Silly name calling, zero facts
343529
This book is a 200+ page rant against everything that inflames Michael Savage.  Savage resorts to name calling far more often than he provides any facts to back up his arguments.  Example:  Tony Blair is "Third Way Fhrer Blair".  Why?  Because he is in the wrong party.  Of course, Savage now thinks Blair is a prince (check his web site)...  Liberals?  As much a threat as Al Quada.
Savage misquotes scientific research from the University of Tokyo (claiming it pertains to global warming, when it doesn't).  He tells us that the divorce rate doubled in 30 years, when in fact it increased 30%.  He attacks ritalin, as a way to slam Hillary Clinton, while ignoring the children who ritalin helps.
Now, I suppose this book is primarily intended to outrage, as such it is a success.  Perhaps Mr. Savage really believes intolerance will solve the problems he is presenting, I don't and therefore can not recommend his book.
135137
This author's series of books are filled with misinformation, erroneous commentary, or completely unfounded opinion disguised as "spiritual truths".  Of the accurate information in the books, almost all of it is simply Buddhism with a New Age Christian flavor.  These books offer nothing new, nothing truly helpful.  They appear to be nothing more than a gateway device to recruit people to the author's cult of psychic phenomenon. You'll discover more about "earth energy" while washing your dog outside than sitting inside reading this book.  If you have no dog, simply go for a walk, a swim, a nap under a cedar tree--do anything other than read this silly book!
129046
If the facts don't fit, make up some facts!  This book isn't about militias, it's about white supremecy organizations.  I guess he used the word militia in the title to attract sales of this piece of garbage to bedwetters.  The first chapter is about Randy Weaver (Ruby Ridge) and there's plenty of made up facts in there to get his misconceived point across.  It's all down hill from there.  Anyone who believes the nonsense he spews is many apples short of a full tree.
963391
More nonsense from another unimportant so called celebrity. The book was passed on to me, would not have spent a nickel on such trivia.
2216071
This "bio" which was obviously hastily churned out right after the 1994 assault on Nancy Kerrigan, doesn't tell the reader anything that hasn't already been printed in news stories. It's doubtful that the writers even interviewed anyone in the Harding camp; for instance, they repeatedly refer to her mother as LaVona Golden, when the woman doesn't even use that name. A shameless attempt to cash in on the scandal.
2804371
All this book is, is a listing of alleged 'alien' names that came from a 'channeled' material from a variety of sources.  The author essentially lists them in alphabetical order, with the reference.  It does not say 'who' exactly they are, or what they allege.  This book could easily be listed as 'fiction' because there is absolutely no corroboration from credible sources, and some of these names, sound made up and/or science fiction-like.  Besides, channeled sources have no credibility, they can say they are Zena, from the planet Xerkon, with no I.D. to prove it, through some 'channel', when in reality they are just demons/deceptive spirits, playing on people's wishful thinking and naivete. Don't waste your time or your money, there is nothing in this book worth looking at.
1612984
I hope Ms. Alexy's mysterious, secretive priest has some idea of the damage he inflicted on her book by refusing to be forthcoming, refusing to answer questions, refusing to meet, and so forth--to an absurd and unnecessary extent.

"Simon's" voiced assertions that he is pleased by her publishing news and that he wants her to tell his story are disingenuous, considering what lengths to which he has gone to avoid giving any answers to her questions beyond the most vague--then coming up with a disaster to excuse avoiding a meeting, followed by a terminally broken heart to excuse ending all communication about Crypto-Judaism.  Especially vile was "Simon's" announcement that two young Ashkenazi Jewish men apparently traveled to his little town somewhere in Latin America and murdered his uncle, a Catholic priest (decades before), because he was a Crypto-Jew:  vile because he then refused to discuss the incident further, and soon afterwards stopped cooperating.  As it stands, it is merely a mean fiction.

Apparently in the end he became a nonsecular sort of interfaith person, which is a shame if, as he claims, he was the end-product of 500 years of lovingly maintained Jewish tradition in his family.

It all sounds like Internet trolling to me, I'm sorry:  some young person somewhere was jerking Ms. Alexy around for the mere sake of entertainment--and then began desperately casting around for ways to get out of the ruse.  Back in those days--'98 and '99--that was all too common.

If that is the impression "Simon" has left us with, he will be clear with us: it is all our fault!  All our fault for not just knuckling under and believing whatever any stranger chooses to claim about his own heritage.  Jews the world over study hard in order to take on their full responsibilities as adult Jews.  That's how it's done.  Crypto-Jews have hidden for 500 years, he says, so despite their heavy Catholic credentials, Jews should just believe them and welcome them as fully educated, bar mitzvah'd Jews! In the end he is so angry at Jews for not welcoming Crypto-Jews as already-bar mitzvah'd Jews (though he has apparently not even tried) that he rejects Judaism altogether.

I worship with several ex-"Crypto-Jews," and I can tell you that this man is not their best representative.

His fury seemed to affect Ms. Alexy deeply, but perhaps didn't make her very angry because she herself had been a hidden Jew, and so was by definition not one of those at whom her priestly pen-pal was so enraged.

I don't know whether to be angry at a fraud who targeted an honest and caring woman or a priest who showed himself to have a shallow intellect and fragile character.

I did enjoy reading the book because the author's style is engaging and she is forthcoming, sincere, and genuine.  I will probably read her earlier book, "The Mezuzah in the Madonna's Foot," which sounds like it is just packed with verifiable and fascinating stories.
2192498
To say this book is bad would be insulting phrases containing the word "Bad".

Says the world needs fewer facts, more feelings, less logic and more empathy.

Yes, thanks, we have had that for the last 20-30 years and it has led to America having the most polarized and ridiculous Feminist brainwash ecosystem in the world, save for Sweden.

No rationality is present, because, SHOCKINGLY, there are fewer facts, less logic and more "Feelings" to back things up.

Not a world that works. There is a reason that the world that survived did so based on rock-solid facts. None of which this author pays homage to.

Sad, and pathetic. Avoid, and make sure to never give this woman a dime.

Her "Reviews" on here? All astroturf.
4819587
This book has no real evidence, and it has wild theories about who was involved in this "cover-up."  The book would be laughable to Oliver Stone!  Truman himself destroying and altering documents?
The funny thing is that actual history repudiates his claims.  The Japanese DID NOT surrender after the USSR invasion.  The Japanese DID NOT surrender after the first Atomic bomb.  The military arm of the government considered a coup NOT to surrender after the second bomb.  The Emperor almost agreed, but reluctantly surrendered when the Allies made a few small concessions.
This point is never directly addressed, and why you ask? Simple. Why let a little thing like actual history get in the way of a great conspiracy story?
677114
Common sense stuff, no revelations here, don't waste your money
3172058
I just purchased this book less than an hour ago, but I'm already annoyed.  If you are going to write a book about little known events and heroes, it would be helpful to, at the very minimum, correctly name the subjects of your book.

There is an entire section devoted to the State of Franklin, and it's founder, John Sevier, who (we are told in this book) was nicknamed "Nolichunky Jack."  Uh, no.  He was known as NoliCHUCKY Jack, after the NoliCHUCKY River.  I mean, come on.  Nolichunky?

I'm not even that interested in reading the rest of the book if an error that screamingly glaring is not caught by the author or publisher.  It's like writing a book about Richard Nixon and calling him "Tricky Rick" throughout. Or calling Lighthorse Harry Lee, "Lighthouse Harry Lee".

Argh!
217305
Lots of speculation and innuendo; very short on facts.
This book offered nothing new on any of the cases featured. In fact, most of the information appeared to come from old newspaper clippings. If you're looking for "who-dun-it-and -why," this is not the book for you.
For anyone who knows absolutely nothing about "old" Hollywood and its stars, you might find it interesting.
501159
This "book" doesn't prove it's premise. The weight of the ox, proves nothing. Why does he even bring it up? The candy jar, as soon as the crowd is given a bit of information, they get it completely wrong. So were they smart or not? And what does it matter? Could he not find relevant real life examples?
Historical and current examples of crowd madness are disregarded completely. The only readable and informative part of the book is the story of the NASA Space Shuttle, and how the complete failure of crowd thought lead to the very sad consequences. Actually Surowiecki gives in this book more examples of failure of group thought than positives even when desperately and selectively trying the opposite, and the positives are mostly laughable and irrelevant like the ox or controversial or possibly random chance from noise (tell us about all those cases when a boat/submarine was not found!).

He mostly repeats the assertion that he has clearly shown it to be so, or that we know it to be so that groups are oh so wise, but the data, the arguments they are not there.

It's confirmation bias taken to the extreme, intellectual dishonesty, very thin in any actually relevant information.

Where would the world be without Socrates, Aristotle, Newton, James Clerk Maxwell and others? Tell me. The sort of people he tries to downplay.

Le Bon's 1895 work on crowds (that Surowiecki tries to discredit) became a sort of prophecy of the 20th century. Mussolini is said to have read it every night. Hitler directly copied large parts of it into his Meinkampf. Le Bon tried to warn us about crowds, and he was proven to be right in a very concrete manner.

Surowiecki touches none of this, while being aware of it. This is dishonesty. You look at the societies on this planet. The more we value the individual achievement, individual freedom and the less there is group thougt, group pressure, you know those things that go together with crowds, the better off the society is generally.

In the end Surowiecki manages to put together the thought structure, that informed crowds, with specific expertise, diverse in opinion, giving individuals their say, co-operative, co-ordinated, listening to each other can produce "miracles". And I agree. Finding the cause of Sars so quickly is an example. And something to keep in mind.

But that is something entirely different from "wisdom of crowds". That is wisdom of co-operating highly skilled experts.

The fact that this book has been a sort of best seller, and has recieved so many 5 star reviews praising it's non-existant content, makes me go back to Mackay, Shermer, Le Bon...

I have never burnt a book in my life, but Surowiecki is seriously tempting me. I utterly hated this book and what it represents. Strong words, but saying it as it is.
1689626
This isn't serious political analysis, it's just ranting, name-calling drivel. It's sort of entertaining, and I agree with him on maybe thirty to forty percent of the issues, but he's not a scholarly figure or even clever. As I saw on an anti-Savage website once: "Calling the New York Times the Old York Times? LOL." Alright...I've read this book a few times, they're mostly just columns he wrote for World Net Daily. He'll never convince you to join his side.

 His book summed up for you:

 1) Gay people suck

 2) Al Gore is a Communist

 3) Family values as he defines them and Fundamentalist Christianity are good

 To quote Savage in his book, "That's it. It's over. You're done."

 Typical stuff. For good analysis, read Ann Coulter, Phyllis Schlafly, Thomas Sowell, and Michelle Malkin. I agree with about half of what most of them say, but they're impassioned and reasonable.
2980314
A quick word to all prospective buyers of this book.

Max Blumenthal speaks neither Hebrew nor Arabic. An intense scrutiny of any society, nation or culture is next to impossible unless and until one speaks the local language. How then does the author report such intimate details of Israeli society with nary a source or a citation?

How exactly does Blumenthal claim to be privy to the very thoughts, ideals and workings of right-wing organisations within Israel (whom most Israelis abhor in any case) when he doesn't speak the language? Can anyone present the inner workings of the Sicilian Mob in Sicily without a working knowledge of the Sicilian dialect?

Furthermore, all of these extremely radical fringes within Israel society are somehow a reflection of ALL of Israeli society, according to Mr. Blumenthal. Where are his observations of the other dimensions of Israeli society that he has conveniently overlooked?

All his tall and fictitious claims on this book are honestly so far-fetched that few in real-life would really buy into them, unless one has a profound hatred for Israel to begin with. The book is packed with statements like "But I saw with my own eyes" and "I noticed" which hardcore Israel-haters will buy into without the least bit of hesitation. No further proof needed there, right?

Donate the $20 you'd waste on this book to a charity, and give this mindless drivel a miss.
4033557
if you like distorted views, misinterpreted facts spun around to defend weak arguments, and outright lies, this book is for you.  this is the first book i've reviewed that i would give no stars if possible.  Hannity makes absurd arguments that go like this, "i'm right!" How are you right?  "Cause you're an American hating Liberal!"  Even if that were true how does it prove any point whatsoever?  "Cause i said so!"  Good point Sean.  Hannity has made a career out of such arguments, arguments that may appeal to a six year old on a playground, but to any literate person with an IQ even slightly above their shoe size can quickly see the book is the same liberal bashing junk, minus any reasonable views, that people like ann coulter continue to vomit from their very confused and warped minds.  Also, when Hannity does catch his breath from name calling to try and make a point about something, he has to lie (and not very well) to back his ultra-conservative stance.  i won't go into all of them (i'd have to quote the entire "book")but a real good one is on pg. 205.  Sean explains "Decades of liberal no-growth policies have seriously endagered our economic and national security."  HA! HA! HA!  anyone remember the mid to late 90's?  when clinton was the last elected president we had?  economic growth during this period was the highest of any country since the beginning of the industrial revolution.  not according to sean however.  why?  "cause i said so!"  if you are a four year old child and believe everything anyone tells you(tooth fairy, santa, boogie-man, liberal media, etc.), and get your news from fox tv (definite conservative media) then little billy buy this book on tape.
4815607
What staggering chain reaction of catastrophes allowed Ann Coulter to command a pencil?

Clearly, an ego as huge and wantonly abrasive as hers belongs on daytime TV or talk radio.  She's ignorant, arrogant, and utterly vicious.  It hurts the conservatives to have someone like this on their side.

This book should have been called "Who Needs Facts?"  There isn't a single fact in this book.  I repeat, NOT ONE SINGLE FACT.  Coming up with moderately clever ways of stretching any viewpoint other than her own into an artless caricature of itself, then smugly and ruthlessly slamming everyone who holds that viewpoint, is much more fun (and more satisfying) than doing research.  Coulter doesn't need facts.  After all, if anyone asks her why liberals are evil, she can just tell them it's because God said so.

Let me assert that I am not a liberal only here to take potshots at a well-known conservative.  I am in the middle of the political road.  My view is that both extremes are usually wrong.  As an example, one of the guys in my workplace is the stereotypical angry young liberal: loud, opinionated, arrogant, abrasive, and ready to lay every problem in the civilized world at the feet of our current conservative President, GW Bush.  Obviously, there are things wrong out there that have nothing to do with President Bush, but you just can't tell this guy that.  As far as he's concerned, conservatives have ruined this country.

Ann Coulter is the same thing only backwards.  She would have you believe all liberals are boorish, unshaven, tree-hugging hooligans. They bathe in the blood of murdered babies. They want everyone else to have to bathe in the blood of murdered babies. They only stop short of international terrorism because they lack the ability to organize.  You think I'm exaggerating?  I'm not.  Coulter says things about liberals that I wouldn't say about Nazis (a group which, incidentally, she compares liberals to in several places).  This book entwines ignorance, invective, and outright fabrication into a wretched, half-congealed mess, and then presents it as "the truth".  It's not her ignorance that offends me.  It's her smug sense of superiority I can't stand.  I read a lot: I've got three large bookcases, all full, and this is the worst excuse for a book I can remember ever reading.

If you:

are a hardcore conservative;

are a hardcore Christian;

are a fan of opinion in its most distilled and rarefied form;

have a room-temperature IQ;

then this is your book.

Everyone else, stay away.