As a disclaimer, I was required to read this book for a class, but I expected to really like it, especially after reading the introduction. If I hadn't had the book assigned, however, I would not have likely made it more than halfway through the first section (on Terrorism).
First, the good: the book is well written, and meticulously researched. The author has found and cited people that share his views. Also, the last two sections of the book (on Science and Postcolonialism, respectively) were reasonable and levelheaded, although the Postcolonialism section was rather dull.
Now, the bad: The majority of the book can be summarized in two words: Pure Craziness. I'd blame the insanity on a hyperliberal bias, except that there are a number of sections where a hyperconservative bias shows. I would guess that I'm in the author's core target audience. I am an American Christian, living and working outside of the US. I'm fairly conservative, but willing to discuss other points of view. That said, I found his views on most things outrageously (even laughably) extreme. I'd be much more sympathetic to a well reasoned extremism, but the author's views don't seem to follow any pattern (except to consistently espouse the most extreme viewpoint he can find).
Now this could just be a rant on my part if I didn't back it up. I don't have time to pick apart the entire book here, but I'll highlight a few quick viewpoints. Most of the rest of the book follows suit.
Just a few highlights: He argues that the US deserved what happened to them on 9/11, that to call intentional acts of guerrilla warfare against civilians terrorism is wrong, that legitimate wars fought by governments within the bounds of the Geneva convention should be called terrorism, and seemingly any other piece of self-contradictory nonsense that he can come up with. He attempts to ensconce his radicalist beliefs in a "Christian" facade, but any discerning reader can see through his chicanery. Later in the book, he argues that stealing to meet any felt need is completely justified, and should in fact not be called stealing. His views on international borders are similarly absurd.
Please save yourself time and money, and don't buy this book. If you feel you must, or like me, have it assigned for a class, go into it expecting the absurd and you won't be disappointed. Anyone looking for well reasoned, serious criticism should try reading "The Onion" before this book.