Customer Reviews

Zarqawi: The New Face of al-Qaeda

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(14)

 

 

First, the author hops from one subject to another without really coming to a meaningful conclusion.

Second, it is obvious even to me, a non expert in this stuff that at least some of it is wrong.

Third, he says he's an expert but what has he done? All I could find was that he said he wrote a report for the UN but then it turned out they said he did not.

So my conclusion is save your money and read something else!

Indeed, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi has become the new image of Al-Qaeda, but Jean-Charles Brisard has barely pulled the mask away from the mystery. Seemingly relying solely on press releases, news paper articles and trial transcripts, Brisard constructs little more than a compilation of media snippets and sound bites. The author adds little clarification to the Zarqawi myth than could be gathered from watching CNN or reading the New York Times.

Brisard does provide an interesting look at the process of emergence of terrorist organizations in the Middle East and Central Asia. In addition, Brisard does add clarity to the changing structure of Al-Qaeda, claiming that many of the emerging factions are acting with a high degree of autonomy from Osama Bin-laden and others at the organization's center.

Lastly, the author also presents a brief look at how the security organizations and governments in Mid-East attempt to quell the spread of terrorist factions, while maintaining a relationship with Islamic culture. Nevertheless, Brisard's book has limited scope and only marginal work. I expected much more, and am sorely disappointed. In order to learn more about the new face of Al-Qaeda, I suggest looking elsewhere.

The situation in Iraq impacts the entire world. Understanding key figures such as Zarqawi is undeniably important.

This book falls short of the objective of providing this understanding.

It presents many facts but few of these facts are provided with support. A book such as this should be based on facts that are without dispute. It is not always possible to tell which facts are actually facts and which then are suppositions advanced by the author. An argument consisting of this mixture is thus impure and of limited value.

One must also look at the author. In the media he is stated as an expert on the subject of terrorist finance. However his commercial undertaking in these lines in Switzlerland was apparently closed due to a lawsuit. What has he done to support his own claim of expertise?

To be an expert it is necessary to do more than write books. The author has given testimony to the US government but that testimony is diminished as it is claimed that the author did not actually produce a report by the request of the UN. That is a concern.

The author does do work on some US court matters but these are not settled.

A mixed book such as this by an author who is not truly an expert cannot be found to have value.

This book has just reached Hungary. I read it in English but you will have to forgive my writing in that language.

The concern is that many facts, they are not correct. Another reviewer points out the improper conclusion about Musharraf and Bhutto. To obtain and maintain credibility, this kind of mistake cannot persist.

At times I could have been reading a novel. But this book is depicted as factual. I am not sure of how to believe.

The author is a frequent media focus. This does not make him correct on all fronts.

Nonetheless much interesting information is in this book. It is therefore I think useful as a quick oversight of the topic of Zarqawi and his organisation in Iraq. For a more precise version it is the unfortuate fact that you will have to seek another source.

GL

This book is by a man who said he wrote a report for the United Nations. The United Nations said he gave them a report he already wrote.

I get the idea he had his answer in mind when he wrote this book and made whatever facts he happened across fit this answer.

This book is really pretty useless. The author is not reliable and the book reads like it was translated in about an hour. There are conspiracy websites with better information, and at least you know not to take them too seriously.

I got this at the library sale. I was surprised to see them selling such a new book but after reading it I know why.

Brisard writes by cutting and pasting from French websites and then he gets someone to translate. This book would not pass in high school!

The book jumps from point to point and it is confusing. He says he backs up what he says but in the back all he has is news reports.

And what's more Brisard is something of a con man. People are always suing him and he lied about his United Nations report. His blog doesn't tell you anything about terrorism it is his history of lawsuits.

He spoke for the US Senate but if you look at that page it is full of complaints from lawyers saying that he is wrong. It also looks like his company was closed because he kept losing these court cases. The man needs to learn to tell the truth!

The book is useless. I wanted to understand what I see on CNN and this book just made me more confused.

Wow! Maybe I should have read some of these reviews before reading the book. I will take away a star based on the what is fact and what is not question. Nonetheless, I found the book interesting and to be honest with you , once there are more than two or three terrorists or orgnizations named I just gloss over it. I mean I'm not taking notes, just making observations on a person of Che status in the Middle East who is repugnant. So as for the factual content of this book and it's errors who knows and who really cares, I still found the book of interest. You can't erase the facts which are this is one of the most ruthless, disgusting, horrible things walking amongst us disguised as a human being. How he came to be is almost irrelevant, let's leave that for psychobabble in the future. The author claims his living near a graveyard and his obsession with death are part of the answer but that is a little hard to swallow. The chronicle of events surrounding his being a petty thug who did time(why do they release these scun?) and honed his "leadership' skills to exit and hide behind religion to further disguise his dark side is intriguing but all too familiar. There are some good photographs that include his use of disguise to reveal the many faces of evil. The details surrounding the travelling about on different passports of this criminal is also detailed. For naysayers I guess it draws into question what is truth and what is made up but I still contend it hardly matters. If the USA , Iraq or Jordan(where a death sentence has been isssued) knew enough about this guy he would probably be dead by now. The facts are there are many terrorists organizations(remember I gloss over the names) that are all in this Jihad stuff with two main common enemies, and you know who they are. Really there is so much information that unless you are an intelligence officer or work for the CIA it would be difficult to decipher fact from fiction. Isn't that what makes him all the more elusive? The separation from fact and fiction is as blurry as the man and the myth that goes along with being a terrorist and the dissemination of misinformation. So is this book worth reading? I think so. It is full of enough correct(I suppose) information to make for compelling reading. Even if only 75% of the facts are accurate it is enough to justify your learning more about the face of evil. Read it for yourself and you be the judge, after all, there will be no quiz or test on the facts.

This is one of the few books I have ever returned.

I do not have a lot to add to the other reviews. I really got upset when I learned that his Senate Testimony had been removed AND that he never really wrote a report for the UN.

The writing is not good, and it is obvious that you can't trust anything he says.

If you need to learn about Zarqawi, go to the BBC site and read their profile. It is not full of conspiracy theories like this book and they don't lie about what they have done.

About the only good thing I can say about the author is that is blog is entertaining. Nothing to do with terrorist money but a lot to do with how much time he spends in court getting sued by rich Arabs.

Despite some negative Amazon reviews, I bought this book with an open mind, hoping that it would illuminate Zarqawi's shadowy background. However, there are such glaring - and embarrassing - factual errors that one has to doubt the veracity of any new information the author presents. For example, on page 65, the author writes that in October 1999, Pakistani General Pervez Musharraf overthrew Benazir Bhutto's government. In fact, Musharraf deposed Bhutto's main political rival, Nawaz Sharif - since Bhutto was out of power after Sharif's party defeated hers in a 1997 election. How can the author be trusted to write authoritatively on anything involving Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc. if he can't get the simplest stuff straight?

There are two schools of thought on Mr. Brisard. One is that he is a great expert on this topic and the other is that he fabricates what he wants to make a good story.

I have found this link,portal.nasstar.com/75/files/DS%20IBC%20Notes.pdf, to a scholarly publication and it details successful libel actions against Mr. Brisard.

It would seem to me that he should be able to back up what he says.

This book is fascinating but after reading about his libel losses I started to think that maybe he just sat around for a couple of days making things up and doing a few google searches.

I have donated my copy of this book to the local thrift store.