into collecting all his letters he had sent out to other people throughout his life and making it this book. I would say that the best part of the book is when you read the letters he sent out to various world leaders like Deng Xiaoping after the Tiannamen Square Massacre, and to Gorbachev after the Lithuania uprising. The period during the first Persian Gulf war is also interesting. You actually get to read the letters that Bush wrote, and this is quite a difference from other presidential memoirs where the author usually says in a line or two what he discussed with other world leaders.
   
   Also interesting are some of the letters he wrote to his children, including George W Bush. There is a letter from Bush the father to his children, written just before Desert Storm, where he talks about how sad and difficult it is for him to send US soldiers in harms way.
   
   The letters to Bush's mom where he talks about his fiancee Barbara is also interesting, but I was more interested in his presidential years. To me, the book became interesting after he started being appointed to various posts by different Presidents, e.g. Ambassidor to China by Nixon, CIA director by Ford, etc.
   
   However, as written by Kitty Kelly, Bush is a bit of a person who kisses up to people when the time is right. For example, while Bush was Chairman of the Republican Party, until a day before Nixon announces his resignation, Bush is in full support of him. Only then (and probably after he hears that Nixon is going to resign) does he send a letter to Nixon saying maybe it is time for him to resign.
   
   I think in future editions of this book, his letters to George W Bush during his son's presidency should be added, and also letters where he describes his feelings about Bill Clinton should be added too, since Clinton and he have become best pals.
   
   Overall an okay book. Would still prefer a typical Presidential Memoir though.

3 comments about Architect of Global Jihad: The Life of Al Qaeda Strategist Abu Mus'ab Al-Suri.

1. A well-written, finely researched book on a critical but otherwise unnoticed player in international terrorism. What is most interesting is Al-Suri's diverse history of terror cell membership and the resulting network of international links he maintained. This book is more than a biography. By reviewing Al-Suri's life, from his ideology, travel and marital choice, the book outlines a blueprint of "serious" terrorists that has been closely mirrored by many other hardcore jihadists in Al-Qa'ida and other groups. Most interesting is Al-Suri's shift from gun-toting combatant to ideological propagandist and his lasting influences. Though Bin Laden is "the face" of modern terrorism, this book leads the reader to question if the most dangerous players have yet to be identified.



2. Required reading for anyone wanting to better understand the past organizations and efforts of the jihadists and an insight into possible future organizational structure for the terrorist networks. The translations of key sections of the "Global Islamic Resistance Call" of Al-Suri's 1,600 page book shows his well thought out, objective case for his idea of a global Islamic resistance design, or for that matter anyone wishing to cause chaos in today's world. You have to understand the enemy to defeat him because a leaderless resistance would be one of the longest, hardest battle this nation, or any others confronted with this threat, will have to fight. A fight that will take an unfailing determination and focus. A fight of generations to discredit the jihadist propaganda and let the true voices of the areas afflicted with this disease to be heard.



3. In a fascinating tale of a fascinating individual this book delves deep into the soul of the Jihadist, learning about him, showing us his seminal work, which was 1,600 pages, and shedding lihgt on the man who theorized the global Jihad that threatens so many people today. This was not the Marx of Islamism or the Lenin. This was the Trotsky, the man who understood 'War Islamism' and how individualized Islamic cells of only a few men could spread havoc and take the war to the enemy on ground of the Islamists own choosing. Although Abu Mus'ab al-Suri, whose middle name was Sethmarriam, was not a latter day Sun Tzu or Clauswitz, her might have been. Alleged to have been killed in the snowy hills of the Pashtun, his wareabouts are actually unknown.
   
   A fascinating book about Islamist history, about the birth and making of the Islamist and the strategy of Islamism. He was truly an architect of the international terrorist revolution.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman