In his latest book, Dennis sets out to achieve several related objectives. He provides a truly three dimensional, "living" portrait of the young Bin Laden and the influences at work in his life based on the known facts. This provides the "key" to understanding Bin Laden's mental landscape and the psychological forces at work in his young life that led him down the terrorist path. The book is unique in that aspect. Dennis then dissects Bin Laden's political techniques and speeches to show him as the Great Communicator of the radical Muslim world. Dennis shows how Bin Laden's visual imagery (lying on a humble pallet of a cave in one video) speaks to Muslims in ways that escape Western audiences. Dennis links the cave imagery to the chapter in the Koran called "The Cave." The author has an admirable understanding of the Koran and how Bin Laden plays off of the Koran in communicating to his audience. The final chapters of the book are thick with information on other fundamentalist figures from the Muslim world, past and present, and show how Bin Laden's pronouncements fit into that larger world of Islamic political thought. This gives the reader a more objective view of how unique or typical Bin Laden is compared to Qutb, Khomeini and others. The book is valuable in each of its parts as well as a whole. A nice addition to the growing Bin Laden literature.

Dennis writes with a novelist's love of words and a biographer's interest in his subject. He avoids the legends and uncorroborated stories about Bin Laden and sticks with only the facts he is able to confirm or which have a solid factual basis. This is the largest small book I have ever read. Dennis doesn't waste time puffing his adventures in pursuit of his quarry like some journalists do. Instead, he gets out of the camera's way and takes us on a narrated tour of Bin Laden's world and his political place in it. Told with flashes of hard-won insight into the Muslim world, this book is valuable for the student as well as the generalist. I particularly liked the way he related Muslim Brother Sayyid Qutb's ideas (d. 1966) to Bin Laden's own revolutionary program and his thoughtful discussion of Bin Laden vs. Iranian President Khatami's political thought. Excellent, original and well done!!

Mr. Dennis has once again proven himself as the quintessential scholar when it comes to knowledge about the threat posed by radical Islamists like Osma Bin Laden. The portrait painted of Bin Laden and his followers is insightful and balanced. If policy makers in the 1990s had heeded Dennis' warnings and recommendations, perhaps many lives would have been saved. Instead our children live under the black cloud of terrosim exactly as Dennis predicted.

As a history book, this is hardly objective. As a legal tome explaining the principles in the Times decision, it must be rated fair to poor. Emphasis is placed on supporting the "winning" argument and interpreting Brennan's written decision. What the author fails to include are the basis for the losing argument and an explanation of the "balancing" principle the Supreme Court used. These omissions create a noticeable bias to the disceerning reader. While readable, this book should be held at arms length and with a jaundiced eye. I was disappointed that this book was used in an undergraduate media law course.

In "Make No Law" Lewis brilliantly chronicles the evolution of freedom of speech as American courts strive to interpret the broad language of the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. The courts' interpretation of the First Amendment within Founding Father James Madison's broad protection by "absolute immunity" for criticism is contrasted with the British premise that truth is NOT a defense for libel and if an individual is defamed they do NOT have to demonstrate damages to be awarded huge amounts of money. Lewis engagingly recounts the courts' struggle to ensure that plaintiffs with frivolous loss of reputation claims do not intimidate the whistleblower and the news reporter into the silence of self-censorship through vivid examples of individuals ordered to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a simple "letter to the editor" and the incredible saga of the landmark Supreme Court case, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, which could have bankrupt the New York Times into oblivion in 1964. The courts must be ever wary that the threat of multi-million dollar judgments do not become mightier than the pen. After reading "Make No Law," the fight for Internet free speech detailed in another monograph, "Be Careful Who You SLAPP," will come into sharp focus as the tragic miscarriage of justice in modern times. Yet, hope remains for the American legal system. Read "Make No Law" and be a proud optimist. And never stop striving for "liberty and justice for all"!

This book was one reason why I took up the study of law at 50. Anthony Lewis begins with a Supreme Court case and ends up reviewing this country's long experience of free speech. The premise is simple enough: Sullivan v. New York Times, which started as a 1960 civil rights case, involving a defamation lawsuit in Alabama, and ending up as a pivotal Supreme Court ruling on freedom of speech and of the press. The legal importance of the case alone justifies Mr. Lewis' interest.

However, Mr. Lewis' real contribution, at least to me, are in the background chapters to the case, in which he goes back to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 and tells of the ongoing tension between free speech and official power. His discussion of the WWI wartime legislation and its aftermath -- a period very much like the post-9/11 era in its attempts to legislate security -- is central to the book.

It is here that he acquaints us with the dissents by Justices Louis Brandeis and Oliver Wendell Holmes, dissents in freedom-of-speech cases that didn't prevail in that time but burn brightly ever since. One Brandeis quote suffices: "Those who won our independence by revolution were neot cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men ... no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present."

Mr. Lewis rightly regards these jurists with awe. Certainly their words are as noble as anything the Founding Fathers wrote on the nature of our liberties. If patriotism means an appreciation of the depth, timelessness and principle of our liberties, then you'll find much of that here.

I have read Anthony Lewis' earlier, arguably more famous book, Gideon's Trumpet, another work of reverence to our legal system, and would still put Make No Law ahead of it, though I also recommend Gideon's Trumpet as well. But this book did reinforce my own appreciation for this country's liberties and I cannot recommend it more highly.

Giddens has a very big name. but name is name. this book has nothing new or insightful. all are there is reproduced from his previous books. and worse, the pricing is unduly high. if u read already his books, u'd better skip this title.

Sociologist Anthony Giddens has recently made some notable contributions to political discussion. This books is based on his radio lectures from 1999 which do not have much to do with Gidden's academic conributions. Instead, this is a practical book aimed at general public interested in the current world affairs. In just 100 pages, compact size and absent of academic buzzwords, the book makes an easy and fast read.

The book has five themes: globalization, risk, tradition, family and democracy. Giddens handles them in turn like he would be playing with his favourite football. Shifts feet, moves forward and kicks when the goal is sure. His playing is readable indeed.

One can rise a couple of leading themes from the book. One is the idea of cosmopolitan tolerance. The other one is the doublesided meaning of risk. On the one hand, risk is what globalization has brought to our daily lives and society at large. On the other hand, risk enables the speed of evolution we are now facing in this global village.

In some parts of the book, one can be very impressed how Giddens summarizes in about three paragraphs what others have written in a 300+ pages of treatise. This is the case of e.g. Soros on global capitalism, Bernstein on the meaning of risk and Castells on information society. Though there are no accurate references - there simply couldn't be - Giddens provides in the end a fifteen page list of selected readings with a short comment on each. I found it very helpful way to put my understanding in a more larger context.

Freedom is wonderful.

That's the basic message of this book. Americans take freedom for granted, but much if not all of the world had less freedom than the US until the recent past. The first half-century of American independence was marked by chaos, out of which a unique and growing American freedom developed which could not be shattered even by the War Between the States.

Now, and I say this as a Canadian nationalist and not an American chauvinist, the rest of the world is catching up with the US. The result is worldwide chaos. The foundation of Canada has always been peace, order and good government; in recent years, this complacent assumption has been challenged by Quebec separatists and the rise of a new political party in the western provinces. Even at that, Canada is a mild case of chaos compared to what is happening in many countries.

Giddens looks at this chaos in relation to a number of universal concerns -- risk, tradition, the family and democracy itself. In each case, as more people are given the right and ability to make their own decisions, a difficult transition to expanded freedom takes place. Giddens examination of family values is an example of the controversy and confusion that is being generated.

For almost all of history, families were economic units based on the ability of one person to provide an income and another to look after the household and raise children. Now, with both people in a marriage able to earn a self-sufficient income, the basic nature of marriage is changing. It is no longer a case of economics, marriage now involves a democracy of emotions.

On a personal basis, Giddens cites the example of a great aunt who ". . . had one of the longest marriages of anyone. having been with her husband for over 60 years. She once confided that she had been deeply unhappy with him the whole of that time. In her day there was no escape." My own mother could have said the same. Today, there is an escape. Divorce is becoming ever more respectable; once, it would have been unthinkable to elect a divorced president, yet no one questioned Ronald Reagan's divorce and the fact that his next wife was several months pregnant by the time they married.

Now, add this freedom to all other elements of society. Then, expand it worldwide. The result of this phenomena is globalisation. Conservatives in foreign lands denounce it as Americanisation, but it is purely an expansion of personal freedom. When you get change, you get chaos. Out of that, as shown by the chaos prior to the writing of the US Constitution, a newer and freer society sometimes emerges. It's happening in Canada, in China, Cuba and worldwide.

