What do you think?
Rate this book
None of Us Were Like This Before: American Soldiers and Torture
None of Us Were Like This Before recounts the dark journey of a tank battalion as its focus switched from conventional warfare to guerrilla war and prisoner detention. Phillips’s narrative reveals how a group of ordinary soldiers, ill trained for the responsibilities foisted upon them, descended into a cycle of degradation that led to the abuse of detainees. The book illustrates that the damaging legacy of torture is not only borne by the detainees, but also by American soldiers and the country to which they have returned.
255 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 14, 2010
23 people are currently reading
4137 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
December 2, 2010
This is a tremendous book. I wasn't sure if it would work when I first picked it up. Reading torture isn't really something that I'm eager to do. I also thought I had a solid understanding of the issue. I was skeptical when I started reading the book, and was frankly unsure that it would hold my interest. The structure isn't a standard formula for non-fiction narratives. I have to say, I was blown away by it.
I learned that I hadn't really understood how torture & abuse emerged in the American context. One of the things that I love about the book is that it's not at all aimed at condemning soldiers or the military, although the author could've easily veered in that direction. It's not heavy handed at all. Instead, the author carefully deconstructs all of the complex factors that led young men to engage in abusive acts (Phillips is careful not to overuse the word "torture" as well, which I really appreciate - in a way it becomes to easy to throw it around). Nor does he apportion blame. If you carefully read this book, you'll understand where the blame should lie. I've found a lot of books on this topic to be dogmatic and preachy - a kind of psuedo-pholosphical exercise masquerading as journalism. Thankfully, this book does NOT belong to that canon. So, it's especially welcome and refreshing to read something like this; it's very fair, thoughtful, and dispassionately written. More than than that, I found myself getting sucked into the narratives. The main overarching narrative is gripping and powerful, but the other small strands, or mini-narratives are equally strong, and illuminating. The range that the book covers is especially impressive. I was especially drawn to some of the "discoveries" the book made in the latter chapters (although some of what the book uncovers in the early chapters was also quite surprising - shocking, at times).
When I was done, I felt like I had just finished a perfectly prepared and proportional meal. It was satisfying, fulfilling, but not too filling. It also helped me reconsider many ideas I held onto about torture and abuse during the global war on terror. I honestly didn't expect to finish reading the book cover to cover. I strongly suggest that others consider peering inside of the cover. You might be equally surprised, and delighted by what you find. It's not always an easy read, but it's definitely quite worthwhile. Even if you're squeamish about reading weighty topics, or engaging in work about violence, you really won't regret reading this.
I learned that I hadn't really understood how torture & abuse emerged in the American context. One of the things that I love about the book is that it's not at all aimed at condemning soldiers or the military, although the author could've easily veered in that direction. It's not heavy handed at all. Instead, the author carefully deconstructs all of the complex factors that led young men to engage in abusive acts (Phillips is careful not to overuse the word "torture" as well, which I really appreciate - in a way it becomes to easy to throw it around). Nor does he apportion blame. If you carefully read this book, you'll understand where the blame should lie. I've found a lot of books on this topic to be dogmatic and preachy - a kind of psuedo-pholosphical exercise masquerading as journalism. Thankfully, this book does NOT belong to that canon. So, it's especially welcome and refreshing to read something like this; it's very fair, thoughtful, and dispassionately written. More than than that, I found myself getting sucked into the narratives. The main overarching narrative is gripping and powerful, but the other small strands, or mini-narratives are equally strong, and illuminating. The range that the book covers is especially impressive. I was especially drawn to some of the "discoveries" the book made in the latter chapters (although some of what the book uncovers in the early chapters was also quite surprising - shocking, at times).
When I was done, I felt like I had just finished a perfectly prepared and proportional meal. It was satisfying, fulfilling, but not too filling. It also helped me reconsider many ideas I held onto about torture and abuse during the global war on terror. I honestly didn't expect to finish reading the book cover to cover. I strongly suggest that others consider peering inside of the cover. You might be equally surprised, and delighted by what you find. It's not always an easy read, but it's definitely quite worthwhile. Even if you're squeamish about reading weighty topics, or engaging in work about violence, you really won't regret reading this.
November 6, 2011
This is easily the best book I've read on the issue of US torture during the war on terror, and definitely one of the strongest narrative nonfiction books I've picked up in quite some time.
The author makes it easy to read a book on such a difficult topic. His writing style is elegant and robust - I saw that another review said "dispassionate," which is spot on, especially in the difficult passages. The reporting and research is thoughtful, careful, and penetrating. It's a terrific blend of investigative reporting and literary journalistic writing.
Most of all it's a book that's guided through curious desire to understand how US forces turned to abuse and torture, and some of the unrecognized costs of these policies and practices. The ending is devastating, but powerful - and important. In the end, one walks away from the book with a strong, richer, illuminated understanding of the issue - an a visceral reaction to torture on a level that one might not expect. I cannot recommend this book more strongly. I hope someone makes it into a movie, too!
The author makes it easy to read a book on such a difficult topic. His writing style is elegant and robust - I saw that another review said "dispassionate," which is spot on, especially in the difficult passages. The reporting and research is thoughtful, careful, and penetrating. It's a terrific blend of investigative reporting and literary journalistic writing.
Most of all it's a book that's guided through curious desire to understand how US forces turned to abuse and torture, and some of the unrecognized costs of these policies and practices. The ending is devastating, but powerful - and important. In the end, one walks away from the book with a strong, richer, illuminated understanding of the issue - an a visceral reaction to torture on a level that one might not expect. I cannot recommend this book more strongly. I hope someone makes it into a movie, too!
January 10, 2012
Let me start by pasting in my writeup on the author's book-signing in Tacoma, WA:
11/19/11 - Journalist and author Joshua Phillips has written a book about torture entitled “None of Us Were Like This Before: Reflections on American
Soldiers and Torture”. He delivered a lecture on 11/16 at the UW Tacoma campus, sponsored in part by VFP.
Lamenting the use of torture by American and allied forces in the “War on Terror”, Phillips wishes to promote deeper public discussion of the issue. He began his talk by referring to a recent Presidential debate in which Republican hopefuls promised to reinstate an official policy of torture. According to Phillips, public support for government-sanctioned torture has risen lately in the polls. Given this trend, he says, it is easy to see that a change in presidents or another 9-11 attack would likely result in a regression back to reinstatement.
Phillips discussed rationalizations used by torture apologists, who claim that torture is effective, that it has prevented terrorist attacks, and that its use by the US is limited. Phillips counters these claims on their own terms: Far from being an effective tool, torture is actually an impediment to intelligence gathering. It forces fake confessions, and destroys the trust between the intelligence community and the local populace. And there is no evidence to support the notion that a terrorist attack has been prevented through the use of torture.
The claim of limited US torture “use”, Phillips says, is a specious form of denial referring solely to the CIA waterboarding program, -- ignoring the widespread problem in the military forces.
Torture is employed by many governments, both despotic and democratic, but democracies, Phillips says, have learned to get away with torture by avoiding leaving marks and traces. His book, however, is not hypothetical, but a rigorous journalistic investigation incorporating testimony of involved soldiers and victims.
Several hundred incidents of torture involving US soldiers in the recent wars have been recorded, but Phillips’s research reveals a far bigger problem. Some of this activity was ordered by superiors, some encouraged or tolerated, and some in violation of regulations. The Bush administration’s non-compliance with Geneva accords. and other pro-torture memos, were a significant step toward loosening the taboo. But because of a leadership failure, US forces were already practicing torture before any of these authorizations.
As anyone can well imagine, the reasons for the spread of torture can vary considerably. In many cases, combat soldiers in the war zones were given responsibility of extracting “actionable” information from detainees, even though they had no training as interrogators. Detainees, not charged, were held under suspicion, often misinformed. Unrealistic deadlines were set for confessions, to extract information that didn’t exist, such as where the WMD’s were.
A lack of moral leadership in the command structure was a significant factor. Sometimes looking the other way was as harmful as giving explicit orders. “Soldiers didn’t need manuals or memos to lead them to torture,” says Philips. “US troops in Bagram tortured their prisoners in banal and crude ways, informed by myths and memory.” Motivation for torture can range from peer-pressure to anger (i.e. revenge for 9/11), and even boredom.
Witnesses who report on unsanctioned use of torture can expect to pay for their whistle-blowing. As an example, Phillips cites the case of the soldier who revealed the Abu Graib scandal: He was subject to subsequent death threats and had to be given a secret identity. This sent a powerful message out to anyone else inclined to come forward.
Soldiers involved in torture, Phillips says, typically are haunted by remorse and guilt which affects their mental health. Afraid to talk about their involvement, they have nowhere to turn, and are at high risk for depression, drug-addiction and suicide. Often, being able to talk about their experiences is therapeutic, but sometimes even that is not enough, as in the example of one soldier interviewed by Phillips who later took his own life.
In the lecture, Phillips preferred to confront the torture problem without widening the discussion to the overall evils of war. Some people in the audience seemed to disagree with this position. However, since many people who believe some wars, such as WWII, are justified, it is probably wise strategy to limit the focus to the issue of torture itself.
During the question-and-answer period, when Phillips stated that under the right circumstances, anyone could become a perpetrator, some in the audience took offence. But history has shown, from Nazi Germany through Vietnam and beyond, that ordinary people, in a paradigm of war or violence, can become involved in evil. This is the meaning of the soldier’s words that provided the title of the book.
11/19/11 - Journalist and author Joshua Phillips has written a book about torture entitled “None of Us Were Like This Before: Reflections on American
Soldiers and Torture”. He delivered a lecture on 11/16 at the UW Tacoma campus, sponsored in part by VFP.
Lamenting the use of torture by American and allied forces in the “War on Terror”, Phillips wishes to promote deeper public discussion of the issue. He began his talk by referring to a recent Presidential debate in which Republican hopefuls promised to reinstate an official policy of torture. According to Phillips, public support for government-sanctioned torture has risen lately in the polls. Given this trend, he says, it is easy to see that a change in presidents or another 9-11 attack would likely result in a regression back to reinstatement.
Phillips discussed rationalizations used by torture apologists, who claim that torture is effective, that it has prevented terrorist attacks, and that its use by the US is limited. Phillips counters these claims on their own terms: Far from being an effective tool, torture is actually an impediment to intelligence gathering. It forces fake confessions, and destroys the trust between the intelligence community and the local populace. And there is no evidence to support the notion that a terrorist attack has been prevented through the use of torture.
The claim of limited US torture “use”, Phillips says, is a specious form of denial referring solely to the CIA waterboarding program, -- ignoring the widespread problem in the military forces.
Torture is employed by many governments, both despotic and democratic, but democracies, Phillips says, have learned to get away with torture by avoiding leaving marks and traces. His book, however, is not hypothetical, but a rigorous journalistic investigation incorporating testimony of involved soldiers and victims.
Several hundred incidents of torture involving US soldiers in the recent wars have been recorded, but Phillips’s research reveals a far bigger problem. Some of this activity was ordered by superiors, some encouraged or tolerated, and some in violation of regulations. The Bush administration’s non-compliance with Geneva accords. and other pro-torture memos, were a significant step toward loosening the taboo. But because of a leadership failure, US forces were already practicing torture before any of these authorizations.
As anyone can well imagine, the reasons for the spread of torture can vary considerably. In many cases, combat soldiers in the war zones were given responsibility of extracting “actionable” information from detainees, even though they had no training as interrogators. Detainees, not charged, were held under suspicion, often misinformed. Unrealistic deadlines were set for confessions, to extract information that didn’t exist, such as where the WMD’s were.
A lack of moral leadership in the command structure was a significant factor. Sometimes looking the other way was as harmful as giving explicit orders. “Soldiers didn’t need manuals or memos to lead them to torture,” says Philips. “US troops in Bagram tortured their prisoners in banal and crude ways, informed by myths and memory.” Motivation for torture can range from peer-pressure to anger (i.e. revenge for 9/11), and even boredom.
Witnesses who report on unsanctioned use of torture can expect to pay for their whistle-blowing. As an example, Phillips cites the case of the soldier who revealed the Abu Graib scandal: He was subject to subsequent death threats and had to be given a secret identity. This sent a powerful message out to anyone else inclined to come forward.
Soldiers involved in torture, Phillips says, typically are haunted by remorse and guilt which affects their mental health. Afraid to talk about their involvement, they have nowhere to turn, and are at high risk for depression, drug-addiction and suicide. Often, being able to talk about their experiences is therapeutic, but sometimes even that is not enough, as in the example of one soldier interviewed by Phillips who later took his own life.
In the lecture, Phillips preferred to confront the torture problem without widening the discussion to the overall evils of war. Some people in the audience seemed to disagree with this position. However, since many people who believe some wars, such as WWII, are justified, it is probably wise strategy to limit the focus to the issue of torture itself.
During the question-and-answer period, when Phillips stated that under the right circumstances, anyone could become a perpetrator, some in the audience took offence. But history has shown, from Nazi Germany through Vietnam and beyond, that ordinary people, in a paradigm of war or violence, can become involved in evil. This is the meaning of the soldier’s words that provided the title of the book.
October 19, 2010
I can’t joke about this one. There were ideas playing out in my head as I read this, but when it comes to putting it down, just about any play seemed too uncaring. So here it is.
Phillips puts together a collection of stories and essays, some journalistic, some observational, about U.S. soldiers involved in torture during the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. His whole research is kicked off by a story he covered about an Afghan war vet who committed suicide after returning home, unable to deal with the torture in his past. Phillips digs through the lives of people to try to get at the questions of how it happened, why we allowed it, and why we accept the explanations that are given about a few “bad apples” in the incidents like at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere; more importantly, he touches on what torture does to us as humans, and as a country.
It’s likely most of us know someone who is involved with or lost someone because of the war, but wounds built on torture run deeper in here, and take longer to heal. I have to admit, I picked this book up mostly out of curiosity, and to that end, Phillips gave me some of what I needed. I feel like this is a conflict that is very much more “over there” than others, but this really made me realize some of what might go on when people just aren’t watching.
I’m grateful for his journalist’s viewpoint through a lot of the book. Though it’s fairly obvious where he’s coming from (and at times he lays it on thick in a “they said this, but I’ll just leave these contrary facts/opinions without comment here in this next paragraph” way), he does try to keep some balance. He doesn’t demonize people outright, but lets them speak for themselves. Actually, he pulls off the toughest part of this act: humanizing soldiers who tortured detainees out of frustration, misplaced patriotism, and sometimes boredom. He clearly did hours upon hours of interviews with a lot of his sources, and poured over other academic and news sources.
I have two major problems with the book. The first one in some ways can’t be helped. Regardless of how much he asks “how” and “why,” Phillips gives some possible ideas as to how things happened, and who is responsible for the atrocities, but comes short of actually calling fault to anyone. It’s a classic news strategy, but so frustrating and at times outright upsetting in comparison to the things that happened without being able to see how we ended up here. In part, there is just no real solid answer. In another part, Phillips is obviously not going to get anyone with authority to take blame or do much more than point out scapegoats to talk. Pretty much the most jarring segment of the book compares the interviews of a few low-level soldiers who came forward to the responses from the upper echelons, each almost completely incongruous with the other. Phillips was not going to get an answer from the start, and he likely set out knowing that; without a conclusion, he has to rely on stories from his interviews for resolution that will not make the situation any better.
The second major problem is the layout of the book. I admit I’m not the most assiduous reader, but whole segments of this book were just obtuse, which is hard to do with non-fiction. Phillips writes at times like a blogger (casually, using first and third person to include his observations), at times a journalist (last names only, with other signifiers listed only once at first mention; quick sentences without modifiers), and at times an academic essayist (thesis, fact/fact/fact). It’s difficult to parse sometimes, and once or twice I was sent back a couple pages to try to figure out which sources he was referencing where, and how this was being interpreted through him before it got to me. The book is divided into chapters, but it’s clear he had more information about some events than others – more than one chapter has “padding” between an opening anecdote and its conclusion. I’m not certain why he didn’t break the book into larger, more general sections. He has pages of footnotes, but they accumulate in the back of the book; for a topic so heavily reliant on reports and sources, I don’t understand why those footnotes aren’t immediately available at the bottom of the page. If I have to reference the back of the book three times on the same page, I feel I’m doing too much work to read it.
I know I’m making it sound like a disappointing read, but Phillips does have a strong work here, at times moving and upsetting. Ultimately, maybe the disappointment is more that a book like this had to be written at all.
Phillips puts together a collection of stories and essays, some journalistic, some observational, about U.S. soldiers involved in torture during the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. His whole research is kicked off by a story he covered about an Afghan war vet who committed suicide after returning home, unable to deal with the torture in his past. Phillips digs through the lives of people to try to get at the questions of how it happened, why we allowed it, and why we accept the explanations that are given about a few “bad apples” in the incidents like at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere; more importantly, he touches on what torture does to us as humans, and as a country.
It’s likely most of us know someone who is involved with or lost someone because of the war, but wounds built on torture run deeper in here, and take longer to heal. I have to admit, I picked this book up mostly out of curiosity, and to that end, Phillips gave me some of what I needed. I feel like this is a conflict that is very much more “over there” than others, but this really made me realize some of what might go on when people just aren’t watching.
I’m grateful for his journalist’s viewpoint through a lot of the book. Though it’s fairly obvious where he’s coming from (and at times he lays it on thick in a “they said this, but I’ll just leave these contrary facts/opinions without comment here in this next paragraph” way), he does try to keep some balance. He doesn’t demonize people outright, but lets them speak for themselves. Actually, he pulls off the toughest part of this act: humanizing soldiers who tortured detainees out of frustration, misplaced patriotism, and sometimes boredom. He clearly did hours upon hours of interviews with a lot of his sources, and poured over other academic and news sources.
I have two major problems with the book. The first one in some ways can’t be helped. Regardless of how much he asks “how” and “why,” Phillips gives some possible ideas as to how things happened, and who is responsible for the atrocities, but comes short of actually calling fault to anyone. It’s a classic news strategy, but so frustrating and at times outright upsetting in comparison to the things that happened without being able to see how we ended up here. In part, there is just no real solid answer. In another part, Phillips is obviously not going to get anyone with authority to take blame or do much more than point out scapegoats to talk. Pretty much the most jarring segment of the book compares the interviews of a few low-level soldiers who came forward to the responses from the upper echelons, each almost completely incongruous with the other. Phillips was not going to get an answer from the start, and he likely set out knowing that; without a conclusion, he has to rely on stories from his interviews for resolution that will not make the situation any better.
The second major problem is the layout of the book. I admit I’m not the most assiduous reader, but whole segments of this book were just obtuse, which is hard to do with non-fiction. Phillips writes at times like a blogger (casually, using first and third person to include his observations), at times a journalist (last names only, with other signifiers listed only once at first mention; quick sentences without modifiers), and at times an academic essayist (thesis, fact/fact/fact). It’s difficult to parse sometimes, and once or twice I was sent back a couple pages to try to figure out which sources he was referencing where, and how this was being interpreted through him before it got to me. The book is divided into chapters, but it’s clear he had more information about some events than others – more than one chapter has “padding” between an opening anecdote and its conclusion. I’m not certain why he didn’t break the book into larger, more general sections. He has pages of footnotes, but they accumulate in the back of the book; for a topic so heavily reliant on reports and sources, I don’t understand why those footnotes aren’t immediately available at the bottom of the page. If I have to reference the back of the book three times on the same page, I feel I’m doing too much work to read it.
I know I’m making it sound like a disappointing read, but Phillips does have a strong work here, at times moving and upsetting. Ultimately, maybe the disappointment is more that a book like this had to be written at all.
February 15, 2020
"We lost more guys in my unit after we got back from Iraq than we lost in Iraq as a result of suicide, reckless behavior, ODs, whatever else. And those guys didn't die in honor of their service. They didn't die as patriots and defenders of freedom. Those guys died because they were trying to drown out and hide from the reality that that war had dug into their hearts."
Joshua E. S. Phillips raises many tough questions in this thorougly well-done piece of journalism, but the hardest one for me to answer, was whether I should feel sympathetic to soldiers who tortured and abused detainees during their trips, and suffered for it. As the book went on, my ambivalence grew more and more prominent, as I learned about their regret and the pressures that were put on them to do so - but at the same time I couldn't help but think, did they really not know better? Can you be a victim and a perpetrator at the same time? I don't know, but I do know this: When I turned the last few pages, and I learned that, in the end, Jonathan Millantz ended up committing suicide, I cried a tear for him.
Joshua E. S. Phillips raises many tough questions in this thorougly well-done piece of journalism, but the hardest one for me to answer, was whether I should feel sympathetic to soldiers who tortured and abused detainees during their trips, and suffered for it. As the book went on, my ambivalence grew more and more prominent, as I learned about their regret and the pressures that were put on them to do so - but at the same time I couldn't help but think, did they really not know better? Can you be a victim and a perpetrator at the same time? I don't know, but I do know this: When I turned the last few pages, and I learned that, in the end, Jonathan Millantz ended up committing suicide, I cried a tear for him.
August 21, 2014
A truly thoughtful book, gracefully written, guided by a inquisitiveness to understand how American forces became involved in torture, and the myriad unsuspecting costs of doing so. Not easy to read at times, not because of the violence but from the tragedy of the tale. Should be considered for National Book Award, or on Oprah's shelf.
May 4, 2013
This is an incredible documentation of American Torture in the Middle East and Vietnam. The truth of the matter is suppressed; we associate it with prisons such as Guantanamo Bay and turn a blind eye to the torture carried out by military forces. No one signs up for this. These are young men (and women; I presume, though I can't recall if Phillips interviewed any female interrogators) who are psychologically coerced into carrying out inhumane procedures which come in direct conflict with Human Rights and the basis of their own country. It's amazing how war continues to toss all the charters, bills, and rule books out the window.
Phillips writes with a very frank tone; he doesn't embellish, because really, None of Us Were Like This Before is a exposé. Still, the text itself is easy to read, however discomforting the content is. Some sick part of me powered through this one. I wanted to know why even though I was already aware of the manifest parallels with other cases in history involving corruption, miscommunication, and blind obedience. I wanted to know that Phillips's book is changing the situation, that after its release, the military was forced to begin removing torture from their interrogation "culture" (can I call it that?).
"I wouldn't have any problems. I wouldn't be on fucking medication. I wouldn't be sitting here doing an interview because I wouldn't know anything, and I would be fucking living life out there," Daniel Keller of Battalion 1-68 tells Phillips. "I thought being a soldier was this honorable and noble thing. You're doing a job that not many other people can do so that other people don't have to."
Phillips writes with a very frank tone; he doesn't embellish, because really, None of Us Were Like This Before is a exposé. Still, the text itself is easy to read, however discomforting the content is. Some sick part of me powered through this one. I wanted to know why even though I was already aware of the manifest parallels with other cases in history involving corruption, miscommunication, and blind obedience. I wanted to know that Phillips's book is changing the situation, that after its release, the military was forced to begin removing torture from their interrogation "culture" (can I call it that?).
"I wouldn't have any problems. I wouldn't be on fucking medication. I wouldn't be sitting here doing an interview because I wouldn't know anything, and I would be fucking living life out there," Daniel Keller of Battalion 1-68 tells Phillips. "I thought being a soldier was this honorable and noble thing. You're doing a job that not many other people can do so that other people don't have to."
January 8, 2019
Gosh, I have so much work to do but I've got to write this review (also Photoshop refuses to function and man, my head hurts too much to do math).
Anyway, this book is incredibly important. It took me a while to finish it because it was hard to read, hard to grasp that this is real.
I can't stop thinking about how the army is essentially the hands of the country and the government is the brain. That soldiers should be doing so many good things that they'll go back to their country with pride. When I say good things, I mean that type of actions that it's hard to argue against their morality (of course, like, you could but why?). And man, I can't believe that I've never heard about these issues like this. I mean, yeah, I knew about Guantanamo Bay but all the torture in between is new to me.
I think you should read this book because we need to know that it happened, that so many died and got hurt, that this was this huge circle of pain because of policies (spoken and unspoken ones) within the army and those in charge of security.
Okay, my work is calling me. All in all, definitely recommend, we've got to face these things.
What I'm Taking with Me
- War is bad. Obviously.
- I hate the idea of armies so much.
- This was so well researched, they did a good job.
Anyway, this book is incredibly important. It took me a while to finish it because it was hard to read, hard to grasp that this is real.
I can't stop thinking about how the army is essentially the hands of the country and the government is the brain. That soldiers should be doing so many good things that they'll go back to their country with pride. When I say good things, I mean that type of actions that it's hard to argue against their morality (of course, like, you could but why?). And man, I can't believe that I've never heard about these issues like this. I mean, yeah, I knew about Guantanamo Bay but all the torture in between is new to me.
