Governments

First of all, I'll concede that it's tough to find someone who argues better for libertarianism in practical, understandable terms than Mary Ruark. Moreover, her book's a very simple read and paints vivid examples of what a libertarian world *might* look like.

But this brings me to my first minor critique. Ruark provides examples of the way a free nation might run, but she elaborates on them in such detail that one begins to get the impression that she's arguing for the examples themselves. When she discusses a system of free-market private schooling, she describes the schools she envisions in intricate detail, and they don't remotely resemble what I think schooling in a libertarian country would look like. Now - Presuming I weren't a libertarian and even slightly objected to the school system she describes, I might simply reject all her ideas based on my objections to her illustrations of them.

Secondly, I just disagree with Ruark's anarcho-capitalistic version of libertarianism. I really am - as some libertarians would say - myopic enough to believe that we need government to provide public goods (I'm talking about the real ones like defense, police protection, and criminal justice). And call me a statist, but I think we'd have to fund these government activities with taxes. Of some kind. Somehow. Of the unvoluntary sort. With - yes - government force to ensure compliance.

Otherwise, though, this book should make an interesting read for libertarians and non.

I love this book. Really.

Dr. Ruwart's political philosophy's foundation is about non-aggression. This is nothing new in the libertarian creed, and the difference is that instead of concentrating on arguments of property rights, she really drives home with the non-aggression principle. She avers that by using aggression (i.e. force) to solve our problems, we end up only worsening our lives. We create a world of zero-sum games instead of a system that respects individual choices so long as they do not harm our person or property.

What also makes this book a pleasure to read is that it its tone is very friendly and accommodating. Many people (rightly) expect books on political philosophy to be badgering or aggressively written, so I like that Dr. Ruwart ditched the popular approach. Plus, her compassionate way of writing makes it difficult to call her a bloodthirsty free-market fan -- she does care about matters like helping the poor and making healthcare accessible.

Every issue she looks at shows the failures of aggression (i.e. government) to be effective, and conversely non-aggression (i.e. voluntary, private cooperation) has been more successful. Healthcare intervention? It's aggression, and it's bad for our health (and our wallet). The Federal Reserve? Central banking is aggression that monopolizes the money supply and creates the "boom & bust" cycle. The public school system? It might be obvious that the Department of Education doesn't actually educate anyone, but the whole setup is aggressive too, and children suffer because of it.

The principle of non-aggression is also applied to pollution, crime & punishment, the FDA, gun ownership, and -- the one especially important these days -- foreign policy. Non-aggression wins every time, and very few issues go untouched.

A cool touch to Dr. Ruwart's book is that she puts tons of great, great quotes in the margins, which work wonderfully with the topic at hand. One of my favorites comes from the first chapter (about the basis of non-aggression): "...we are living in a sick Society filled with people who would not directly steal from their neighbor but who are willing to demand that the government do it for them," says William L. Comer. That's classic! There's a lot of great ones, many of which I didn't recognize.

Please, read this book. This is a world where governments keep getting bigger, and that will always mean more aggression as the State invades more aspects of our lives. Know what's scary? In Chapter 19, "The Communist Threat Is All In Our Minds", Ruwart shows that the United States has implemented eight of ten policies The Communist Manifesto declared necessary for a transition into socialism. Darn. So, getting the word out on liberty is always a good thing. Please see Scott Ryan's excellent review of this book too.

Her premise isn't that hard to understand; when the government
takes (even if they call it taxation) it's stealing, so someone wins and someone loses. Essentially, in all coercion someone wins and someone loses. In voluntary exchange--the free market--it's win-win. Ruwart has a casual, easy-to-understand style. The title isn't an exaggeration; the world would be close to healed if everyone would follow two simple and ancient laws: "Do not steal" and "Do not murder."

This book's true value rests in its spotlight upon Neville Chamberlain, a man truly ahead of his time and a genius of world geopolitics. When faced with a terrorist threat from Germany, Chamberlain's very first thought was, "Why does he hate us?" Chamberlain then based his every succeeding action upon the premise there must have been something wrong with his own society and way of life, and he went out of his way to appease the terrorist, to give him more time, to allow inspectors to do their jobs and so forth. Contrasted with all the savages who suggest that the German terrorist should have been killed early in the game, Chamberlain's exemplary diplomatic behavior (consulting others, forming a coalition to sit and observe, and so on) was the prototype model for the sort of diplomacy that a significant number of people today believe is the way to deal with aggressive terrorists. We saw exactly how well that strategy worked for Chamberlain, thanks to Winston Churchill's excellent chronicle.

