What makes people love and die for nations, as well as hate and kill in their name? In this important work, Benedict Anderson focuses a much-needed clear eye on nationalism as cultural artefact, created and transformed through historical processes--a fated and thus pure attachment experienced every day through the connections language forges with a living and dead community.

In selecting the genealogy of "thinking" the nation, Anderson chooses his trajectory well--thankfully reading not only from the social history of Europe, but also from the experiences of its colonies and other states across the globe (the armed conflicts of 1978--79 Indochina provided the immediate impetus for the original 1983 text). It is especially these states which Anderson's later revisions address, with his wise realisation that so-called "official nationalism" in colonised Asia and Africa was not transplanted without intervention from that of the dynastic states of 19th-century Europe. When dealing with such an emotive subject, Anderson thankfully avoids favouring rhetoric over grounded analysis. He thoroughly explains the role of print language in imagining community, particularly with the development of the novel set in a society to which the reader may or may not belong, but can recognise, and the newspaper, which, perhaps replacing morning prayers, is read every day by people who have a sense of their fellow readers' existence.

The power of Imagined Communities ultimately lies in its applied resonances. The force of the argument of an "imagined community" is not only invaluable to sociologists or political economists, but it implicates each of us in compelling notions of identity and belonging whether our imagined community is with a nation or with others who buy, listen to and watch the same cultural products as ourselves. Essential reading for anyone interested in a history of the present. --Fiona Buckland

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Terroist or Freedom Fighter, Soldier or Politician , 12 Sep 2008
Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan is interesting book dealing with one of modern Ireland's legendary figures. It is a very in-depth book especially when you consider that Michael Collins died in his early thirties and therefore I believe that anybody interested in finding out about this man will not be disappointed. However, it does have some flaws, firstly, the style of writing is at first a little difficult and needs perservering with. Secondly, the use of English when the term British is more appropriate can be annoying and finally, it does fit at times into the usual trend you find in books about revolutionaries who died young that what they did and what they could have achieved can be overplayed. Nevertheless it is a good book about this pivotal figure in modern Irish history.

Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan, 04 Sep 2008
Taken from a historical viewpoint, Michael Collins, is arguably Ireland's most complex figure. His death at the age of 31 adds to the enigma but far from the version we see in Neil Jordan's enjoyable if somewhat glossed biopic of Irelands former Commander in Chief,we are given a very comprehensive account of whom Tim Pat Coogan describes as Ireland's greatest nationalist. Those reading about Collins or indeed this period of Irish history for the first time should familiarize themselves with the intricacies of the Irish question in this period for they were very complex. At the heart of the issue was Ireland's quest for total independence. Collins it is revealed saw the Anglo Irish treaty as a stepping stone but his opponents saw it as a sell out. It would lead to a country divided, the greatest tragedy of a very tragic history, but Tim Pat Coogan deals with the subject very sensitively. The complex issues involved means that the language at times is a bit heavy handed but overall this is a wonderful book which challenges the reader.

concise history, 02 Feb 2008
This books as much a review of the treaty than a blow by blow account of collin's life

crowded with facts it quickly swamps the reader and a feeling of when does the interesting bit begin washes over

obivously the last section provides this with the ambush

it left me with feeling that those who live by the sword often die of it
collins was no saint - his death may even have saved lives up north who knows

Best book ever likely to be written on M. Collins, 29 Jan 2002
Tim Pat Coogan's book is a triumph of intelligence, research and dedication over the romantic rose tinted blindness of others who have tackled this subject. He presents the man as a whole being not an empty hero on a pedestal. This is a man in his worst and best moments.

Coogan's style of writing is a delight to behold. This is a man who never uses over blown emotion and empty cliche. He absorbs you into the subject.

I have had both the delight and misfortute to read many books on Michael Collins and this is by far the best. It towers head and shoulders above all others. Even Margery Forster's 'Lost Leader' can't capture the man or the era in this honest, direct and evocative manner.

If you enjoy twentifth century history then buy this book. Buy this book if you want the undiluted truth. Most of all buy this book if you want to read a biographical masterpiece.

The most complete, authoritative work about Michael Collins, 16 Nov 2001
A splendid biography about one of the most important leaders in the process of Ireland's independence.

As the other books of T.P.Coogan, it reflects a lot of research of a professional writer who is specialised in the history of Ireland in the 20th century. The account reads fluently, also for foreigners, sometimes bearing the character of a thrilling non-fiction novel.

Readers, who have watched the movie of Neil Jordan first, will find that the motion-picture scenario is almost completely based on this title with some small differences, obviously inserted or altered for reasons of screen effect.

One point surprising me is the covering of the Civil War after the signing of the Treaty: there is no chapter in this title dedicated especially to the Civil War, rather are the elements of this conflict spread evenly over the last chapters. It looks like T.P.Coogan replaced this with the chapter about Northern Ireland, just before "mouth of flowers", wherein the policy of Michael Collins and the Free State government towards the northern Six Counties is emphasized. I have the impression this was done deliberately and that the Northern Ireland issue and it's Troubles is the pet subject of T.P.Coogan (see e.g. other titles of the same author, as "the Troubles" or "the IRA"...). Personally, I would have expected an elaborate account on this sensitive subject (in contradistinction to the absence of a detailed account on the Civil War, an extensive description and discussion of the (Guerilla) War against the British and the British Campaign in Ireland appears in the former part of the book, which is indeed a very chilling experience). This might be a possible new title of the author in the future.
At the end a short discussion is given on the circumstances of Michael Collins death and the alleged assassin(s). A short touch is made on one of the famous cover-up stories. Coogan penetrates here without too many details, because this kind of investigations rather belongs in the world of (sensational) "who-done-it" documentaries.
Very interesting is the speculation the author makes in the last chapter "honouring the dead" about what would have happened if Michael Collins would not have been assassinated but would have lived during the following years. It is Coogan's opinion that Ireland would have prospered more quickly, and that on top of that, most probably, it would have been an united country now without the separation of the North.

This title is also a jumping board to other titles of the same author. Several subjects which are treated briefly in this book are the title of other works of T.P.Coogan. People who want to have a good insight in the background of the struggle of Ireland for it's independence can rely on this writer.

A must for concerned readers.

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Terroist or Freedom Fighter, Soldier or Politician , 12 Sep 2008
Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan is interesting book dealing with one of modern Ireland's legendary figures. It is a very in-depth book especially when you consider that Michael Collins died in his early thirties and therefore I believe that anybody interested in finding out about this man will not be disappointed. However, it does have some flaws, firstly, the style of writing is at first a little difficult and needs perservering with. Secondly, the use of English when the term British is more appropriate can be annoying and finally, it does fit at times into the usual trend you find in books about revolutionaries who died young that what they did and what they could have achieved can be overplayed. Nevertheless it is a good book about this pivotal figure in modern Irish history.

Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan, 04 Sep 2008
Taken from a historical viewpoint, Michael Collins, is arguably Ireland's most complex figure. His death at the age of 31 adds to the enigma but far from the version we see in Neil Jordan's enjoyable if somewhat glossed biopic of Irelands former Commander in Chief,we are given a very comprehensive account of whom Tim Pat Coogan describes as Ireland's greatest nationalist. Those reading about Collins or indeed this period of Irish history for the first time should familiarize themselves with the intricacies of the Irish question in this period for they were very complex. At the heart of the issue was Ireland's quest for total independence. Collins it is revealed saw the Anglo Irish treaty as a stepping stone but his opponents saw it as a sell out. It would lead to a country divided, the greatest tragedy of a very tragic history, but Tim Pat Coogan deals with the subject very sensitively. The complex issues involved means that the language at times is a bit heavy handed but overall this is a wonderful book which challenges the reader.

concise history, 02 Feb 2008
This books as much a review of the treaty than a blow by blow account of collin's life

crowded with facts it quickly swamps the reader and a feeling of when does the interesting bit begin washes over

obivously the last section provides this with the ambush

it left me with feeling that those who live by the sword often die of it
collins was no saint - his death may even have saved lives up north who knows

Best book ever likely to be written on M. Collins, 29 Jan 2002
Tim Pat Coogan's book is a triumph of intelligence, research and dedication over the romantic rose tinted blindness of others who have tackled this subject. He presents the man as a whole being not an empty hero on a pedestal. This is a man in his worst and best moments.

Coogan's style of writing is a delight to behold. This is a man who never uses over blown emotion and empty cliche. He absorbs you into the subject.

I have had both the delight and misfortute to read many books on Michael Collins and this is by far the best. It towers head and shoulders above all others. Even Margery Forster's 'Lost Leader' can't capture the man or the era in this honest, direct and evocative manner.

If you enjoy twentifth century history then buy this book. Buy this book if you want the undiluted truth. Most of all buy this book if you want to read a biographical masterpiece.

The most complete, authoritative work about Michael Collins, 16 Nov 2001
A splendid biography about one of the most important leaders in the process of Ireland's independence.

As the other books of T.P.Coogan, it reflects a lot of research of a professional writer who is specialised in the history of Ireland in the 20th century. The account reads fluently, also for foreigners, sometimes bearing the character of a thrilling non-fiction novel.

Readers, who have watched the movie of Neil Jordan first, will find that the motion-picture scenario is almost completely based on this title with some small differences, obviously inserted or altered for reasons of screen effect.

One point surprising me is the covering of the Civil War after the signing of the Treaty: there is no chapter in this title dedicated especially to the Civil War, rather are the elements of this conflict spread evenly over the last chapters. It looks like T.P.Coogan replaced this with the chapter about Northern Ireland, just before "mouth of flowers", wherein the policy of Michael Collins and the Free State government towards the northern Six Counties is emphasized. I have the impression this was done deliberately and that the Northern Ireland issue and it's Troubles is the pet subject of T.P.Coogan (see e.g. other titles of the same author, as "the Troubles" or "the IRA"...). Personally, I would have expected an elaborate account on this sensitive subject (in contradistinction to the absence of a detailed account on the Civil War, an extensive description and discussion of the (Guerilla) War against the British and the British Campaign in Ireland appears in the former part of the book, which is indeed a very chilling experience). This might be a possible new title of the author in the future.
At the end a short discussion is given on the circumstances of Michael Collins death and the alleged assassin(s). A short touch is made on one of the famous cover-up stories. Coogan penetrates here without too many details, because this kind of investigations rather belongs in the world of (sensational) "who-done-it" documentaries.
Very interesting is the speculation the author makes in the last chapter "honouring the dead" about what would have happened if Michael Collins would not have been assassinated but would have lived during the following years. It is Coogan's opinion that Ireland would have prospered more quickly, and that on top of that, most probably, it would have been an united country now without the separation of the North.

This title is also a jumping board to other titles of the same author. Several subjects which are treated briefly in this book are the title of other works of T.P.Coogan. People who want to have a good insight in the background of the struggle of Ireland for it's independence can rely on this writer.

A must for concerned readers.

Standby to emigate!, 28 Apr 2008
Hitchens is always a good, if controversial read. His opinions are well founded and often well researched. This book tells you why UK society has been broken, why it might never recover and who did it. The devastation that has been waged while the UK has slept is truly shattering. I dont always agree with Hitchens and his opinions, but here he is dealing with hard edged fact. Fact that will enrage you and by the end of book will make you wonder what you have to do to change the social re engineering that the UK has suffered at the hands of the do gooders who have not always fully understood the ramifications of their handiwork. Hitchens covers everything from the Church of England to Law. Hitchens will admit that this book is out of date by 10 years as Blair was just coming to power as he closes the book. We all know what Blair has done to England since then. The vacuum created allows a much worse enemy to creep into our society. For American readers this book is s dire warning of what they must fight in their own society. Time to emigrate!

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Terroist or Freedom Fighter, Soldier or Politician , 12 Sep 2008
Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan is interesting book dealing with one of modern Ireland's legendary figures. It is a very in-depth book especially when you consider that Michael Collins died in his early thirties and therefore I believe that anybody interested in finding out about this man will not be disappointed. However, it does have some flaws, firstly, the style of writing is at first a little difficult and needs perservering with. Secondly, the use of English when the term British is more appropriate can be annoying and finally, it does fit at times into the usual trend you find in books about revolutionaries who died young that what they did and what they could have achieved can be overplayed. Nevertheless it is a good book about this pivotal figure in modern Irish history.

Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan, 04 Sep 2008
Taken from a historical viewpoint, Michael Collins, is arguably Ireland's most complex figure. His death at the age of 31 adds to the enigma but far from the version we see in Neil Jordan's enjoyable if somewhat glossed biopic of Irelands former Commander in Chief,we are given a very comprehensive account of whom Tim Pat Coogan describes as Ireland's greatest nationalist. Those reading about Collins or indeed this period of Irish history for the first time should familiarize themselves with the intricacies of the Irish question in this period for they were very complex. At the heart of the issue was Ireland's quest for total independence. Collins it is revealed saw the Anglo Irish treaty as a stepping stone but his opponents saw it as a sell out. It would lead to a country divided, the greatest tragedy of a very tragic history, but Tim Pat Coogan deals with the subject very sensitively. The complex issues involved means that the language at times is a bit heavy handed but overall this is a wonderful book which challenges the reader.

concise history, 02 Feb 2008
This books as much a review of the treaty than a blow by blow account of collin's life

crowded with facts it quickly swamps the reader and a feeling of when does the interesting bit begin washes over

obivously the last section provides this with the ambush

it left me with feeling that those who live by the sword often die of it
collins was no saint - his death may even have saved lives up north who knows

Best book ever likely to be written on M. Collins, 29 Jan 2002
Tim Pat Coogan's book is a triumph of intelligence, research and dedication over the romantic rose tinted blindness of others who have tackled this subject. He presents the man as a whole being not an empty hero on a pedestal. This is a man in his worst and best moments.

Coogan's style of writing is a delight to behold. This is a man who never uses over blown emotion and empty cliche. He absorbs you into the subject.

I have had both the delight and misfortute to read many books on Michael Collins and this is by far the best. It towers head and shoulders above all others. Even Margery Forster's 'Lost Leader' can't capture the man or the era in this honest, direct and evocative manner.

If you enjoy twentifth century history then buy this book. Buy this book if you want the undiluted truth. Most of all buy this book if you want to read a biographical masterpiece.

The most complete, authoritative work about Michael Collins, 16 Nov 2001
A splendid biography about one of the most important leaders in the process of Ireland's independence.

As the other books of T.P.Coogan, it reflects a lot of research of a professional writer who is specialised in the history of Ireland in the 20th century. The account reads fluently, also for foreigners, sometimes bearing the character of a thrilling non-fiction novel.

Readers, who have watched the movie of Neil Jordan first, will find that the motion-picture scenario is almost completely based on this title with some small differences, obviously inserted or altered for reasons of screen effect.

One point surprising me is the covering of the Civil War after the signing of the Treaty: there is no chapter in this title dedicated especially to the Civil War, rather are the elements of this conflict spread evenly over the last chapters. It looks like T.P.Coogan replaced this with the chapter about Northern Ireland, just before "mouth of flowers", wherein the policy of Michael Collins and the Free State government towards the northern Six Counties is emphasized. I have the impression this was done deliberately and that the Northern Ireland issue and it's Troubles is the pet subject of T.P.Coogan (see e.g. other titles of the same author, as "the Troubles" or "the IRA"...). Personally, I would have expected an elaborate account on this sensitive subject (in contradistinction to the absence of a detailed account on the Civil War, an extensive description and discussion of the (Guerilla) War against the British and the British Campaign in Ireland appears in the former part of the book, which is indeed a very chilling experience). This might be a possible new title of the author in the future.
At the end a short discussion is given on the circumstances of Michael Collins death and the alleged assassin(s). A short touch is made on one of the famous cover-up stories. Coogan penetrates here without too many details, because this kind of investigations rather belongs in the world of (sensational) "who-done-it" documentaries.
Very interesting is the speculation the author makes in the last chapter "honouring the dead" about what would have happened if Michael Collins would not have been assassinated but would have lived during the following years. It is Coogan's opinion that Ireland would have prospered more quickly, and that on top of that, most probably, it would have been an united country now without the separation of the North.

This title is also a jumping board to other titles of the same author. Several subjects which are treated briefly in this book are the title of other works of T.P.Coogan. People who want to have a good insight in the background of the struggle of Ireland for it's independence can rely on this writer.

A must for concerned readers.

Standby to emigate!, 28 Apr 2008
Hitchens is always a good, if controversial read. His opinions are well founded and often well researched. This book tells you why UK society has been broken, why it might never recover and who did it. The devastation that has been waged while the UK has slept is truly shattering. I dont always agree with Hitchens and his opinions, but here he is dealing with hard edged fact. Fact that will enrage you and by the end of book will make you wonder what you have to do to change the social re engineering that the UK has suffered at the hands of the do gooders who have not always fully understood the ramifications of their handiwork. Hitchens covers everything from the Church of England to Law. Hitchens will admit that this book is out of date by 10 years as Blair was just coming to power as he closes the book. We all know what Blair has done to England since then. The vacuum created allows a much worse enemy to creep into our society. For American readers this book is s dire warning of what they must fight in their own society. Time to emigrate!

Read, Learn, Understand., 06 Mar 2008
An amazing book with so much detail from one who cites Arafat and Golda Meir as friends. Hart not only refutes Zionism's history but makes a passionate plea to everyone to understand that Jew does not mean Zionist and Zionism does not represent Judaism.

He says enough for me to understand that a two state solution will never work, it will be based on the Israel state dominating the Palestine state. Hart shows me at least that a unified fight against Zionism from within Israel and beyond is the only real solution to this problem.


Informative and Enlightening, 03 Mar 2008
I have always struggled to understand the conflict in the Middle East. It touches me deeply and i feel great sorrow without really understanding the history. I wanted clarification and an unbiased account of what went wrong in Palestine.

I saw an interview of Alan Hart, where he was explaining how he struggled to get this book published. That was encouraging enough for me, someone obviously didn't want the truth getting out, which made me want to know the truth more than ever.

I have to admit i did find some of the reality of information hard to swallow, and it did upset me for days. To think such injustice could be carried out with the blessings of those who we regard as our protectors, and morally guided leaders, could in fact be so morally bankrupt was alarming.
I had been living in a rose tinted world and suddenly the world sucks! There were moments i was ashamed of our British history, we had betrayed them!

Overall this was an excellent book, which i would highly recommend to all, if you can read Harry Potter, you can read this!

The Truth Is Often Uncomfortable, 15 Nov 2007
The premise of this book is obvious from the title and the author presents a wealth of factual evidence to back it up. Zionism is an ideology based on the claim that "God" gave land in the Middle East to the Jewish people several thousand years ago. The concept is clearly ridiculous given that the vast majority of Jewish people today have no relationship to the Jews of antiquity other than a religious belief that many adopted relatively recently. This fact alone makes a mockery of the idea that a portion of land in the Middle East belongs to the Jews of today. It also makes a mockery of the idea that to criticize Zionism is anti-semitic - hatred of Jewish people.

The Zionist movement is and always has been owned by a small group of individuals who used the manipulative power of religion to further their own selfish agenda.

The January 16th 2007 edition of Boston Globe ran an editorial by the editorial page director, H.D.S. Greenway. It was a typical apparently left-of-center piece on a possible attack on Iran, with Greenway urging everyone to "step back and take a deep breath". Towards the end of the piece however, Greenway makes a comment in which he momentarily strikes at the heart of the matter only to then gloss it over with a line taken directly from the Zionist book of truisms.

"Every Israeli prime minister has had to fear in one remote corner of the brain that the effect of Zionism might be to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction. This fear has been brought front and center by Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's criminally irresponsible call for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The only truth in this statement is found in the words "the effect of Zionism [has been] to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction." The idea, as implied by Greenway, that this was a mistake on the part of the Zionists who created and continue to control the Zionist state is laughable, mainly because it was patently obvious from the very outset that to create a state for Jews in 1948 by stealing land belonging to another people and to proceed to oppress, and periodically murder, the indigenous population over the following 58 years was the best way to ensure a perpetual threat to the Jews of Israel.

Furthermore, in his book Ben-Gurion's Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews Naeim Giladi states:

"From the start they (Zionist leaders) knew that in order to establish a Jewish state they had to expel the indigenous Palestinian population to the neighboring Islamic states and import Jews from these same states. Vladimir Jabotinsky, Netanyahu's ideological progenitor, frankly admitted that such a transfer of populations could only be brought about by force.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, told a Zionist Conference in 1937 that any proposed Jewish state would have to "transfer Arab populations out of the area, if possible of their own free will, if not by coercion." After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948-49, Ben-Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market. "Emissaries" were smuggled into these countries to "convince" Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.

In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them."

To this we must add the Fact of Zionist collaboration with the Nazis during WWII. In Lenni Brenner's book,51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis we read:

"The infamous SS-Hptscharf, Adolf Eichmann, had visited Palestine in October, 1937 as the guest of the Zionists. He also met in Egypt with Feivel Polkes, a Zionist operative whom Eichmann described as a "leading Haganah functionary." The chain-smoking Polkes was also on the Nazis' payroll "as an informer."[...]

After the Holocaust began in 1942, Eichmann dealt regularly with Dr. Rudolf Kastner, a Hungarian Jew, whom he considered a "fanatical Zionist." At issue was the bargaining over the eventual fate of Hungary's Jews, who were slated for liquidation in the Nazi-run death camps. Eichmann said this about Kastner, the Zionist representative:

"I believe that [he] would have sacrificed a thousand or a hundred thousand of his blood to achieve his political goal. He was not interested in old Jews or those who had become assimilated into Hungarian society. 'You can have the others,' he would say, 'but let me have this group here.' And because Kastner rendered us a great service by helping keep the deportation camps peaceful. I would let his groups escape."

After the Nuremberg Anti-Jewish Race Laws were enacted in Sept., 1935 only two flags that were permitted to be displayed in all of Nazi Germany. One was Hitler's favorite, the Swastika. The other was the blue and white banner of Zionism. The Zionists were also allowed to publish their own newspaper. The reasons for this Reich-sponsored favoritism was, according to the author:

"The Zionists and the Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews emigrate to Palestine." However, according to Greenway, the Bush government and the Zionists in Israel, the root cause of any possible threat to the future of the Jews of Israel is the 'bogeyman du jour', President Adhmadinejad. Evidence for this 'fact' is provided by the oft-repeated yet entirely false claim that the Iranian president has "called for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The minor problem with this 'fact' is that it is a lie. What Ahmadinejad actually said was that the "Zionist entity" (meaning the small group of Zionist leaders) should be "wiped from the pages of history", and given the clear and present danger that these psychopaths pose to not only the Jewish people but the entire planet, who but the most ignorant could disagree with him.

US & Israeli propoganda, 07 Aug 2007
I commend the author for bringing up this issue, it seems we have one rule for the rest of the world & one rule for Israel: that is, no one dares to critise the injustices, ethnic cleansing, toture, humiliation & racism that is commited in the name of a terrorist state called ISRAEL!.

I borrowed this from the library...., 26 Jul 2007
An excellent overview of history and a very compelling read. Don't be put off by those who suggest this book is biased simply because it confronts the facts head on. It does so from a genuine concern in the plight of the Middle East, of the Jewish 'soul', and humanity in general.

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Terroist or Freedom Fighter, Soldier or Politician , 12 Sep 2008
Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan is interesting book dealing with one of modern Ireland's legendary figures. It is a very in-depth book especially when you consider that Michael Collins died in his early thirties and therefore I believe that anybody interested in finding out about this man will not be disappointed. However, it does have some flaws, firstly, the style of writing is at first a little difficult and needs perservering with. Secondly, the use of English when the term British is more appropriate can be annoying and finally, it does fit at times into the usual trend you find in books about revolutionaries who died young that what they did and what they could have achieved can be overplayed. Nevertheless it is a good book about this pivotal figure in modern Irish history.

Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan, 04 Sep 2008
Taken from a historical viewpoint, Michael Collins, is arguably Ireland's most complex figure. His death at the age of 31 adds to the enigma but far from the version we see in Neil Jordan's enjoyable if somewhat glossed biopic of Irelands former Commander in Chief,we are given a very comprehensive account of whom Tim Pat Coogan describes as Ireland's greatest nationalist. Those reading about Collins or indeed this period of Irish history for the first time should familiarize themselves with the intricacies of the Irish question in this period for they were very complex. At the heart of the issue was Ireland's quest for total independence. Collins it is revealed saw the Anglo Irish treaty as a stepping stone but his opponents saw it as a sell out. It would lead to a country divided, the greatest tragedy of a very tragic history, but Tim Pat Coogan deals with the subject very sensitively. The complex issues involved means that the language at times is a bit heavy handed but overall this is a wonderful book which challenges the reader.

concise history, 02 Feb 2008
This books as much a review of the treaty than a blow by blow account of collin's life

crowded with facts it quickly swamps the reader and a feeling of when does the interesting bit begin washes over

obivously the last section provides this with the ambush

it left me with feeling that those who live by the sword often die of it
collins was no saint - his death may even have saved lives up north who knows

Best book ever likely to be written on M. Collins, 29 Jan 2002
Tim Pat Coogan's book is a triumph of intelligence, research and dedication over the romantic rose tinted blindness of others who have tackled this subject. He presents the man as a whole being not an empty hero on a pedestal. This is a man in his worst and best moments.

Coogan's style of writing is a delight to behold. This is a man who never uses over blown emotion and empty cliche. He absorbs you into the subject.

I have had both the delight and misfortute to read many books on Michael Collins and this is by far the best. It towers head and shoulders above all others. Even Margery Forster's 'Lost Leader' can't capture the man or the era in this honest, direct and evocative manner.

If you enjoy twentifth century history then buy this book. Buy this book if you want the undiluted truth. Most of all buy this book if you want to read a biographical masterpiece.

The most complete, authoritative work about Michael Collins, 16 Nov 2001
A splendid biography about one of the most important leaders in the process of Ireland's independence.

As the other books of T.P.Coogan, it reflects a lot of research of a professional writer who is specialised in the history of Ireland in the 20th century. The account reads fluently, also for foreigners, sometimes bearing the character of a thrilling non-fiction novel.

Readers, who have watched the movie of Neil Jordan first, will find that the motion-picture scenario is almost completely based on this title with some small differences, obviously inserted or altered for reasons of screen effect.

One point surprising me is the covering of the Civil War after the signing of the Treaty: there is no chapter in this title dedicated especially to the Civil War, rather are the elements of this conflict spread evenly over the last chapters. It looks like T.P.Coogan replaced this with the chapter about Northern Ireland, just before "mouth of flowers", wherein the policy of Michael Collins and the Free State government towards the northern Six Counties is emphasized. I have the impression this was done deliberately and that the Northern Ireland issue and it's Troubles is the pet subject of T.P.Coogan (see e.g. other titles of the same author, as "the Troubles" or "the IRA"...). Personally, I would have expected an elaborate account on this sensitive subject (in contradistinction to the absence of a detailed account on the Civil War, an extensive description and discussion of the (Guerilla) War against the British and the British Campaign in Ireland appears in the former part of the book, which is indeed a very chilling experience). This might be a possible new title of the author in the future.
At the end a short discussion is given on the circumstances of Michael Collins death and the alleged assassin(s). A short touch is made on one of the famous cover-up stories. Coogan penetrates here without too many details, because this kind of investigations rather belongs in the world of (sensational) "who-done-it" documentaries.
Very interesting is the speculation the author makes in the last chapter "honouring the dead" about what would have happened if Michael Collins would not have been assassinated but would have lived during the following years. It is Coogan's opinion that Ireland would have prospered more quickly, and that on top of that, most probably, it would have been an united country now without the separation of the North.

This title is also a jumping board to other titles of the same author. Several subjects which are treated briefly in this book are the title of other works of T.P.Coogan. People who want to have a good insight in the background of the struggle of Ireland for it's independence can rely on this writer.

A must for concerned readers.

Standby to emigate!, 28 Apr 2008
Hitchens is always a good, if controversial read. His opinions are well founded and often well researched. This book tells you why UK society has been broken, why it might never recover and who did it. The devastation that has been waged while the UK has slept is truly shattering. I dont always agree with Hitchens and his opinions, but here he is dealing with hard edged fact. Fact that will enrage you and by the end of book will make you wonder what you have to do to change the social re engineering that the UK has suffered at the hands of the do gooders who have not always fully understood the ramifications of their handiwork. Hitchens covers everything from the Church of England to Law. Hitchens will admit that this book is out of date by 10 years as Blair was just coming to power as he closes the book. We all know what Blair has done to England since then. The vacuum created allows a much worse enemy to creep into our society. For American readers this book is s dire warning of what they must fight in their own society. Time to emigrate!

Read, Learn, Understand., 06 Mar 2008
An amazing book with so much detail from one who cites Arafat and Golda Meir as friends. Hart not only refutes Zionism's history but makes a passionate plea to everyone to understand that Jew does not mean Zionist and Zionism does not represent Judaism.

He says enough for me to understand that a two state solution will never work, it will be based on the Israel state dominating the Palestine state. Hart shows me at least that a unified fight against Zionism from within Israel and beyond is the only real solution to this problem.


Informative and Enlightening, 03 Mar 2008
I have always struggled to understand the conflict in the Middle East. It touches me deeply and i feel great sorrow without really understanding the history. I wanted clarification and an unbiased account of what went wrong in Palestine.

I saw an interview of Alan Hart, where he was explaining how he struggled to get this book published. That was encouraging enough for me, someone obviously didn't want the truth getting out, which made me want to know the truth more than ever.

I have to admit i did find some of the reality of information hard to swallow, and it did upset me for days. To think such injustice could be carried out with the blessings of those who we regard as our protectors, and morally guided leaders, could in fact be so morally bankrupt was alarming.
I had been living in a rose tinted world and suddenly the world sucks! There were moments i was ashamed of our British history, we had betrayed them!

Overall this was an excellent book, which i would highly recommend to all, if you can read Harry Potter, you can read this!

The Truth Is Often Uncomfortable, 15 Nov 2007
The premise of this book is obvious from the title and the author presents a wealth of factual evidence to back it up. Zionism is an ideology based on the claim that "God" gave land in the Middle East to the Jewish people several thousand years ago. The concept is clearly ridiculous given that the vast majority of Jewish people today have no relationship to the Jews of antiquity other than a religious belief that many adopted relatively recently. This fact alone makes a mockery of the idea that a portion of land in the Middle East belongs to the Jews of today. It also makes a mockery of the idea that to criticize Zionism is anti-semitic - hatred of Jewish people.

The Zionist movement is and always has been owned by a small group of individuals who used the manipulative power of religion to further their own selfish agenda.

The January 16th 2007 edition of Boston Globe ran an editorial by the editorial page director, H.D.S. Greenway. It was a typical apparently left-of-center piece on a possible attack on Iran, with Greenway urging everyone to "step back and take a deep breath". Towards the end of the piece however, Greenway makes a comment in which he momentarily strikes at the heart of the matter only to then gloss it over with a line taken directly from the Zionist book of truisms.

"Every Israeli prime minister has had to fear in one remote corner of the brain that the effect of Zionism might be to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction. This fear has been brought front and center by Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's criminally irresponsible call for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The only truth in this statement is found in the words "the effect of Zionism [has been] to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction." The idea, as implied by Greenway, that this was a mistake on the part of the Zionists who created and continue to control the Zionist state is laughable, mainly because it was patently obvious from the very outset that to create a state for Jews in 1948 by stealing land belonging to another people and to proceed to oppress, and periodically murder, the indigenous population over the following 58 years was the best way to ensure a perpetual threat to the Jews of Israel.

Furthermore, in his book Ben-Gurion's Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews Naeim Giladi states:

"From the start they (Zionist leaders) knew that in order to establish a Jewish state they had to expel the indigenous Palestinian population to the neighboring Islamic states and import Jews from these same states. Vladimir Jabotinsky, Netanyahu's ideological progenitor, frankly admitted that such a transfer of populations could only be brought about by force.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, told a Zionist Conference in 1937 that any proposed Jewish state would have to "transfer Arab populations out of the area, if possible of their own free will, if not by coercion." After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948-49, Ben-Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market. "Emissaries" were smuggled into these countries to "convince" Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.

In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them."

To this we must add the Fact of Zionist collaboration with the Nazis during WWII. In Lenni Brenner's book,51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis we read:

"The infamous SS-Hptscharf, Adolf Eichmann, had visited Palestine in October, 1937 as the guest of the Zionists. He also met in Egypt with Feivel Polkes, a Zionist operative whom Eichmann described as a "leading Haganah functionary." The chain-smoking Polkes was also on the Nazis' payroll "as an informer."[...]

After the Holocaust began in 1942, Eichmann dealt regularly with Dr. Rudolf Kastner, a Hungarian Jew, whom he considered a "fanatical Zionist." At issue was the bargaining over the eventual fate of Hungary's Jews, who were slated for liquidation in the Nazi-run death camps. Eichmann said this about Kastner, the Zionist representative:

"I believe that [he] would have sacrificed a thousand or a hundred thousand of his blood to achieve his political goal. He was not interested in old Jews or those who had become assimilated into Hungarian society. 'You can have the others,' he would say, 'but let me have this group here.' And because Kastner rendered us a great service by helping keep the deportation camps peaceful. I would let his groups escape."

After the Nuremberg Anti-Jewish Race Laws were enacted in Sept., 1935 only two flags that were permitted to be displayed in all of Nazi Germany. One was Hitler's favorite, the Swastika. The other was the blue and white banner of Zionism. The Zionists were also allowed to publish their own newspaper. The reasons for this Reich-sponsored favoritism was, according to the author:

"The Zionists and the Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews emigrate to Palestine." However, according to Greenway, the Bush government and the Zionists in Israel, the root cause of any possible threat to the future of the Jews of Israel is the 'bogeyman du jour', President Adhmadinejad. Evidence for this 'fact' is provided by the oft-repeated yet entirely false claim that the Iranian president has "called for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The minor problem with this 'fact' is that it is a lie. What Ahmadinejad actually said was that the "Zionist entity" (meaning the small group of Zionist leaders) should be "wiped from the pages of history", and given the clear and present danger that these psychopaths pose to not only the Jewish people but the entire planet, who but the most ignorant could disagree with him.

US & Israeli propoganda, 07 Aug 2007
I commend the author for bringing up this issue, it seems we have one rule for the rest of the world & one rule for Israel: that is, no one dares to critise the injustices, ethnic cleansing, toture, humiliation & racism that is commited in the name of a terrorist state called ISRAEL!.

I borrowed this from the library...., 26 Jul 2007
An excellent overview of history and a very compelling read. Don't be put off by those who suggest this book is biased simply because it confronts the facts head on. It does so from a genuine concern in the plight of the Middle East, of the Jewish 'soul', and humanity in general.


A Courageous, Important Declaration, 10 Dec 2008
My own view is, 231 years on from the American Revolution, 219 years after the French Revolution and 218 years on from the death of Emperor Joseph II, the terms `Jew', `Jewish' and `Jewry' should be reserved for adherents to Judaism, as `Christians', `Muslims', `Hindus' and `Buddhists' are reserved for adherents to those faiths. However, few, if any, of the 21 contributors to this sparkling collection of essays would agree. Some are religious (one is a rabbi), most are secular, some are Zionists, many not, two are Americans, two South Africans, two Australians, one a Swede, one an Iraqi, the others British, but all are proudly, resolutely Jews. They belong to Independent Jewish Voices, launched by Harold Pinter, Mark Leigh, Stephen Fry, Zoe Wanamaker, Eric Hobsbawn, Geoffrey Bindman, Nicole Farhi and others on 5 February 2007, and these essays are their testimonials. As Jews, they feel compelled to reject the claim of successive Israeli governments and self-appointed `community leaders' such as the Board of Deputies, American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee, American Jewish Committee, Council of Australian Jewry and World Jewish Conference to repre¬sent them.

They have been criticized for `acting to deprive Israel of its means of defence'. `Legitimate self-defence', counters Jeremy Montagu, sometime president of West Central Liberal Synagogue, `does not mean oppressing a whole community or people. It does not mean demolishing their houses. Nor does it mean uprooting their olive trees, something that is specifically forbidden in the Torah (Deuteronomy 20:19-20). It does not mean preventing them and their children from getting to hospitals or subjecting them to humiliation. When I, as a Jew, see such things happening, how can I not speak out?'

They are told that they should be `ashamed to be Jewish'. `If they are ashamed of anything,' Anthony Isaacs counters, `it is of what is being done purportedly in their name.' Labelling Israel's critics as `Jews for genocide', malshinim (informers), `anti-Semites' and `self-hating Jews', adds Richard Kuper, are attempts `to reframe the debate' by rendering criticism suspect before it is voiced. Criticism `should be evaluated on the basis of evidence put forward', not on the presumed motivation of the critics.

They believe that the `Israel right or wrong' polemic of Alan Dershowitz, Melanie Phillips and other `ideologues' of the Zionist right serves neither Israel's nor Jewry's interest. Conflating Israel and Jews `spill[s] over into unjustifiable attacks on Jews as a whole.' They `find themselves increasingly the object of scorn, or worse.' `Have we forgotten?' asks Jeremy Montagu?

The South African contributor Gillian Slovo perhaps best sums up the view of the brave Jews who have spoken out in this book. `The tradition of ethics in which I was brought up says that it is not enough for you, and the people you love, to be safe and comfortable. It says that you must not close your eyes to the pain of others just because they do not have the same colour of skin, or the same religion, or the same ethnic background as you. It says that to argue against the injustice of Palestinians being walled into enclaves, or against the way that circum¬stances of birth dictate which roads can be travelled and which passes carried, or to point to parallels with apartheid, is not knee-jerk antisemitism [sic] (or self-hatred). Rather it is the respon¬sibility we all have to make an effort to ensure equality and justice for everybody. It is for this reason that I am happy to be part of the Independent Jewish Voices initiative.'

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Terroist or Freedom Fighter, Soldier or Politician , 12 Sep 2008
Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan is interesting book dealing with one of modern Ireland's legendary figures. It is a very in-depth book especially when you consider that Michael Collins died in his early thirties and therefore I believe that anybody interested in finding out about this man will not be disappointed. However, it does have some flaws, firstly, the style of writing is at first a little difficult and needs perservering with. Secondly, the use of English when the term British is more appropriate can be annoying and finally, it does fit at times into the usual trend you find in books about revolutionaries who died young that what they did and what they could have achieved can be overplayed. Nevertheless it is a good book about this pivotal figure in modern Irish history.

Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan, 04 Sep 2008
Taken from a historical viewpoint, Michael Collins, is arguably Ireland's most complex figure. His death at the age of 31 adds to the enigma but far from the version we see in Neil Jordan's enjoyable if somewhat glossed biopic of Irelands former Commander in Chief,we are given a very comprehensive account of whom Tim Pat Coogan describes as Ireland's greatest nationalist. Those reading about Collins or indeed this period of Irish history for the first time should familiarize themselves with the intricacies of the Irish question in this period for they were very complex. At the heart of the issue was Ireland's quest for total independence. Collins it is revealed saw the Anglo Irish treaty as a stepping stone but his opponents saw it as a sell out. It would lead to a country divided, the greatest tragedy of a very tragic history, but Tim Pat Coogan deals with the subject very sensitively. The complex issues involved means that the language at times is a bit heavy handed but overall this is a wonderful book which challenges the reader.

concise history, 02 Feb 2008
This books as much a review of the treaty than a blow by blow account of collin's life

crowded with facts it quickly swamps the reader and a feeling of when does the interesting bit begin washes over

obivously the last section provides this with the ambush

it left me with feeling that those who live by the sword often die of it
collins was no saint - his death may even have saved lives up north who knows

Best book ever likely to be written on M. Collins, 29 Jan 2002
Tim Pat Coogan's book is a triumph of intelligence, research and dedication over the romantic rose tinted blindness of others who have tackled this subject. He presents the man as a whole being not an empty hero on a pedestal. This is a man in his worst and best moments.

Coogan's style of writing is a delight to behold. This is a man who never uses over blown emotion and empty cliche. He absorbs you into the subject.

I have had both the delight and misfortute to read many books on Michael Collins and this is by far the best. It towers head and shoulders above all others. Even Margery Forster's 'Lost Leader' can't capture the man or the era in this honest, direct and evocative manner.

If you enjoy twentifth century history then buy this book. Buy this book if you want the undiluted truth. Most of all buy this book if you want to read a biographical masterpiece.

The most complete, authoritative work about Michael Collins, 16 Nov 2001
A splendid biography about one of the most important leaders in the process of Ireland's independence.

As the other books of T.P.Coogan, it reflects a lot of research of a professional writer who is specialised in the history of Ireland in the 20th century. The account reads fluently, also for foreigners, sometimes bearing the character of a thrilling non-fiction novel.

Readers, who have watched the movie of Neil Jordan first, will find that the motion-picture scenario is almost completely based on this title with some small differences, obviously inserted or altered for reasons of screen effect.

One point surprising me is the covering of the Civil War after the signing of the Treaty: there is no chapter in this title dedicated especially to the Civil War, rather are the elements of this conflict spread evenly over the last chapters. It looks like T.P.Coogan replaced this with the chapter about Northern Ireland, just before "mouth of flowers", wherein the policy of Michael Collins and the Free State government towards the northern Six Counties is emphasized. I have the impression this was done deliberately and that the Northern Ireland issue and it's Troubles is the pet subject of T.P.Coogan (see e.g. other titles of the same author, as "the Troubles" or "the IRA"...). Personally, I would have expected an elaborate account on this sensitive subject (in contradistinction to the absence of a detailed account on the Civil War, an extensive description and discussion of the (Guerilla) War against the British and the British Campaign in Ireland appears in the former part of the book, which is indeed a very chilling experience). This might be a possible new title of the author in the future.
At the end a short discussion is given on the circumstances of Michael Collins death and the alleged assassin(s). A short touch is made on one of the famous cover-up stories. Coogan penetrates here without too many details, because this kind of investigations rather belongs in the world of (sensational) "who-done-it" documentaries.
Very interesting is the speculation the author makes in the last chapter "honouring the dead" about what would have happened if Michael Collins would not have been assassinated but would have lived during the following years. It is Coogan's opinion that Ireland would have prospered more quickly, and that on top of that, most probably, it would have been an united country now without the separation of the North.