I think you should read this book because we need to know that it happened, that so many died and got hurt, that this was this huge circle of pain because of policies (spoken and unspoken ones) within the army and those in charge of security.
Okay, my work is calling me. All in all, definitely recommend, we've got to face these things.
What I'm Taking with Me
- War is bad. Obviously.
- I hate the idea of armies so much.
- This was so well researched, they did a good job.
May 9, 2012
What can I say? Powerful, shocking, memorable, anger inducing, disgust inducing, excellently done, 5 star, a must read. Yes, a 'must' read. A must read for all Americans and anyone who wants to acknowledge that the truth about detainee abuse did not come out with Abu Ghraib. That was only scraping the top of the shitheap.
August 19, 2012
Well-written investigation of why US soldiers abused and tortured detainees in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo, and the lasting effects on the tortured and the torturers.
March 26, 2018
This is an excellent description of the torture by U.S. forces which took place in Iraq, GTMO, and Afghanistan. Phillips covers all of the bases (no pun intended) in terms of how torture came to be used, how and why it's ineffective at getting results, the psychological impact it has not only on prisoners but on torturers, etc.
It's fascinating to me how so many people get their ideas of "how things are" from entertainment media. They'll ignore decades of research and expert opinion in favor of what some actor did in a movie or on TV.
The whole thing is rather scary because, sure, the show "24" was a glaring example of "but it works and the guy really was bad." But what about the incessant parade of crime procedurals Americans watch daily? "CSI," et al, have people convinced that crime labs look like sci-fi fever dreams and are immune to error. Shows like "Law and Order" lead us to believe that 99.9% of cops are dedicated public servants up against a parade of unrepentant rapists and murderers who are always guilty. (The only show I can recall ever showing any sort of realistic nuance was "The Wire," but come on, this isn't the sort of show *your parents* watch.)
Basically, a great book worth reading despite being rather depressing--not just for its content but for its wider implications.
It's fascinating to me how so many people get their ideas of "how things are" from entertainment media. They'll ignore decades of research and expert opinion in favor of what some actor did in a movie or on TV.
The whole thing is rather scary because, sure, the show "24" was a glaring example of "but it works and the guy really was bad." But what about the incessant parade of crime procedurals Americans watch daily? "CSI," et al, have people convinced that crime labs look like sci-fi fever dreams and are immune to error. Shows like "Law and Order" lead us to believe that 99.9% of cops are dedicated public servants up against a parade of unrepentant rapists and murderers who are always guilty. (The only show I can recall ever showing any sort of realistic nuance was "The Wire," but come on, this isn't the sort of show *your parents* watch.)
Basically, a great book worth reading despite being rather depressing--not just for its content but for its wider implications.
March 2, 2019
Found this book interesting... it intentionally ignores a moral argument about torture. Only seeks to evaluate the damage it causes to our military... and there is enough evidence to suggest abusive violence (non-military) contributes to long term damages to veterans, their families and their communities. The damage contributes to disabling conditions like PTSD, higher likelihood of domestic violence, post-combat criminal behavior.
March 14, 2014
I've read a lot of books about US torture and there is a lot of overlap between them, but each one has their own unique information, and this one had an interesting focus on the effects of torture on the soldiers who committed the acts. Clearly a thoroughly researched book, and well worth the read if you can stomach the material.
December 30, 2019
It would be so easy to condemn one person from the monstrous done; to say some are evil and defect, not to understand the circumstances they have been put through. Also, to forget the systematic torture happening in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay and other off-sites, and hold individuals in fault as has happened. This all has been done in the name of information gathering. Unfortunately, the book both shows that to be a false conclusion (that often enough torture was done out of boredom and frustration) and as an ineffective way to get accurate information and information at all. (Not even to mention that Red Cross estimated that from all the arrest done in Iraq, 94% were wrongly picked up and jailed. Of those innocent men and women, some have even ended up dead and others scarred for life, and for what?) All this leaves with one question, why? Why, if it has been shown time and again that torture isn't a way to get information? Have 24 Hours TV show and its like blinded the citizens along with the politicians and military personnel to think that end justifies the means and make people forget that there quite probably won't be any justification at the end for stress positions, waterboarding, beatings, sleep deprivation, dog attacks, molestation, shock...? Or is this all about hatred and revenge? Or most likely due to failed government procedures and politics? The pressure to get things done and show results even when it can't be done?
Joshua E.S. Phillips looks at the USA's use of torture in Iraq, Afghanistan, and off-site prisons through the eyes of one tank battalion. And the thing is, you end up feeling mortified both for the victims and the soldiers who ended up using torture to those they were meant to guard (you can always also question the decision to make soldiers be prison guards in the first place. World War I and II showed that soldiers make lousy prison guards. Stress, function, boredom, and frustration. Sound familiar?) '"When he came home he was a different boy," Roy said. "He was aggressive. His mood swings were horrible."' And a boy in his prime ended up killing himself. Other battalion members followed by killing them slowly with drugs and alcohol. No counseling, no suicide watch, and a soldier die in the barracks, and nothing follows. This seems so wrong on so many levels; we have not mentioned even the Iraqi who suffocated while hanging from their hands from the ceiling hooded, alone, stripped from humanity, facing a foreign power and in no sight of justice.
But let's put that besides and try to see the bigger picture. What this all does to the relationship between the USA and other countries. What kind of ramifications follows from this? You can read the dissatisfaction, loss of trust, faith, and goodwill towards the USA on the book's pages, from the personal accounts of those who were broken. To remind, they weren't the only ones who were robbed of their humanity. Their families were as broken by torture as them, along with their nations. What will follow from this distrust say fifteen years from now? How about twenty or a hundred? History has shown that children of the children will remember. The scars will stay both at home and abroad.
This book is depressing to read. There is no happy ending where the evil pays for their dues. There are only misery and death and never-ending hate and for nothing. The USA's military system has highly trained intelligence gatherers, who are equipped efficiently gathering information, which doesn't include torture. Yet torture happened. Why? Their own system has taught that being friendly, chatting with the prisoner or enemy takes farther than electric shocks. It didn't help at Vietnam, it didn't help at Afghanistan, it surely didn't help at Iraq. Something has gone wrong with the thought processes, and as a reader, you are left with the question of what to do? I can't just move on when all this has happened and those who are responsible for all this walk free. That nothing really has changed. I say, remember Dilawar, remember Adam, and read this book and spread it around. When the public understands that torture is ineffective, harmful both to us and "them," then there is a chance for change. The worst we can do is blind our eyes and pretend nothing has happened. Information is power, so make people aware of what has happened and what hasn't. The facts have been checked.
