Product Description

Andrew C. McCarthy takes readers back to the real beginning of the war on terror--not the atrocities of September 11, but the first bombing of the World Trade Center in February 1993 when radical Islamists effectively declared war on the United States. From his perch as a government prosecutor of the blind sheik and other jihadists responsible for the bombing, Andrew McCarthy takes readers inside the twisted world of Islamic terror.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #609 in Books
• Published on: 2008-04-14
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 250 pages

From Publishers Weekly
In this annotated retrospective, the prosecutor responsible for leading the investigation of Blind Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and others involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing dissects the miscues between federal agencies that led to that event while laying bare the challenges facing the war on terror today. The pre-1993 comedy of errors begins with the CIA's decision to funnel arms and money to Afghanistan during the Soviet-Afghan war and continues with inexplicable lapses of communication between the State Department and immigration officials (despite having been placed on a State Department terror watchlist, the sheikh travels freely to the United States). The most enduring oversight, however, at least from McCarthy's perspective, is the refusal among academics and political leaders to confront fundamentalist Islamic tenets, the 800-pound gorilla that is somehow always in the middle of the room when terror strikes. The jihadist philosophy that guided the Blind Sheikh is traced through generations of Islamic thinkers to the Prophet Mohammed himself. Though McCarthy's language is at times cumbersome, his firsthand account of jihad's rise and the sheikh's trial of the century is an important contribution (and in some instances, counterpoint) to existing literature on the attack that foreshadowed disaster to come. (Mar.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Customer Reviews

Willful?
Ohmygosh, I just read this on the train and I'm glad I was moving when I did. I share friendships with many journalists who are not "liberals" with "agendas," both in the US, the UK and South Asia (India and Pakistan). My impression of Andy's book is that it lay somewhere on the continuum between Vincent Bugliosi's iconic memoir and analysis of the Manson case, "Helter Skelter," and Cracker Jack candy and gorp-entertainment for the right-wingers to gobble up. I will say that Andy is somewhat successful at avoiding the usual prosecutor/police procedural trope and heroics, yet the plunge in the other end of the pool without the float of context and analysis, and tossing away ideology, is a bit weird. It's almost a bugle call to arms against an evil empire of classic Hollywood vintage. Or perhaps Andy has has "channeled" Richard The Lionhearted and we must follow against the evil, ragged and Unholy Arabs. In short, I don't think it adds anything to the decourse beside this basic "Helter Skelter" review. I am sure the right wing will eat it up, however, and there it seems to have found it's only audience.

an important, timely read
Andrew McCarthy writes with clarity, depth and self-effacement about the lead up to and the successful 1995 prosecution of Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Sheikh, and his terrorist followers. As lead Assistant United States Attorney, McCathy's knowledge and attention to detail fascinate. The intricacies in mounting the prosecution, avoiding the pitfalls and foibles of the FBI and New York's Joint Terrorism Task Force, keeping a difficult informant from refusing to cooperate, struggling with the rules of admissible evidence, rival the best in any police procedural mystery; this is not Sam Waterston spouting the script of "Law and Order," this is the argot of a real life Federal prosecutor and it is daunting. No Hollywood script can capture the nuance and judgment needed to bring a case like this to its successful conclusion.

McCarthy, a talented writer, draws deep insights from his experience into the shortcomings of prosecuting terrorists as criminals. He ends with a thoughtful exposition of the disconnect between national security and criminal law. He is a voice of clarity, reason and experience in the dialogue now going in America on issues of law and national security.