Giddens examines the basics of this growing freedom. Once these basics are understood, the current chaos of globilisation can be seen as a dawn of expanding freedom rather than an insidious American plot to take over the world. On that basis, every country will develop its own freedom even if it doesn't match the appearance of American institutions.

Unless, of course, conservative forces of tradition seize power to end the chaos and restore peace, order and good government. Freedom can be as diverse as every distinct society; repression always wears the same stern face of not allowing people to make decisions for themselves.

would be interesting only to people, who study scripts seriously, who love Minghella's art, and who love the film itself. This particular script was not meant to stand on its own, unlike some scripts from other great films. It was only meant to be Minghella's subjective and brief overview of what he is going to create for the screen. I bought it because I was curious to compare written word with what I have seen on the film. This book has lyrics of "Lullaby for Cain" and full cast list, though, which is a nice touch...

The book was better than the movie. I think the movie was too soapy. The ending was not conclusive

After seeing this film I was quick to jump to the conclusion that the screenplay would be just as good. I am pleased to report that I was correct!

As a read, Ripley is captivating and diabolical. The words finely link together the voices and faces that I loved in the film. Anthony Minghella has such a remarkable gift! First English Patient, now Ripley!

All I really have to say about this screenplay is that it is honey--rich, sweet, and easy to swallow. You'll love it!

Mr. DePalma, naturally, doesn't disappoint the denizens of right wing think tanks like the Cato Institute or the neo-liberal editorialists of our major broadsheets in his favorable depiction of the economic impact of the controversial North American Free Trade Agreement, and prospective readers of this quaint sentimentialism of a book should realize the treaty provides the impetus for even writing a book like this in the first place. Mr. DePalma can find nothing inherently wrong with the promises proferred by the acolytes of free trade ideology (hey, all of us North Americans reap rewards from this stuff!!), so his seemingly feigned appreciation for the distinctive characteristics of a Canada or Mexico really tests credulousness, unless of course those traits begin to converge with that behemoth to the north or south. Do Canada or Mexico have any singular accomplishments that might actually teach the US a thing or two? And are those accomplishments jeopardized by the tenets of global trade like open markets, reduced government expenditure and obeisance to transnational (ie US) corporations? Well, Mr. DePalma frankly doesn't give a damn, and neither should you about his book!

Think back to a few years ago, when prior to the 1992 election, Ross Perot in attacking the then proposed North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), described it as "a giant sucking sound" of American jobs being lost to Mexico. Well the exodus of jobs never happened and Perot's one-sided criticism was probably just politics anyway. What then accounts for Mr DePalma's equally skewed analysis "HERE"; although the arguments in this book are the exact opposite of Perot's; for Mr DePalma, NAFTA is a very good thing. Perhaps the explanation for his ringing endorsement of the gradual economic integration of the US, Canadian, and Mexican economies, comes from the fact that Mr DePalma has lived and worked for a number of years in both Mexico and Canada. Looking at NAFTA from that vantage point shows that it's influence on not only economic, but also the social and cultural aspects of peoples lives, in the 7 years since the agreement came into effect, has been largely positive.

Mr DePalma sees the signing of the agreement itself as a significant achievement; the three nations, he says overcame decades of prejudice and have struck out on "our shared destiny" based on mutual respect and a committment to free trade. He gives sketches of the political and cultural histories of Canada and Mexico throughout his book and writes best when he mixes these in with stories of his experiences in each country.

Mr DePalma is correct in saying that "we know North America exists, but we do not know North America" and we can thank him for helping us learn a lot that's new about Canada and Mexico. There are however some limits to all this talk of continental unity. In his epilogue entitled "symmetry regained" he argues that NAFTA is removing the borders between the three countries and returning us to how it was before the Spanish, French and British came. He says as we go forward as a continent we will talk about "here" and not about "there".

That may be all well and good economically and politically for everyone, and culturally also for Mexico as we become more Latino. The difficulty with this vision and ultimately then, with the book, is that the perspective from the US is startling absent throughout HERE. Mr DePalma doesn't seem to see the threat to unity when he says that in the US people "rarely are conscious that they share this continent with anyone." What happens then, when political awareness comes with liberals highlighting some of the negative economic side-effects of NAFTA and conservatives drawing attention to the potential social and cultural dangers.

HERE is very one-sided and offers only the positives of free trade and globalization. Mr DePalma does not mention any of the negatives and more importantly, he totally ignores the reality that some of the same constituents in the US that now support NAFTA, if it becomes politically expedient to do otherwise, will turn on it with a vengeance. As a result he sounds a little naive and the book's arguments feel shallow.