Thank you for reading!
Joshua E.S. Phillips looks at the USA's use of torture in Iraq, Afghanistan, and off-site prisons through the eyes of one tank battalion. And the thing is, you end up feeling mortified both for the victims and the soldiers who ended up using torture to those they were meant to guard (you can always also question the decision to make soldiers be prison guards in the first place. World War I and II showed that soldiers make lousy prison guards. Stress, function, boredom, and frustration. Sound familiar?) '"When he came home he was a different boy," Roy said. "He was aggressive. His mood swings were horrible."' And a boy in his prime ended up killing himself. Other battalion members followed by killing them slowly with drugs and alcohol. No counseling, no suicide watch, and a soldier die in the barracks, and nothing follows. This seems so wrong on so many levels; we have not mentioned even the Iraqi who suffocated while hanging from their hands from the ceiling hooded, alone, stripped from humanity, facing a foreign power and in no sight of justice.
But let's put that besides and try to see the bigger picture. What this all does to the relationship between the USA and other countries. What kind of ramifications follows from this? You can read the dissatisfaction, loss of trust, faith, and goodwill towards the USA on the book's pages, from the personal accounts of those who were broken. To remind, they weren't the only ones who were robbed of their humanity. Their families were as broken by torture as them, along with their nations. What will follow from this distrust say fifteen years from now? How about twenty or a hundred? History has shown that children of the children will remember. The scars will stay both at home and abroad.
This book is depressing to read. There is no happy ending where the evil pays for their dues. There are only misery and death and never-ending hate and for nothing. The USA's military system has highly trained intelligence gatherers, who are equipped efficiently gathering information, which doesn't include torture. Yet torture happened. Why? Their own system has taught that being friendly, chatting with the prisoner or enemy takes farther than electric shocks. It didn't help at Vietnam, it didn't help at Afghanistan, it surely didn't help at Iraq. Something has gone wrong with the thought processes, and as a reader, you are left with the question of what to do? I can't just move on when all this has happened and those who are responsible for all this walk free. That nothing really has changed. I say, remember Dilawar, remember Adam, and read this book and spread it around. When the public understands that torture is ineffective, harmful both to us and "them," then there is a chance for change. The worst we can do is blind our eyes and pretend nothing has happened. Information is power, so make people aware of what has happened and what hasn't. The facts have been checked.
Thank you for reading!
May 29, 2013
I thought this would be about the troops and how they would become/became different than they were "before". While the book began with a narrative putting a human face on the implied content, this seemed to be dropped. What followed were 50+ pages of accounts of torture and the winks and nods from the higher ups. If you've been following the news and reading blogs the names and places are different, but you've read this story before.
I'm glad I stayed with it, because some very good material follows.
The author shows the culture that brought this about. There are young, angry soldiers, not trained in interrogation techniques who are charged with getting information. There are memos from those very high up with vague guidance on how to get it. The are interviews that show how innocent people wound up under interrogation and estimates of how many were wrongly imprisoned.
This book helped me understand the scale of what went on. Abuse was much more prevalent than even alternative news sources report.
The Millgram and Zimbardo studies are referenced and there are discussions on movies and the TV series "24".
Interviews of whistle blowers show how difficult (career-killing and potentially lethal) it was/is to report on the abuse and on how the Abu Ghraib pictures became public. There is something of the legal standing of the tortured and the risks torturers (as well as whistle-blowers as noted above) face in going public.
The book is short and topics sometimes seem to come from the information at hand rather than a systematic look at the issue. Nevertheless, there is a lot of good information and perspective.
In the end, the author, returns to the topic implied in the title, and through personal stories shows the problems of the torturer when the thrust back into a civilian life.
I'm glad I stayed with it, because some very good material follows.
The author shows the culture that brought this about. There are young, angry soldiers, not trained in interrogation techniques who are charged with getting information. There are memos from those very high up with vague guidance on how to get it. The are interviews that show how innocent people wound up under interrogation and estimates of how many were wrongly imprisoned.
This book helped me understand the scale of what went on. Abuse was much more prevalent than even alternative news sources report.
The Millgram and Zimbardo studies are referenced and there are discussions on movies and the TV series "24".
Interviews of whistle blowers show how difficult (career-killing and potentially lethal) it was/is to report on the abuse and on how the Abu Ghraib pictures became public. There is something of the legal standing of the tortured and the risks torturers (as well as whistle-blowers as noted above) face in going public.
The book is short and topics sometimes seem to come from the information at hand rather than a systematic look at the issue. Nevertheless, there is a lot of good information and perspective.
In the end, the author, returns to the topic implied in the title, and through personal stories shows the problems of the torturer when the thrust back into a civilian life.
December 2, 2012
Phillips opens a window for us to see into the hearts and minds of some (many?) of our own soldiers as thy digress into torture which the tacit, if not blatant support from their superiors, all the way up to Donald Rumsfeld. As an ex-infantry soldier, trained to kill behind enemy lines, (though not having seen combat), I am appalled at the depths our own have fallen.
This is a black mark on our troops, our government, our nation and us as a people who are either silent, ignorant or in support about such abuse that should not be happening. We are better than this. We should strive to be better than this.
"How did US forces turn to torture? Phillips's narrative recount the journey of a tank battalion - trained for conventional combat - as its focus switches to guerrilla war and prisoner detention."
The book "tells of how a group of ordinary soldiers, ill trained for the responsibilities foisted upon them, descended into the degradation of abuse....the story captures the widespread use and nature of torture in the US armed forces."
"The book illustrates that the damaging legacy of torture is not only borne by the detainees, but also by American soldiers and the country to which they've returned."
This is a black mark on our troops, our government, our nation and us as a people who are either silent, ignorant or in support about such abuse that should not be happening. We are better than this. We should strive to be better than this.
"How did US forces turn to torture? Phillips's narrative recount the journey of a tank battalion - trained for conventional combat - as its focus switches to guerrilla war and prisoner detention."