Winston Churchill, in addition to his well-deserved reputation as a great war-time leader and statesman, also has a well-deserved reputation as a prolific author and historian. His six volume history of the Second World War, recently re-issued and now readily available, part history, part memoir, is a must read original source for any student of the War.

Obviously, what makes Churchill's history of the War unique is his involvement in so much of the narrative. He is alone among the great leaders in recording his experiences of this period. But this work is not merely a memoir of his role in the War but rather a complete work of historical scholarship in and of itself. In this book, volume one, Churchill covers the period from the end of the Great War in 1919 until the invasion of France and the fall of the Chamberlain government in 1940. The book is divided into two parts, the first "From War to War" briefly covers developments in Britain and Germany during the twenties that relate to the rise of Hitler and the growing menace of Germany in the thirties. The bulk of this section is devoted to the folly of Britain and France in allowing a toothless Germany to reach military parity with and then greatly surpass the abilities of the two Democracies. Churchill covers all the major events and gives his views on them, including his exclusion from the government and his frustrating inability to affect the course of events. His criticism is surprisingly muted, however. In his characteristic way, Churchill allows his adversaries' own words of folly to speak for themselves. His criticism after the fact his actually a good deal tamer than his speeches to Parliament during this period. Some of this may have to do with the fact of his reconciliation with Chamberlain after the beginning of the War.

The second part of the book, "the Twilight War" covers the period from September 1939 until the invasion of the West in the Spring of 1940. With the mind of a military thinker, Churchill details the naval challenges to Britain from he very start of the war, including the need to protect merchant shipping and the need to secure England's northern Baltic ports. In this section as well, Churchill chronicles the political and diplomatic difficulties of the early part of the war. Included of course, in his typically understated fashion, is the story of his return to power, first as First Lord of the Admiralty then as Prime Minister after the fall of the Chamberlain government. It is on this note that the book concludes, saving the story of the Fall of France and Britain's lonely stand for the second volume.

Churchill's way with the pen is incomparable. His use of the written English language is remarkable. As a history, this book is comprehensive and excellent. He makes much use of original sources, particularly regarding German actions. Its only weakness as a history is the lack of Churchill's detachment from the events of which he writes. But this weakness of the book as a history is its strength as a biography. Churchill's insights into the times in which he lived and the famous people with whom he dealt are invaluable. In this book, his description of Molotov as a perfect robot is priceless. Churchill states that the theme to this volume is "How the English-Speaking people's...allowed the wicked to re-arm." It is a lesson also covered in Manchester's "The Last Lion Volume Two-Alone." It is a lesson still invaluable today.

As with virtually everything he did in life, Winston Churchill wrote his six volume history of the Second World War with many goals: As the Prime Minister of Britain (and--equally importantly--a member of the "right" class), Churchill had access to volumes of original documents. As the Prime Minister during the War, he was in a unique position to understand the relationship of those documents to real events. As a central actor, he had a huge incentive to prepare the first draft of history...to place himself in the best possible light. As a conservative politician out of power when he wrote, he sought to warn the world of the looming communist menace. Finally, as a long time practitioner of written English, he had an unparalleled command of the language. In this volume, Churchill successfully blends together all of these personas to create an absolutely riveting history of the prelude to the Second World War--from the close of World War One to the invasion of Belgium.

Churchill's mastery of English is reason enough to read this book. For example, in describing the British government's constant debates over what to do about German rearmament, Churchill says the British were "frothing pious platitudes while foeman forge their arms". Very seldom do I have to turn to a dictionary while reading, but Churchill sent me there regularly.
But do not think that this is just a book to be read to enjoy his use of language. His detailed account of how we got into the Second World War, and how we might have avoided it, is incisive and persuasively argued. And always watch for the subtext--his warning that the appeasement on Germany was then (in the 1950's) being repeated in the appeasement of the Soviet Union.
Churchill's weakness flows directly from his strength. As a prime actor, he saw (and describes) the war entirely from the "balance of power", or large political perspective. The plight of the Jews in Germany is barely mentioned. He pays virtually no attention to the internal politics of the U.S.--which ultimately proved decisive in the war. And he virtually ignores the growing war in the far east.
With that limitation in mind, this is a book everyone interested in understanding the Second World War--and everyone who enjoys the creative use of the English language--should read.