As a college magazine editor and writer, I've heard dozens of speakers and read many authors over the years who either apply political and economic theories to events in Latin America or tell stories that attempt to shine a light on individuals or groups in that region. But in "Here", DePalma puts a face on the people and finds the story behind the events, public and private, he witnessed in his singular role as a journalist covering Latin America, the U.S., and Canada. By combining these stories with reflections of his own family's immigration and throwing closely observed political events into the mix, he illuminates the struggles, aspirations, and challenges facing all of us on the American continent. He presents an original and well-grounded worldview that, whether or not you agree with it, provides a solid and insightful foundation for a long overdue discussion on the connectedness of North and South.

As a writer, I admire the clarity and accuracy of observation in DePalma's prose, whether he's unmasking Subcomandante Marcos during a downpour in Aguascalientes or listening to a Mayan soldier for the source of the outrage that fed the Zapatista movement. DePalma doesn't lose the individual in the larger scheme of things, but also never loses sight of that larger context.

DePalma's book humanized for me recent trends on the American continent. My only regret after reading it is that I didn't do so before accompanying students on a recent learning expedition to Mexico. Next time, I'll take it with me.

Good grief, this sort of thing sounds like TORTURE. People become accountants because they failed at something else. And they actually read stuff like this?

This book is very practical and covers all the pertinent information needed for a good foundation in Accounting. The book is easy to understand and gives practical examples and useful exercises.

I am an accounting Professor. I am also an accountant. I am so surprised that you thought people became accountants because they failed from something else. It is totally wrong. I am so pround of it. I am 27 year old. I have a good car, have a good house (no debt at all; I just repaid all my mortgage recently.) I do not think that people who are in the field from which you mentioned they failed can make money and have good reputation like I do. Do you know that an auditor money as much as a lawyer (I am a good auditor; please do not talk about other case)

For this book, I found it is very good. I used Prof Skousen's textbook in first accounting class as well as intermediate. My students like them so much. However, they give a little bit too much detail. A professor should adapt it when using in class. This book is a excellent alternative to another book published by Wiley.

The author obviously knows a great deal about Mandela and South Africa. However, there is so much detail that I found the book just deadening over time. The writing style was not engaging enough to sustain me through all the blow-by-blow accounts that one has to plod through . -I was surprised and disappointed that the book was not more enjoyable.

What an amazing life this man had. He was born on the rural plains in South Africa.. His father was absent due to forced circumstances. Mandela later received an education in law and began the practice of law. Political causes led to his imprisonment for nearly thirty years in Robbins Prison. The book tells the wrenching tale of his separation of his family during his imprisonment, yet the family (the second marriage, to Winnie) remained intact during his long imprisonment and only dissolved after the release from prison. The book is very heavy on the political activity in whch Mandela was involved. This is an interesting book of personal triumph over overwhelming odds.

If you believe there are no modern heroes - that fortitude and unselfish judgement in the face of adversity are out-of-date virtues, you need to read this book. That Sampson shows the whole man so well (with admittedly a few frailities) adds depth to the tremendous courage, excellent judgement, and magnanimity Mandela demonstrated his entire life, even when the cause of the ANC he led seemed hopeless. Along the way the book gives an excellent view of South African history during Mandela's adulthood. If you are not very familiar with Mandela or South Africa you might do better to start with Mandela's own book, "Long Walk to Freedom" which doesn't cover quite so much ground and is more on a human scale. Both books are inspiring.

I wonder at my colleagues in their discussion about Shakespeare's use of the Geneva Bible. Is that really the issue, and (to refer to my friend's observation that he does not "endorse" this version) does it really matter whether we embrace, endorse or otherwise subscribe to either the translation or the accompanying notes? This is a venture of historical proportions, the value of which is gauged, not in terms of endorsement, but in the availability of such a significant piece of Biblical history (even if the publisher's price is about twice what it should be).

For comparative purposes in drawing doctrinal conclusions, the Geneva Bible is of only cursory value (most of us wouldn't change a doctrinal position anyway; not even if Jesus Himself "endorsed" 1560. That is evident in that we have no intention of changing despite the revelational clarity of the hundreds of other translations. Why should 1560 be any different?).

As a publishing feat, it is significant. As a tool for research, it is invaluable. As another example of the profound processes by which Divine Providence vouched safe His Word to posterity, it is nothing short of remarkable.

Buy it if you can...but don't denigrate its place in the grand scheme of things.

To be short on words, yet provide useful content....this is a quality reproduction, and is a diamond among gems in my library.

imagine this: someone laborously and painstakenly translates and handwrites the Bible. Imagine the detail and craftsmanship that went into that task. Imagine further the days and nights and time that passed before its product was finished. Look at the bigger picture and wonder about what the ramifications were for this project (both political and religious). Envision that this work was protected by both a stroke of luck and the blessing of fate to be preserved for several hundred years--every page intact--and delivered into the hands of time and technology to be reproduced via a high grade scanner (and other technological accomplices) so that its beauty could be mass produced and distributed at an economical rate....and so that other fools would have the audacity to rate it with a few stars (as IF they even knew what they were talking about).

you want to read more about how wonderful Clinton was from a syocophant who spends too much time writing about the magnificant people in Clinton's administration. Once he gets away from his pandering, some of the information is interesting. One of his nightmares was actually his for he was considered to far to the left to be approved for head of the CIA. Because of that, he bad mouthed Washington DC which became his 6th. nightmare. The fictionalization of his scenarios are sophomoric to the extent of embarrassment.

6 Nightmares was actually only one or two nightmares. Anthony Lake begins discussing the global dangers facing our nation today, but eventually digresses and gives us his autobiography instead. He also dedicates quite a bit of space towards how Bill Clinton really wasn't as bad as he seemed to be and how we are all victims of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
There were plenty of interesting insider tidbits, but I think an article in TIME might have been more appropriate than dedicating a whole book to Anthony Lake.

Anthony Lake's book outlines six potential threats to our nation's national security. Unfortunately the reality of ambigious warfare (chapter 3) has already reared its ugly head...Anthony Lake has unfortunately made himself into somewhat of a prophet. The other chapters are incredibly pertinent also.

As someone who participated in and helped craft major U.S. foreign policy initiatives and decisions, Lake is able to share anecdotal snipets which really bring his subject into focus. I especially enjoyed the chapters on peacekeeping and Washington politics and the experiences Lake was able to share to illustrate his points.

The only negative aspect of the book is that sometimes he can delve into examples where it seems as if he is more interested in vindicating himself than staying focused on the topic. I truly however feel and it is evident in the book that Lake was able (and desired) to remain non-political while writing the book and when he was the National Security Advisor. As he suggests in the book, national security is one issue in which politics and ideology should have the least influence.

Parts of this book were very interesting, but over all it was way too broad. The author tried to cover too much; there were too many story lines. Alternating story lines every few pages became confusing. Using italics for every remotely Spanish word was ridiculous. The book needed a good editor.

Other readers here have adequately described the narrative and historical aspects of Conforti's novel. Those aren't the problematical aspects of this 780-page tome. The constant irritation owes to something else: absurdly anachronistic description and especially conversation style, coming across in too many instances as if these ancient Mayans were protagonists of LA Law, or perhaps were ancient counterparts of George and Kramer on episodes of Seinfeld. An example: Mac Chaanal, a Mayan speaker of 800 AD, says, "The hunting trip is just the cover story." Another ancient Mayan speaks: "The bean counters outdid themselves on that one." [Cover story?! Bean counters?!]

Conforti's writing is often just clumsy: "The heady scent went right to [his] head." Also, picture this: Conforti has two adult male Mayan priests saying to a young girl, "Don't tell us you can read that, girl. We're almost priests and we can hardly read it ourselves." Is the reader to believe that a young Mayan girl reads at all, let alone better than two men educated sufficiently to be temple priests?! Other Conforti Mayans use modern cliche phrases such as, "the end of life as we know it," and "the power behind the throne." And all of the above language and concept problems occur in just the first few pages of this 780-page novel!

You will pick up lots of interesting Mayan history here, but the US soap-opera dialogue placed in the mouths of ancient Mayans is unsettlingly anachronistic and unintentionally comical if not flat-out ludicrous.

Great epic novel! I can't wait for the second volume.
Colorful and filled with adventures based on historic facts, Acalan gives a realistic view of the evil men can do with knowledge, power, technology and......sexual drive ! A subtle mysogyny however permeates the book. Too bad that Anthony Conforti, despite of his spiritual quest, still has a teenager's look at women : all his main women's characters are young, beautiful and dependent on a man for their success.