The book "tells of how a group of ordinary soldiers, ill trained for the responsibilities foisted upon them, descended into the degradation of abuse....the story captures the widespread use and nature of torture in the US armed forces."
"The book illustrates that the damaging legacy of torture is not only borne by the detainees, but also by American soldiers and the country to which they've returned."
May 14, 2012
I'm completely fed up with stories in the liberal press and books about torture supposedly conducted by American troops. We are up against a fanatical enemy sworn to destroy us and people like this writer want us to handle them with kid gloves, when they routinely torture and behead our people? To hell with this! We are in a war for our very survival. War is ugly. Nasty. Brutal. If you want a kid glove war, then don't fight the damned thing in the first place. Our military is at war. America is at the mall. There is no place for Mr. Nice Guy when dealing with savages. The only thing they understand is brutal force applied directly. Anything else is second best and those who come in second best in wars are called *losers.*
August 8, 2013
A reporter’s account of torture inflicted on Iraqi prisoners by members of the American military who were inconceivably transformed from regular soldiers to “detention specialists.” The scars were not reserved for the detainees but permanently devastated the perpetrators. Post-Iraqi War soldiers are on a rocky road, often making it impossible to feel the same way they did about their lives in America when they shipped away. As in Finding Home, the soldier’s act of coming home equals severely altered reality.
August 28, 2021
Great book. Focuses on the military’s—particularly the Army’s—use of torture during the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and a little on Guantanamo. Even better read in conjunction with Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side, which covers the same subject (with a major focus on the CIA’s and its use of black sites to engage in torture, with a smaller section of Guantanamo). Mayer takes a top-down approach to explaining prisoner abuse, meaning orders and memos from the top trickle down to the lower enlisted. Phillips, in this book, goes with the bottom-up theory, meaning the individual troops made their own decisions first, and their commanders looked the other way, so it was great to get in-depth looks at both perspectives. Highly recommended for anyone who’s interested in US war crimes during the war on terror.
August 11, 2016
Half of this book traces the stories of the soldiers that made up Battalion 1-68 in Iraq and the detainees who were abused by the soldiers, and the other half was investigative reporting on how torture came to be so widely used in Afghanistan and Iraq. Phillips weaves together multiple narratives into one damning book to show how torture proliferated and the impact that it had years after the troop left Iraq on both American soldiers and Iraqi detainees and their families. The role that popular culture played in interrogations was especially interesting to me. I recommend this to anyone who is interested in military history.
September 11, 2017
I had a tough time getting through this book due to the graphic content surrounding the "War on Terror". However, I think everyone should educate themselves about the issue of torture, especially when making policy decisions/stances. I appreciate Phillips backing his statements with evidence when discussing whether torturing is effective or not. It was a bit redundant at times, which is why I'm rating the book 4 stars instead of 5. Overall, I'd recommend.
September 7, 2020
This was a harrowing book about the effects of torture on the tortured and the torturers as well. Lack of accountability and guidance paired with vague parameters of acceptable behavior by leadership created a miserable situation for all involved. This was a sad and eye opening book about many facets of our armed forces operations with prisoners but also a chilling one on our human nature.
December 13, 2022
I wrote these reviews for my own memories. Please skip.
This was a rough read. Read after the Lucifer Effect. I'd like to not revisit the subject ever again.
What have I learned? All humans are capable of evil and it breaks them permanently. Torturer or torturee.
This was a rough read. Read after the Lucifer Effect. I'd like to not revisit the subject ever again.
What have I learned? All humans are capable of evil and it breaks them permanently. Torturer or torturee.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 21, 2018
This piece was just beautiful. Mind-blindingly good writing. His research is precise and accurate. It's a flawless argument. I love this book more than I can explain.
January 12, 2023
There was a lot of interesting information in this book, and it certainly looks at a fascinating and often ignored topic. For the most part it manages this in an impressively neutral way, and the interviews and information contained in the book make for fascinating reading. Unfortunately, the writing style was not great, which was a real shame. Despite the fact that there was a lot of decent stuff in here, the writing was often choppy and disjointed, and it was frustrating to follow at times. Many pages consisted of paragraphs that were one to three lines in length, with the occasional longer paragraph that managed to develop a voice -- these were the stronger sections. The short, sharp paragraphs and the tone of the writing made me feel like this was an article online, one of those five to 10 minute reads that provide a great overview and introduction but not much else. Reading an entire book in this style was grating.
I can commend the way that the book navigated the tricky subject. Essentially this book is asking us to try to understand, and therefore feel sympathy for, war criminals. This is no exaggeration: the book chronicles the experiences of soldiers in the US military who have tortured prisoners in horrific ways, many of them for no reason other than, by their own admission, boredom or a desire for revenge. The book makes it very clear that the myths of torture are very much alive in today's society -- that it works, that it's permissible if it saves lives, that in high-stress situations on a time limit, it should be allowed. It also dismantles these myths and illustrates beyond all doubt that the people doing the torturing do not believe them in the slightest. It outlines the fact that very often, no information whatsoever is acquired. It shows how the reasons for torture cannot even be called "justification" -- it's too banal, very often boiling down to personal beef, power trips, and boredom. The best that can be said for these men is that they often find themselves facing intimidating superiors who demand results, as well as a culture that would put them in danger, professionally but also sometimes physically, if they report the abuse of prisoners. Many people would say that this is still not a very sympathetic position. I would agree, and yet at the same time I came away from this book understanding more of the nuance, and the odds stacked against those men who would otherwise have done differently if not for the fact that all these variables and obstacles existed. It goes without saying that I still believe that no torture is justifiable, and I do have to admit that I don't feel an overwhelming amount of sympathy for the men involved. But at the very least I understand more of the wider picture, and can therefore present an even better argument against torture. Sometimes a book does not have to change your mind to be good.
I wish that the writing had slowed down and developed itself a little more -- as I said, it feels more like a short introductory article than anything else. It also feels disorganised in some places, and often sentences or paragraphs end with the implication that the next paragraph will expand and elaborate, only for the point or event to be dropped. I constantly felt like I should be getting more, and being frustrated when I didn't. What was there was very good indeed, but the whole thing felt a little rushed, the writing choppy. While the book itself does a decent job at presenting the facts and allowing them to speak for themselves without "siding" with either faction, I was also a little put off by some of the highlighted reviews on the book's cover and inside pages. This is not something I would judge the book on solely, as it is after all the opinion of others, but with a subject like this it's worth keeping in mind that what people take away from the book is a direct result of how the book has presented certain facts. In one of these reviews, the torturers profiled in the book, whose inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners is illustrated in great detail, very often in their own words, are referred to as "brave Americans." I think the book's choppiness, as well as its occasionally extreme focus on the angst of these men, may have left the wrong impression for readers eager to find justifcation in the American history of torture -- the very people this book should be trying to reach. Some of these misconceptions are down to the reader, of course, but some of it is also on the book itself, which is why I mention it here.