My 10 year old sister was given this book as a gift. I'm pretty good at history, so I thought learning all the presidents in order would be really cool. I read the book for 20 or 30 minutes, took the quizes, and by the time I was done I could name all the presidents in order, and backwords. The book also gives you clues to help remember the 5,10,15,20,25,30,35, and 40th presidents.

I was on a pop quiz team in high school so knowing the order of all the US Presidents was imperative and the book helped accomplish that end. It uses cartoons and silly phrases that are easy to remember and visualize. Now I will never forget that JFK was the 35th and Buchanan was the 15th. Rock Forth.

My mom bought me this book when I was in 2nd or 3rd grade. I read the whole thing through in an hour or so, and I immediately had all the presidents memorized. When I was in 6th grade, one of the book's authors, Will Cleveland I think, came to my school. To start off his speech he asked if anyone knew who the 14th president of the United States was. I was the only one in the audience to raise my hand, and after I said the answer (Pierce), I told Mr. Cleveland I had read his book. He said I was proof that the book really works, and he was right. I am now in 10th grade, and can still name all of the presidents in order, along with all of the helpful clues in the books. I just passed Yo, Millard Fillmore! down to my 11 year-old sister, and it's working so far for her too. Long story short: this book works!!!!!

This is an awesome book about the awesome task of an awesome God.

Piper relates missions to the supremacy of God by insisting that missions is not the chief end of the church, worship is. Missions exists because worship doesn't. Worship therefore is the goal of missions. But even more than that, the impetus behind true missionary zeal is a heart that is satisfied in the glory of God above all things. Therefore, worship is also the fuel of missions.

Then Piper shows the key role that prayer plays in missionary effort. Prayer is a wartime walkie-talkie given by our Commander-in-Chief so that we can call Him for air cover when we are on the frontlines of the battle. The problem with most of us is that we have turned this wartime walkie-talkie into a domestic intercom by asking for more worldy comforts instead of help for Kingdom work.

A third chapter (in part one) shows the role that suffering plays in missions by expositing texts like Col. 1:24. This is a powerful and insightful section that will inspire and encourage you - as well as make you count the cost of following Jesus down the hard road of love.

The second part of the book deals with theological issues that are essential to a Biblical understanding of missions, such as the eternality of hell, the necessity of the atonement, and the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation. This book is a Calvinistic call to missions that exceeds anything I have ever read elsewhere! I recommend it heartily!

"Missions is not the ultimate goal of the church, worship is. Missions exists because worship doesn't." This is the opening line of this book, and it is the foundational premise on which it is written.

Piper writes about a God who is worth serving, worth going to the nations for, and who is worth suffering for. There is no greater cause in all the world than the glory of God and Piper eloquently describes how Missions is intimately connected to that cause.

Perhaps the most striking point in the book is the idea that God is passionate for his own glory. In fact that God is passionately establishing his glory in the nations. It is not that God is in constant need of affirmation, but that He knows that His glory is the "chief end of man"...and of God.

The chapter on Suffering is incredible. Piper's writing is as convicting as it is motivating. The reader is left asking the question "Do I believe in a God like this? Do I serve a God who is worth suffering for?"

God has honored his church with the privelege of joining Him in his work in the world. Piper is a man who understands this privilege, and who invites us to join Him as well.

This is, indeed, one of the greatest books on missions. It offers a fresh perspective on missions offering that when non-believers witness true worship of the living God, they will be won over. It's easy to read for the general parishoner, and theologically deep enough for the seminarian. I highly recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in learning about missions.

Barry Goldwater could have saved this country many of its fiscal problems had he been elected President. He lost though, and the government adopted huge programs that are still costing America to this day. Goldwater's brand of libertarian/conservative politics were responsible, compassionate, and not a burden on the American public. The large welfare state, wasteful education programs, inefficient social security programs, and other government controlled entities would not have been created had Goldwater's policies been accepted. He clearly explains why the federal government should stay out of the lives of the people and business, not only because it is for the good of the society, but the Constitution calls for it as well. Goldwater believed in expanding states' rights and letting liberty and freedom with responsibility be the norm in society, not a far-reaching goal. Had his ideas and precepts taken effect with his desired presidency, America would have been a far different, and better, place to live.

Published in 1960 and reproduced in the millions in 1964, when Goldwater ran for President, it is still read widely today. Some people suggest that, since the draft of the book was written by the late Brent Bozell (whose son, Brent Bozell III, is the head of the media-watchdog organization, the Media Research Center), credit for the book belongs more to Bozell than Goldwater.

        Bozell studied Goldwater's writings and listened carefully to his speeches. He wrote this book in close coordination with Goldwater Conscience of a Conservative is pure Barry Goldwater, circa 1960. Those who haven't read it should do so, not only for its masterly distillation of the principles of limited government, but also to gain an insight into Goldwater's great impact on politics in America. This book didn't win the 1964 election for Sen. Goldwater, but it launched the political education of many grassroots activists who eventually nominated and elected Ronald Reagan.

No self-respecting conservative should be without this book. Goldwater lays out the seminal argument for American conservatism. This book became the underground college book of the early sixties, and no doubt is one of the most influential political works of the 20th Century. If you're a conservative today, you have Goldwater to thank for it.

For the realtively uninitiated. These days, anything related to the Austrian school of economics is worth al least looking at. Rothbard is a bit extreme, proposing that un-backed credit creation is equivalent to counterfeiting. In my opinion there is a difference, since money supply based solely on credit can evaporate into bad debt write-offs if a credit bubble bursts, while money supply cannot evaporate if based on the issuance of counterfeit currency. Nevertheless, this is interesting material in a concise book with no fluff. If you're reading a dozen books on the Fed and money, this might as well be one of them.

Ever since the creation of the Federal Reserve Board ("the Fed"), the American economy has been subject to a cycle of boom and bust. Most recently, we saw a bubble in technology stocks in general and telecommunication stocks in particular, fueled by the creation of credit. But no one wants to blame the culprit -- the Fed. Why has an institution that was created allegedly to bring stability to the economy caused such havoc? Equally importantly, why is an institution that has so much power so unaccountable?

Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) provides in this book an outstanding discussion of money, banking, the Fed, and U.S. monetary policy. As usual, Rothbard sees the "big picture." There was no need for a central bank, however the Banksters ' in combination with Big Business and Big Intellectuals -- pushed for the creation of the Fed. Rothbard's discussion of the battles between the Rockefellers and the House of Morgan is fascinating. (See his Wall Street, Banks and American Foreign Policy for a more elaborate discussion of this great "conspiracy" in U.S. history.)

The foundation for this work is Austrian economic theory. Through fractional reserve banking ' which is little more than legal counterfeiting ' banks are permitted to print new money, thus creating inflation. Yet the central insight of Austrian theory is that this creation of money doesn't simply increase prices, but distorts the cycle of production as it works its way through the economy. This creates the boom and bust cycles that have plagued our economy.

For a more detailed discussion of many of the issues raised in this book, the interested reader should consult Rothbard's The Mystery of Banking.

Murray Rothbard once again cuts through the popular dogma and conventional knowledge which government would prefer we all simply take on faith. In this case, the subject is money and the creation of it. Rothbard, an exceptional economist, showcases his ability to set aside the technical jargon and higher mathematics of the profession in favor of language accessible to everyone. In "The Case Against the Fed," Professor Rothbard examines the roots of money, as a commodity with subjective value which, because of wide-spread acceptance and other desireable qualities, becomes a medium of exchange for a people. Furthermore, he exposes the government's, via the Federal Reserve, monopolization of money. Rothbard shows how the Fed uses the power of the printing press to tax the people via inflation, to redistribute income, and to artificailly lower the interest rate leading to the infamous "business cycle" and the roller coaster of depressions and booms which our eceonomy is regualraly subjected to. Anyone who is concerned about the purchasing power of their income and about the unemployment which the business cycle regularly brings should read this book. Professor Rothbard portrays the federal government as what it is: the self-proclaimed, legitimate counterfeiter

I am a retired Navy Submariner who now lives in New York. It was exciting to read about so many instances and details that had the realism only a fellow submariner could express, even down to the mannerisms and lingo. It is also apparent that the author has been to the places cited in the book. Once again, having been to the Puget Sound and San Diego, it brought back memories. The combination of submarine realism, location facts, and the weaving back and forth of the story line between different scenes and settings kept my interest, and kept me wanting to read more. Great book for a relaxing yet interesting read.

Final Bearing, by George Wallace and Don Keith, truly is a rip-snorter! The authors packed a lot of exciting action into every page. Combining submarines and other craft with spies, drugs, and jungle warfare was a potent formula mixed up with a great air of authenticity. I hope it sells well, and I can hardly wait for the movie. But the book jacket needs a government warning: "Do not read this book if you have heart trouble!" Frank S. Virden, Captain, USN (Ret.)

Wallace and Keith manage to take the action from the jungles of South America to the streets of Seattle without missing a beat, but the best scenes take place within the confines of the submarine. Never has the pressure, camraderie, and very real danger of daily life on a sub been conveyed so fondly and so well. You don't have to be a submariner or even a fan of this genre to find this book thoroughly engrossing.

This is truly an astounding, superbly compiled, book. Now, years later, we finally know the truth: Lyndon B. Johnson was not merely a tragic president who stuck to his guns and fought a war he mistakenly believed he could win (with various political restrictions on the military).

He was, this book proves beyond a shadow of a doubt in its lively transcripts of his secretly taped phone conversations, a tragic president who stuck to his guns and fought a war he firmly believed would be LOST no matter WHAT.

He didn't want to lose, but he didn't want to be the one to pull out, so he got in deeper and deeper, losing sleep and agonizing all the way -- and the consequences to his administration and the country were catastrophic.

There are a slew of reasons why you should read (or gift) this amazing book.

The main one: true, it does give you perhaps more than you wanted to know about LBJ (but I don't care WHAT some reviewers have said: I LOVE the many sections where he is flirting with and flattering Jackie Kennedy!)...but if you read it you get a clear idea of how a president operated -- and many parts of this book are so dramatic and gripping, they read like a movie script. In fact, I can see the Oliver Stone movie now.....

Historian Michael Beschloss makes it seem easy when you read it, but transcribing and annotating (so you know through footnotes what LBJ is referring to when he talks and get some historical context..and know when LBJ is spinning) these conversations taped between 1964 and 1965 could not have been easy. Yet, he gives you the meat and you get to "know" how LBJ thinks and, politically, works.

It shows Johnson, warts and all, as a man who could have been one of the top presidents because of his skills, will and sincere desire to serve. But it also shows a highly conflicted, contradictory, at times paranoid and highly depressed man. On the night of his monster landslide 1964 election he is angry and "down," steaming over Bobby Kennedy's influence, lack of political deference and possible future machinations. As he presses and manipulates to get his Great Society legislation passed, he's secretly leaking negative info on election opponent Barry Goldwater, keeping the lid on information regarding his number one aide's role in a sex scandal. He talks of victory in Vietnam, but repeatedly tells politicos and his wife that there is absolutely no way the U.S. can ever win, and he is tormented by his terrible choice and unwanted role. He wants to help the poor and the blacks, but will talk a little more "southern" if he has to while talking to someone who doesn't quite agree with him to make them think he's on their wavelength.

The famous Gulf of Tonkin resolution? Even Johnson believed it may not have happened. But he took the resolution in Congress and ran with it -- using it to justify the war he knew he the U.S. could not win.

In Feb. 1965 he told a Senator "a man can fight if he can see daylight down the road somewhere. But there ain't no daylight in Vietnam. Not a bit."

If you went back and contrasted his public pronouncements with what he was saying privately, it would be shocking: pep talks to the country (and troops) to the contrary, he never felt we could win. Meanwhile, he kissed J. Edgar Hoover's you-know-what to keep Hoover on his side (actually, they had been neighbors in Washington and Johnson had carefully wooed Hoover for years) in his battle against Goldwater, Kennedy and others.

Not all of the book is about the sad, deceitful slide into Vietnam. Many of the transcripts deal with his election campaign, domestic legislation etc....but by the end of this fast-moving volume Vietnam is devouring LBJ alive as it did the country -- and the innocence and joy of the early 1960s.

I read this book rather quickly. It was an INCREDIBLE experience. Read it and you'll be a very sad fly on the wall in the White House.

This is truly an astounding book. Now, years later, we finally know the truth: Lyndon B. Johnson was not merely a tragic president who stuck to his guns and fought a war he mistakenly believed he could win (with various political restrictions on the military).
He was, this book proves beyond a shadow of a doubt in its lively transcripts of his secretly taped phone conversations, a tragic president who stuck to his guns and fought a war he firmly believed would be LOST no matter WHAT.
He didn't want to lose, but he didn't want to be the one to pull out, so he got in deeper and deeper, losing sleep and agonizing all the way -- and the consequences to his administration and the country were catastrophic.
There are a slew of reasons why you should read (or gift) this amazing book.
The main one: true, it does give you perhaps more than you wanted to know about LBJ (but I don't care WHAT some reviewers have said: I LOVE the sections where he is flirting with Jackie Kennedy)...but if you read it you get a clear idea of how a president operated -- and many parts of this book are so dramatic and gripping, they read like a movie script. In fact, I can see the Oliver Stone movie now..
Historian Michael Beschloss makes it seem easy when you read it, but transcribing and annotating (so you know through footnotes what LBJ is referring to when he talks and get some historical context..and know when LBJ is spinning) these conversations taped between 1974 and 1965 could not have been easy. Yet, he gives you the meat and you get to "know" how LBJ thinks and, politically, works.
It shows Johnson, warts and all, as a man who could have been one of the very best presidents because of his skills, will and sincere desire to serve. But it shows a highly conflicted, contradictory, at times paranoid and highly depressed man. On the night of his monster landslide 1964 election he is angry and "down," steaming over Bobby Kennedy's influence and possible future machinations. As he presses and manipulates to get his Great Society legislation passed, he's leaking info on election opponent Barry Goldwater, keeping the lid on information regarding his number one aide's role in a sex scandal. He talks of victory in Vietnam, but repeatedly tells politicos and his wife that there is absolutely no way the U.S. can ever win, and he is tormented by his terrible choice and unwanted role. He wants to help the poor and the blacks, but will talk a little more "southern" if he has to while talking to someone who doesn't quite agree with him to make them think he's on their wavelength.
The famous Gulf of Tonkin resolution? Even Johnson believed it may not have happened. But he took the resolution in Congress and ran with it -- using it to justify the war he knew he the U.S. could not win.
In Feb. 1965 he told a Senator "a man can fight if he can see daylight down the road somewhere. But there ain't no daylight in Vietnam. Not a bit."
If you went back and contrasted his public pronouncements with what he was saying privately, it would be shocking indeed: pep talks to the country (and troops) to the contrary, he never felt we could win. Meanwhile, he kissed J. Edgar Hoover's you-know-what to keep hoover on his side (actually, they had been neighbors in Washington and Johnson had carefully kept Hoover on his side for years) in his battle against Goldwater, Kennedy and others.
Not all of the book is about the sad, deceitful slide into Vietnam. Many of the transcripts deal with his election campaign, domestic legislation...but by the end of the volume Vietnam is devouring LBJ alive as it did the country and the innocence and joy of the early 60s.
I read this book rather quickly. It was an INCREDIBLE experience. Read it and you're a fly on the wall in the White House.

I listened to the cassette versions of "Taking Charge" and "Reaching for Glory" when they first appeared. I listened to "Reaching for Glory" again after two LBJ bios and LBJ does indeed come alive. LBJ was, in the words of Robert Dalleck, a flawed giant. So many contradictions, so much hypocrisy - but yet - not... he was just LBJ.

The tape system which proved to be Nixon's downfall was also used by LBJ and JFK. Luckily for us 40 years later, we have wonderful insight into LBJ and the operation of his administration. The cassette versions are abridged, but getting to hear the actual recordings is fantastic. I anxiously await the third volume of the trilogy.

Ambush at Ruby Ridge is a must read for all young people not to anger them but to educate them as to what can happen when we let Government to go out of control. I feel this book weighed both sides of this issue but no matter what, the US Government came out on the losing end of it. Alan Bock has shown what can happen when we, as citizens, allow the Government to do as they feel fit giving a new meaning to the importance of showing up at the polls and putting capable people into office that will correct these kinds of problems. These type of Ruby Ridge incidents are showing up far too often in our Country.

The photographic section in the middle of the book picturing Sammy Weaver's classmates with targets pinned on their shirts shocks one into the reality that "yes, this really did happen. A fourteen year old was murdered, his little arm shot completely off." The family dog's dead carcass has multiple tank marks from being repeatedly run over. Bock is fair in pointing out that the Weaver's had a different point of view, but hey, isn't that why our forefathers came to this country? It requires some concentration to follow all the documentary but what an amazing chronicle of the great injustice done to this family by Big Brother! Bock is very courageous and I wouldn't be surprised if the government bans the book. After all, the first thing Hitler did was to kill the real journalists. Refreshing in a time when journalists are afraid to speak out for fear of government retaliation. Direct coverage of the true events surrounding Ruby Ridge trials, great photographic section!

Hard Truth - Sad Fact

The book tells the hard truth that the government messed up.

The FBI deliberately took the law into its own hands, giving its people what amounted to a "shoot on sight" directive.

The fact that the administrators escaped prosecution is a sad one.