This title is also a jumping board to other titles of the same author. Several subjects which are treated briefly in this book are the title of other works of T.P.Coogan. People who want to have a good insight in the background of the struggle of Ireland for it's independence can rely on this writer.

A must for concerned readers.

Standby to emigate!, 28 Apr 2008
Hitchens is always a good, if controversial read. His opinions are well founded and often well researched. This book tells you why UK society has been broken, why it might never recover and who did it. The devastation that has been waged while the UK has slept is truly shattering. I dont always agree with Hitchens and his opinions, but here he is dealing with hard edged fact. Fact that will enrage you and by the end of book will make you wonder what you have to do to change the social re engineering that the UK has suffered at the hands of the do gooders who have not always fully understood the ramifications of their handiwork. Hitchens covers everything from the Church of England to Law. Hitchens will admit that this book is out of date by 10 years as Blair was just coming to power as he closes the book. We all know what Blair has done to England since then. The vacuum created allows a much worse enemy to creep into our society. For American readers this book is s dire warning of what they must fight in their own society. Time to emigrate!

Read, Learn, Understand., 06 Mar 2008
An amazing book with so much detail from one who cites Arafat and Golda Meir as friends. Hart not only refutes Zionism's history but makes a passionate plea to everyone to understand that Jew does not mean Zionist and Zionism does not represent Judaism.

He says enough for me to understand that a two state solution will never work, it will be based on the Israel state dominating the Palestine state. Hart shows me at least that a unified fight against Zionism from within Israel and beyond is the only real solution to this problem.


Informative and Enlightening, 03 Mar 2008
I have always struggled to understand the conflict in the Middle East. It touches me deeply and i feel great sorrow without really understanding the history. I wanted clarification and an unbiased account of what went wrong in Palestine.

I saw an interview of Alan Hart, where he was explaining how he struggled to get this book published. That was encouraging enough for me, someone obviously didn't want the truth getting out, which made me want to know the truth more than ever.

I have to admit i did find some of the reality of information hard to swallow, and it did upset me for days. To think such injustice could be carried out with the blessings of those who we regard as our protectors, and morally guided leaders, could in fact be so morally bankrupt was alarming.
I had been living in a rose tinted world and suddenly the world sucks! There were moments i was ashamed of our British history, we had betrayed them!

Overall this was an excellent book, which i would highly recommend to all, if you can read Harry Potter, you can read this!

The Truth Is Often Uncomfortable, 15 Nov 2007
The premise of this book is obvious from the title and the author presents a wealth of factual evidence to back it up. Zionism is an ideology based on the claim that "God" gave land in the Middle East to the Jewish people several thousand years ago. The concept is clearly ridiculous given that the vast majority of Jewish people today have no relationship to the Jews of antiquity other than a religious belief that many adopted relatively recently. This fact alone makes a mockery of the idea that a portion of land in the Middle East belongs to the Jews of today. It also makes a mockery of the idea that to criticize Zionism is anti-semitic - hatred of Jewish people.

The Zionist movement is and always has been owned by a small group of individuals who used the manipulative power of religion to further their own selfish agenda.

The January 16th 2007 edition of Boston Globe ran an editorial by the editorial page director, H.D.S. Greenway. It was a typical apparently left-of-center piece on a possible attack on Iran, with Greenway urging everyone to "step back and take a deep breath". Towards the end of the piece however, Greenway makes a comment in which he momentarily strikes at the heart of the matter only to then gloss it over with a line taken directly from the Zionist book of truisms.

"Every Israeli prime minister has had to fear in one remote corner of the brain that the effect of Zionism might be to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction. This fear has been brought front and center by Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's criminally irresponsible call for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The only truth in this statement is found in the words "the effect of Zionism [has been] to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction." The idea, as implied by Greenway, that this was a mistake on the part of the Zionists who created and continue to control the Zionist state is laughable, mainly because it was patently obvious from the very outset that to create a state for Jews in 1948 by stealing land belonging to another people and to proceed to oppress, and periodically murder, the indigenous population over the following 58 years was the best way to ensure a perpetual threat to the Jews of Israel.

Furthermore, in his book Ben-Gurion's Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews Naeim Giladi states:

"From the start they (Zionist leaders) knew that in order to establish a Jewish state they had to expel the indigenous Palestinian population to the neighboring Islamic states and import Jews from these same states. Vladimir Jabotinsky, Netanyahu's ideological progenitor, frankly admitted that such a transfer of populations could only be brought about by force.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, told a Zionist Conference in 1937 that any proposed Jewish state would have to "transfer Arab populations out of the area, if possible of their own free will, if not by coercion." After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948-49, Ben-Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market. "Emissaries" were smuggled into these countries to "convince" Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.

In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them."

To this we must add the Fact of Zionist collaboration with the Nazis during WWII. In Lenni Brenner's book,51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis we read:

"The infamous SS-Hptscharf, Adolf Eichmann, had visited Palestine in October, 1937 as the guest of the Zionists. He also met in Egypt with Feivel Polkes, a Zionist operative whom Eichmann described as a "leading Haganah functionary." The chain-smoking Polkes was also on the Nazis' payroll "as an informer."[...]

After the Holocaust began in 1942, Eichmann dealt regularly with Dr. Rudolf Kastner, a Hungarian Jew, whom he considered a "fanatical Zionist." At issue was the bargaining over the eventual fate of Hungary's Jews, who were slated for liquidation in the Nazi-run death camps. Eichmann said this about Kastner, the Zionist representative:

"I believe that [he] would have sacrificed a thousand or a hundred thousand of his blood to achieve his political goal. He was not interested in old Jews or those who had become assimilated into Hungarian society. 'You can have the others,' he would say, 'but let me have this group here.' And because Kastner rendered us a great service by helping keep the deportation camps peaceful. I would let his groups escape."

After the Nuremberg Anti-Jewish Race Laws were enacted in Sept., 1935 only two flags that were permitted to be displayed in all of Nazi Germany. One was Hitler's favorite, the Swastika. The other was the blue and white banner of Zionism. The Zionists were also allowed to publish their own newspaper. The reasons for this Reich-sponsored favoritism was, according to the author:

"The Zionists and the Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews emigrate to Palestine." However, according to Greenway, the Bush government and the Zionists in Israel, the root cause of any possible threat to the future of the Jews of Israel is the 'bogeyman du jour', President Adhmadinejad. Evidence for this 'fact' is provided by the oft-repeated yet entirely false claim that the Iranian president has "called for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The minor problem with this 'fact' is that it is a lie. What Ahmadinejad actually said was that the "Zionist entity" (meaning the small group of Zionist leaders) should be "wiped from the pages of history", and given the clear and present danger that these psychopaths pose to not only the Jewish people but the entire planet, who but the most ignorant could disagree with him.

US & Israeli propoganda, 07 Aug 2007
I commend the author for bringing up this issue, it seems we have one rule for the rest of the world & one rule for Israel: that is, no one dares to critise the injustices, ethnic cleansing, toture, humiliation & racism that is commited in the name of a terrorist state called ISRAEL!.

I borrowed this from the library...., 26 Jul 2007
An excellent overview of history and a very compelling read. Don't be put off by those who suggest this book is biased simply because it confronts the facts head on. It does so from a genuine concern in the plight of the Middle East, of the Jewish 'soul', and humanity in general.


A Courageous, Important Declaration, 10 Dec 2008
My own view is, 231 years on from the American Revolution, 219 years after the French Revolution and 218 years on from the death of Emperor Joseph II, the terms `Jew', `Jewish' and `Jewry' should be reserved for adherents to Judaism, as `Christians', `Muslims', `Hindus' and `Buddhists' are reserved for adherents to those faiths. However, few, if any, of the 21 contributors to this sparkling collection of essays would agree. Some are religious (one is a rabbi), most are secular, some are Zionists, many not, two are Americans, two South Africans, two Australians, one a Swede, one an Iraqi, the others British, but all are proudly, resolutely Jews. They belong to Independent Jewish Voices, launched by Harold Pinter, Mark Leigh, Stephen Fry, Zoe Wanamaker, Eric Hobsbawn, Geoffrey Bindman, Nicole Farhi and others on 5 February 2007, and these essays are their testimonials. As Jews, they feel compelled to reject the claim of successive Israeli governments and self-appointed `community leaders' such as the Board of Deputies, American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee, American Jewish Committee, Council of Australian Jewry and World Jewish Conference to repre¬sent them.

They have been criticized for `acting to deprive Israel of its means of defence'. `Legitimate self-defence', counters Jeremy Montagu, sometime president of West Central Liberal Synagogue, `does not mean oppressing a whole community or people. It does not mean demolishing their houses. Nor does it mean uprooting their olive trees, something that is specifically forbidden in the Torah (Deuteronomy 20:19-20). It does not mean preventing them and their children from getting to hospitals or subjecting them to humiliation. When I, as a Jew, see such things happening, how can I not speak out?'

They are told that they should be `ashamed to be Jewish'. `If they are ashamed of anything,' Anthony Isaacs counters, `it is of what is being done purportedly in their name.' Labelling Israel's critics as `Jews for genocide', malshinim (informers), `anti-Semites' and `self-hating Jews', adds Richard Kuper, are attempts `to reframe the debate' by rendering criticism suspect before it is voiced. Criticism `should be evaluated on the basis of evidence put forward', not on the presumed motivation of the critics.

They believe that the `Israel right or wrong' polemic of Alan Dershowitz, Melanie Phillips and other `ideologues' of the Zionist right serves neither Israel's nor Jewry's interest. Conflating Israel and Jews `spill[s] over into unjustifiable attacks on Jews as a whole.' They `find themselves increasingly the object of scorn, or worse.' `Have we forgotten?' asks Jeremy Montagu?

The South African contributor Gillian Slovo perhaps best sums up the view of the brave Jews who have spoken out in this book. `The tradition of ethics in which I was brought up says that it is not enough for you, and the people you love, to be safe and comfortable. It says that you must not close your eyes to the pain of others just because they do not have the same colour of skin, or the same religion, or the same ethnic background as you. It says that to argue against the injustice of Palestinians being walled into enclaves, or against the way that circum¬stances of birth dictate which roads can be travelled and which passes carried, or to point to parallels with apartheid, is not knee-jerk antisemitism [sic] (or self-hatred). Rather it is the respon¬sibility we all have to make an effort to ensure equality and justice for everybody. It is for this reason that I am happy to be part of the Independent Jewish Voices initiative.'


Inside the IRA,sort of., 02 Apr 2008
That's the problem with this book.It says it is an iside account,but,in the nature of underground paramilitary groups,the reader is left to take so much on trust.Virtually all the sources are "Republican source","confidential interview" and the like-it's hard to know what to believe.
For all that,the material from 1976 onwards(Gerry Adams becoming political leader,the dual nature of Sinn Fein and the IRA,the politicisation of the IRA,the drive towards negotiations,and finally Sinn Fein's eclipsing others to become the dominant Catholic/nationalist party in Northern Ireland)is highly plausible and well written.His conclusion,that the extremes have now taken over Northern Ireland,and that sectarianism is more established now than it ever was during The Troubles,is hard to argue with.A depressing conclusion to a depressing history.

One day in 1992, Thomas Friedman toured a Lexus factory in Japan and marvelled at the robots that put the luxury cars together. That evening, as he ate sushi on a Japanese bullet train, he read a story about yet another Middle East squabble between Palestinians and Israelis. And it hit him: half the world was lusting after those Lexuses, or at least the brilliant technology that made them possible, and the other half was fighting over who owned which olive tree.

Friedman, the well-travelled New York Times foreign-affairs columnist, peppers The Lexus and the Olive Tree with stories that illustrate his central theme: that globalisation--the Lexus--is the central organising principle of the post-cold war world, even though many individuals and nations resist by holding onto what has traditionally mattered to them--the olive tree. Problem is, few of us understand what exactly globalisation means. As Friedman sees it, the concept, at first glance, is all about American hegemony. But the reality, thank goodness, is far more complex than that, involving international relations, global markets and the rise of the power of individuals (Bill Gates, Osama Bin Laden) relative to the power of nations.

No one knows how all this will shake out, but The Lexus and the Olive Tree is as good an overview of this sometimes brave, sometimes fearful new world as you'll find. --Lou Schuler

Badly written though has some good points, 23 Sep 2007
This book though not totally without merit could have been condensed into about two pages of useful information. The author has taken rather selective interpretations of history and in many areas his historical knowledge contains huge gaps. There are a few good points made though the amount of nonsense one has to trawl through to get to these points is enough to make one despair.

An eloquent masterpiece and an all defining reflection, 29 Dec 1999
Without doubt the finest reflection on the origin and spread of nationalism ever written, not only in terms of its informed, imaginative perspective but also in the erudite quality of Anderson's narrative. As an expert on the history of South-East Asia, Anderson brings a valuable perspective to the all too Euro-centric debate on the rise of the nation state and the emotional attachment to it. A must for all who seek to discover the elusive and thusfar ill-defined origins of nationalism.

Terroist or Freedom Fighter, Soldier or Politician , 12 Sep 2008
Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan is interesting book dealing with one of modern Ireland's legendary figures. It is a very in-depth book especially when you consider that Michael Collins died in his early thirties and therefore I believe that anybody interested in finding out about this man will not be disappointed. However, it does have some flaws, firstly, the style of writing is at first a little difficult and needs perservering with. Secondly, the use of English when the term British is more appropriate can be annoying and finally, it does fit at times into the usual trend you find in books about revolutionaries who died young that what they did and what they could have achieved can be overplayed. Nevertheless it is a good book about this pivotal figure in modern Irish history.

Michael Collins by Tim Pat Coogan, 04 Sep 2008
Taken from a historical viewpoint, Michael Collins, is arguably Ireland's most complex figure. His death at the age of 31 adds to the enigma but far from the version we see in Neil Jordan's enjoyable if somewhat glossed biopic of Irelands former Commander in Chief,we are given a very comprehensive account of whom Tim Pat Coogan describes as Ireland's greatest nationalist. Those reading about Collins or indeed this period of Irish history for the first time should familiarize themselves with the intricacies of the Irish question in this period for they were very complex. At the heart of the issue was Ireland's quest for total independence. Collins it is revealed saw the Anglo Irish treaty as a stepping stone but his opponents saw it as a sell out. It would lead to a country divided, the greatest tragedy of a very tragic history, but Tim Pat Coogan deals with the subject very sensitively. The complex issues involved means that the language at times is a bit heavy handed but overall this is a wonderful book which challenges the reader.

concise history, 02 Feb 2008
This books as much a review of the treaty than a blow by blow account of collin's life

crowded with facts it quickly swamps the reader and a feeling of when does the interesting bit begin washes over

obivously the last section provides this with the ambush

it left me with feeling that those who live by the sword often die of it
collins was no saint - his death may even have saved lives up north who knows

Best book ever likely to be written on M. Collins, 29 Jan 2002
Tim Pat Coogan's book is a triumph of intelligence, research and dedication over the romantic rose tinted blindness of others who have tackled this subject. He presents the man as a whole being not an empty hero on a pedestal. This is a man in his worst and best moments.

Coogan's style of writing is a delight to behold. This is a man who never uses over blown emotion and empty cliche. He absorbs you into the subject.

I have had both the delight and misfortute to read many books on Michael Collins and this is by far the best. It towers head and shoulders above all others. Even Margery Forster's 'Lost Leader' can't capture the man or the era in this honest, direct and evocative manner.

If you enjoy twentifth century history then buy this book. Buy this book if you want the undiluted truth. Most of all buy this book if you want to read a biographical masterpiece.

The most complete, authoritative work about Michael Collins, 16 Nov 2001
A splendid biography about one of the most important leaders in the process of Ireland's independence.

As the other books of T.P.Coogan, it reflects a lot of research of a professional writer who is specialised in the history of Ireland in the 20th century. The account reads fluently, also for foreigners, sometimes bearing the character of a thrilling non-fiction novel.

Readers, who have watched the movie of Neil Jordan first, will find that the motion-picture scenario is almost completely based on this title with some small differences, obviously inserted or altered for reasons of screen effect.

One point surprising me is the covering of the Civil War after the signing of the Treaty: there is no chapter in this title dedicated especially to the Civil War, rather are the elements of this conflict spread evenly over the last chapters. It looks like T.P.Coogan replaced this with the chapter about Northern Ireland, just before "mouth of flowers", wherein the policy of Michael Collins and the Free State government towards the northern Six Counties is emphasized. I have the impression this was done deliberately and that the Northern Ireland issue and it's Troubles is the pet subject of T.P.Coogan (see e.g. other titles of the same author, as "the Troubles" or "the IRA"...). Personally, I would have expected an elaborate account on this sensitive subject (in contradistinction to the absence of a detailed account on the Civil War, an extensive description and discussion of the (Guerilla) War against the British and the British Campaign in Ireland appears in the former part of the book, which is indeed a very chilling experience). This might be a possible new title of the author in the future.
At the end a short discussion is given on the circumstances of Michael Collins death and the alleged assassin(s). A short touch is made on one of the famous cover-up stories. Coogan penetrates here without too many details, because this kind of investigations rather belongs in the world of (sensational) "who-done-it" documentaries.
Very interesting is the speculation the author makes in the last chapter "honouring the dead" about what would have happened if Michael Collins would not have been assassinated but would have lived during the following years. It is Coogan's opinion that Ireland would have prospered more quickly, and that on top of that, most probably, it would have been an united country now without the separation of the North.

This title is also a jumping board to other titles of the same author. Several subjects which are treated briefly in this book are the title of other works of T.P.Coogan. People who want to have a good insight in the background of the struggle of Ireland for it's independence can rely on this writer.

A must for concerned readers.

Standby to emigate!, 28 Apr 2008
Hitchens is always a good, if controversial read. His opinions are well founded and often well researched. This book tells you why UK society has been broken, why it might never recover and who did it. The devastation that has been waged while the UK has slept is truly shattering. I dont always agree with Hitchens and his opinions, but here he is dealing with hard edged fact. Fact that will enrage you and by the end of book will make you wonder what you have to do to change the social re engineering that the UK has suffered at the hands of the do gooders who have not always fully understood the ramifications of their handiwork. Hitchens covers everything from the Church of England to Law. Hitchens will admit that this book is out of date by 10 years as Blair was just coming to power as he closes the book. We all know what Blair has done to England since then. The vacuum created allows a much worse enemy to creep into our society. For American readers this book is s dire warning of what they must fight in their own society. Time to emigrate!

Read, Learn, Understand., 06 Mar 2008
An amazing book with so much detail from one who cites Arafat and Golda Meir as friends. Hart not only refutes Zionism's history but makes a passionate plea to everyone to understand that Jew does not mean Zionist and Zionism does not represent Judaism.

He says enough for me to understand that a two state solution will never work, it will be based on the Israel state dominating the Palestine state. Hart shows me at least that a unified fight against Zionism from within Israel and beyond is the only real solution to this problem.


Informative and Enlightening, 03 Mar 2008
I have always struggled to understand the conflict in the Middle East. It touches me deeply and i feel great sorrow without really understanding the history. I wanted clarification and an unbiased account of what went wrong in Palestine.

I saw an interview of Alan Hart, where he was explaining how he struggled to get this book published. That was encouraging enough for me, someone obviously didn't want the truth getting out, which made me want to know the truth more than ever.

I have to admit i did find some of the reality of information hard to swallow, and it did upset me for days. To think such injustice could be carried out with the blessings of those who we regard as our protectors, and morally guided leaders, could in fact be so morally bankrupt was alarming.
I had been living in a rose tinted world and suddenly the world sucks! There were moments i was ashamed of our British history, we had betrayed them!

Overall this was an excellent book, which i would highly recommend to all, if you can read Harry Potter, you can read this!

The Truth Is Often Uncomfortable, 15 Nov 2007
The premise of this book is obvious from the title and the author presents a wealth of factual evidence to back it up. Zionism is an ideology based on the claim that "God" gave land in the Middle East to the Jewish people several thousand years ago. The concept is clearly ridiculous given that the vast majority of Jewish people today have no relationship to the Jews of antiquity other than a religious belief that many adopted relatively recently. This fact alone makes a mockery of the idea that a portion of land in the Middle East belongs to the Jews of today. It also makes a mockery of the idea that to criticize Zionism is anti-semitic - hatred of Jewish people.

The Zionist movement is and always has been owned by a small group of individuals who used the manipulative power of religion to further their own selfish agenda.

The January 16th 2007 edition of Boston Globe ran an editorial by the editorial page director, H.D.S. Greenway. It was a typical apparently left-of-center piece on a possible attack on Iran, with Greenway urging everyone to "step back and take a deep breath". Towards the end of the piece however, Greenway makes a comment in which he momentarily strikes at the heart of the matter only to then gloss it over with a line taken directly from the Zionist book of truisms.

"Every Israeli prime minister has had to fear in one remote corner of the brain that the effect of Zionism might be to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction. This fear has been brought front and center by Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's criminally irresponsible call for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The only truth in this statement is found in the words "the effect of Zionism [has been] to gather all the Jews in one place for destruction." The idea, as implied by Greenway, that this was a mistake on the part of the Zionists who created and continue to control the Zionist state is laughable, mainly because it was patently obvious from the very outset that to create a state for Jews in 1948 by stealing land belonging to another people and to proceed to oppress, and periodically murder, the indigenous population over the following 58 years was the best way to ensure a perpetual threat to the Jews of Israel.

Furthermore, in his book Ben-Gurion's Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews Naeim Giladi states:

"From the start they (Zionist leaders) knew that in order to establish a Jewish state they had to expel the indigenous Palestinian population to the neighboring Islamic states and import Jews from these same states. Vladimir Jabotinsky, Netanyahu's ideological progenitor, frankly admitted that such a transfer of populations could only be brought about by force.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, told a Zionist Conference in 1937 that any proposed Jewish state would have to "transfer Arab populations out of the area, if possible of their own free will, if not by coercion." After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948-49, Ben-Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market. "Emissaries" were smuggled into these countries to "convince" Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.

In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them."

To this we must add the Fact of Zionist collaboration with the Nazis during WWII. In Lenni Brenner's book,51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis we read:

"The infamous SS-Hptscharf, Adolf Eichmann, had visited Palestine in October, 1937 as the guest of the Zionists. He also met in Egypt with Feivel Polkes, a Zionist operative whom Eichmann described as a "leading Haganah functionary." The chain-smoking Polkes was also on the Nazis' payroll "as an informer."[...]

After the Holocaust began in 1942, Eichmann dealt regularly with Dr. Rudolf Kastner, a Hungarian Jew, whom he considered a "fanatical Zionist." At issue was the bargaining over the eventual fate of Hungary's Jews, who were slated for liquidation in the Nazi-run death camps. Eichmann said this about Kastner, the Zionist representative:

"I believe that [he] would have sacrificed a thousand or a hundred thousand of his blood to achieve his political goal. He was not interested in old Jews or those who had become assimilated into Hungarian society. 'You can have the others,' he would say, 'but let me have this group here.' And because Kastner rendered us a great service by helping keep the deportation camps peaceful. I would let his groups escape."

After the Nuremberg Anti-Jewish Race Laws were enacted in Sept., 1935 only two flags that were permitted to be displayed in all of Nazi Germany. One was Hitler's favorite, the Swastika. The other was the blue and white banner of Zionism. The Zionists were also allowed to publish their own newspaper. The reasons for this Reich-sponsored favoritism was, according to the author:

"The Zionists and the Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews emigrate to Palestine." However, according to Greenway, the Bush government and the Zionists in Israel, the root cause of any possible threat to the future of the Jews of Israel is the 'bogeyman du jour', President Adhmadinejad. Evidence for this 'fact' is provided by the oft-repeated yet entirely false claim that the Iranian president has "called for the destruction of the Jewish state."

The minor problem with this 'fact' is that it is a lie. What Ahmadinejad actually said was that the "Zionist entity" (meaning the small group of Zionist leaders) should be "wiped from the pages of history", and given the clear and present danger that these psychopaths pose to not only the Jewish people but the entire planet, who but the most ignorant could disagree with him.

US & Israeli propoganda, 07 Aug 2007
I commend the author for bringing up this issue, it seems we have one rule for the rest of the world & one rule for Israel: that is, no one dares to critise the injustices, ethnic cleansing, toture, humiliation & racism that is commited in the name of a terrorist state called ISRAEL!.

I borrowed this from the library...., 26 Jul 2007
An excellent overview of history and a very compelling read. Don't be put off by those who suggest this book is biased simply because it confronts the facts head on. It does so from a genuine concern in the plight of the Middle East, of the Jewish 'soul', and humanity in general.


A Courageous, Important Declaration, 10 Dec 2008
My own view is, 231 years on from the American Revolution, 219 years after the French Revolution and 218 years on from the death of Emperor Joseph II, the terms `Jew', `Jewish' and `Jewry' should be reserved for adherents to Judaism, as `Christians', `Muslims', `Hindus' and `Buddhists' are reserved for adherents to those faiths. However, few, if any, of the 21 contributors to this sparkling collection of essays would agree. Some are religious (one is a rabbi), most are secular, some are Zionists, many not, two are Americans, two South Africans, two Australians, one a Swede, one an Iraqi, the others British, but all are proudly, resolutely Jews. They belong to Independent Jewish Voices, launched by Harold Pinter, Mark