I can commend the way that the book navigated the tricky subject. Essentially this book is asking us to try to understand, and therefore feel sympathy for, war criminals. This is no exaggeration: the book chronicles the experiences of soldiers in the US military who have tortured prisoners in horrific ways, many of them for no reason other than, by their own admission, boredom or a desire for revenge. The book makes it very clear that the myths of torture are very much alive in today's society -- that it works, that it's permissible if it saves lives, that in high-stress situations on a time limit, it should be allowed. It also dismantles these myths and illustrates beyond all doubt that the people doing the torturing do not believe them in the slightest. It outlines the fact that very often, no information whatsoever is acquired. It shows how the reasons for torture cannot even be called "justification" -- it's too banal, very often boiling down to personal beef, power trips, and boredom. The best that can be said for these men is that they often find themselves facing intimidating superiors who demand results, as well as a culture that would put them in danger, professionally but also sometimes physically, if they report the abuse of prisoners. Many people would say that this is still not a very sympathetic position. I would agree, and yet at the same time I came away from this book understanding more of the nuance, and the odds stacked against those men who would otherwise have done differently if not for the fact that all these variables and obstacles existed. It goes without saying that I still believe that no torture is justifiable, and I do have to admit that I don't feel an overwhelming amount of sympathy for the men involved. But at the very least I understand more of the wider picture, and can therefore present an even better argument against torture. Sometimes a book does not have to change your mind to be good.
I wish that the writing had slowed down and developed itself a little more -- as I said, it feels more like a short introductory article than anything else. It also feels disorganised in some places, and often sentences or paragraphs end with the implication that the next paragraph will expand and elaborate, only for the point or event to be dropped. I constantly felt like I should be getting more, and being frustrated when I didn't. What was there was very good indeed, but the whole thing felt a little rushed, the writing choppy. While the book itself does a decent job at presenting the facts and allowing them to speak for themselves without "siding" with either faction, I was also a little put off by some of the highlighted reviews on the book's cover and inside pages. This is not something I would judge the book on solely, as it is after all the opinion of others, but with a subject like this it's worth keeping in mind that what people take away from the book is a direct result of how the book has presented certain facts. In one of these reviews, the torturers profiled in the book, whose inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners is illustrated in great detail, very often in their own words, are referred to as "brave Americans." I think the book's choppiness, as well as its occasionally extreme focus on the angst of these men, may have left the wrong impression for readers eager to find justifcation in the American history of torture -- the very people this book should be trying to reach. Some of these misconceptions are down to the reader, of course, but some of it is also on the book itself, which is why I mention it here.
July 28, 2024
This book took me somewhat by surprise in its scope. Phillips directly confronts the reality of torture conducted by U.S soliders, blending in narratives from both soldiers and those who were subjected to torture during the Iraq war. Many of the soldiers within the same unit as Adam Gray grappled with what they had done in Iraq and attempted to make positive change wherever they could. I appreciated the direct quotes from experts and those speaking of their experiences- it made the narrative seem more personal and carefully considered. The reliance upon torture to acquire intelligence had a ripple effect- it was not limited to both the soliders and those who were tortured. This was explored brilliantly by Phillips.
July 29, 2018
I found this to be a fair and mostly un-biased look at the torture allegations from troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course most who participated in the interviews regret their actions and are suffering the consequences of them but it does leave one wondering if there are troops out there who participated and still feel good about it.
I was most taken with Phillips' ability to lay out the "influences" that led us to this situation in a narrative fashion that didn't feel like an outline. He doesn't dwell on them and he never lays blame but it becomes clear that our culture is complicit in making these abuses acceptable.
It is occasionally a little repetitive, but not overly so. The torture techniques are detailed at times, consider that a warning, but it is emotionally fairly detached so while it's still hard to read, it is possible to to do so without being actually sick to one's stomach.
I was most taken with Phillips' ability to lay out the "influences" that led us to this situation in a narrative fashion that didn't feel like an outline. He doesn't dwell on them and he never lays blame but it becomes clear that our culture is complicit in making these abuses acceptable.
It is occasionally a little repetitive, but not overly so. The torture techniques are detailed at times, consider that a warning, but it is emotionally fairly detached so while it's still hard to read, it is possible to to do so without being actually sick to one's stomach.
August 4, 2018
Felt like deja vu reading this book. The author just spends so many pages making the same exact claim. Really disappointed in this book as Phillips is a reporter by trade and only gives the reader a glimpse of the his process researching about the issue of torture.
October 27, 2014
If I could give it 3.5 stars i would. It' s hard for me to rate this book. The topic is unlike anything I have read before and definitely interesting. I came across the book by accident the other day when watching great documentary "Taxi to the dark side". Half of the facts in this book were also included in that documentary so some of it was bit repetitive but fair enough, not the author' s fault. He did try to explore the reason behind why the US troops resorted to torture in some cases, what were the causes and who is responsible...however you will not find definitive answers in the book. He is pitching ideas, but i feel like without closure. Also, it was bit hard for me to read. I know it is non-fiction but still...there was absolutely no story line, no point A - point B...I wish it was bit more structured, maybe? Good book, but not sure I would call it a must read. I would much more recommend the "Taxi to the dark side" documentary which presents the same facts and ideas but it much more engaging (for the reader/viewer) way.
Want to read
June 30, 2012Cullen Murphy's head trip on how things stacked up against the inquisition:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/a...
Could a 2006 documentary "The Human Behavior Experiments" shed some light on it (not in my library, ugh):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/01/art...
this bk gets totally 1-sided online reviews, maybe it's the title?
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/a...
Could a 2006 documentary "The Human Behavior Experiments" shed some light on it (not in my library, ugh):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/01/art...
this bk gets totally 1-sided online reviews, maybe it's the title?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews