James Bamford wrote the book “A Pretext for War”, in 2004. The topic of this book is that it explains the systematic weakness that led to the ignorance or misinterpreted evidence of the pending terrorist attack on 9/11. The authors thesis is clearly stated on the title of the book “9/11, Iraq, and The Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies.” After reading this book, Bamford does explain everything he said in his thesis. I will talk about how the author organized his book, the style of his book, and about the author himself. Bamford organizes his book, “A Pretext for War”, in three different parts: Destruction, Detection, and Deception. In the first part “Destruction”, he talks about the events leading up to the attack on the World …show more content…
He talks about the confusion in the national government after the first plane struck the World Trade Center. Bamford says that in this crisis, they should have activated entire nuclear command structure, but during the attack, many of our nation’s leaders knew just as much as what was on the news. Bamford says, “The President of the United States knew less than the tens of millions of other people in every part of the country who were watching the attack as it unfolded.” Bamford adds that the news was the best source of information because all of the national intelligence agencies were busy emptying out its buildings and running for cover. Throughout the first part, he still just describes in gruesome detail of everything that is happening during the attack. Some of the details Bamford says is, “ ‘There’s body parts all over the place,’ said one officer, ‘I’ve got dozens of bodies, people are just jumping from the top of the building onto…in front of One World Trade…bodies are just coming out of the sky,’ said another …show more content…
Navy. I think Bamford is bias over the situations of the CIA, NSA, and other intelligence agencies. I think Bamford does not like the way all of the intelligence agencies are running their organizations. I believe the author is bias in this book because Bamford mainly focuses on the problems of these different agencies and not on what these agencies have helped us. The reason I believe he wrote this book was because he spent three years in the navy and knew many thing everyday people did not. Therefore, he wanted to share all the things he knew about with
I found this book to be a rather interesting read. I enjoyed how Levathes researched this book and wrote it to try to explain about this specific period of time and how it is very non-fiction.
I would recommend this novel to anyone who enjoys historical fiction books where the characters learn life-altering lessons. I also feel that people of all ages would enjoy this book because it’s messages and theme was very positive. While I did enjoy this book, I think I will not be reading another historical fiction novel for my upcoming book response.
?Espionage.? 2000-2004. The War to End All Wars. Michael Duffy. Original Material. Primary Documents Online.
Popular Mechanics.eds. “Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report.” Popular Mechanics Online. March 2005. 26 August 2008. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html.
Prados, John. Safe for Democracy The Secret Wars of the CIA. Chicago, IL: Ivan R Dee, Publisher, 2006.
... the ending of the book seemed too abrupt to me, and could be improved by making that a little smoother. It seemed like he was rushing to finish the book toward the end of the book, and quickly wrapped up the story at the end, I think that could be improved, but still nicely written.
All in all, this novel is a good read, so long as the reader takes the time to think about everything that goes into it.
I would recommend this book to people who love realistic stories. Personally for me it is hard to find books that interest me and this one felt like if I was watching someone else's life while I read it. It has so many interesting points. When you think something might happen
After the attacks by the predominantly Saudi extremists on 9-11, the administration of then President George ‘Dubya’ Bush went into overdrive to be seen as proactive in the effort to make sure that the attacks could not be repeated. With the passage of The USA Patriot Act, the then President Bush asserted, we would be handed our intelligence and law enforcement officers the required tools and abilities to fight this new and ‘present danger.’ The document lays out the assertions of the President as of October 26, 2001 as given during a speech at the White House. Also included are the contrasting comments and opinions of Suzanne Spaulding, who has served in the intelligence community for 25 years under both Republican and Democratic presidents and is currently Under Secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security.
Carr, Matthew.” Chapter 12: A Raid on the Path: 9/11 and the War on Terror.” Unknown Soldiers. 291-321.UK: Profile Books, 2006. History Reference Center. Web.25 Feb, 2014
... Sept. 11th, 2001, terrorist attack on theWorld Trade Center and the unreliability of U.S. intelligence onWeapons of mass Destruction in Iraq have been a focus of intense scrutiny in the U.S. in 2004 particularly in the context of the 9/11 Commision , the continuing armed resistance against U.S. occupation of Iraq, and the widely perceived need for systematic review of the respective roles of the CIA, FBI and the Defense Intelligence Agency. On July 9th, 2004 the Senate report of Pre-war Intelligenceon Iraq of the Senate Intelligence Committe stated that the CIA described the danger presented by Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq in an unreasonable way, largely unsupported by the available intelligence. In a briefing held Sept 15th, 2001 George Tenet presented the Worldwide Attack Matrix, a "top-secret" document describing covert CIA anti-terror operations in 80 countries in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The actions, underway or being recommended, would range from "routine propaganda to lethal covert action in preparation for military attacks". The plans, if carried out, "would give the CIA the broadest and most lethal authority in its history".
Farley, John E. "An American Attack on Iraq is Not Justified." Iraq Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. William Dudley. Greenhaven Press, 2004. 27-31.
is a great novel and reflects both the historical time periods of when it is set and when it was published. The novel also does an amazing
Pillar, P 2006, ‘Intelligence, Policy, and the War in Iraq’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 15-27.
My overall opinion of this book is good I really liked it and recommend it to anyone. It is a good book to read and it keep you interested throughout the whole book.