Was not a good source of entertainment or insight into Spanish culture. The best stories were mildly amusing at best and after a while I developed a strong dislike for the narrator. This book is still available in England, don't waste your time or money buying it.

Sometimes I wonder if the professional review organizations give every book such great review? I had some high hopes for this book as I have read some of his non-fiction work. I came away from the reading a bit disappointed. The story was inventive, but the cast of characters were a little to stereotypical and not very well developed. As the book unfolds the story that interested me from the dust jacket started to get a little unbelievable with his writing, I just kept saying "No Way". With the combination of the lackluster characters and the increasingly unbelievable story I lost interest at the end of the book. I simply finished it becuase I had put the time into it. I would stick to this authors non-fiction works

I ordered this book for my son as he had a book report due on an historical biography. My son is a very reluctant reader and as it was rather lengthy, I offered to read some pages and he could read some pages aloud to me. History is a fascinating subject, but Barbara Ford has reduced Paul Revere's life and contribution to so tedious an excercise, I couldn't even stay interested. The book has too many characters and it is difficult to remember who they are and what they did. Ford uses terms such as "whig" and "tories" and "regulars", without much explanation as to what those terms mean. In chapter six, Ford says, "As Revere helped carry John Hancock's trunk away from the tavern, he heard the first shot of the American Revolution". She doesn't indicate here why Revere secured John Hancock's trunk, what was in the trunk, or why that was important. She does go on to say that the trunk survived and is currently on display at the Worcester Historical Museum in Massachusettes. So? What was in the trunk? There is no definitive timeline, except in the chronology at the end of the book. There is no sense of the drama of being a country at war. The characters have no personalities. The battles have no interest. The book makes no effort to engage the young reader at any level.

This is the second Zubro mystery I have read, and it was not near as good as the first one, "Another Dead Teenager." However, I am not deterred from reading all of his work, and I will continue to purchase the new ones as they are published.

What I criticized in "Another Dead Teenager" I found to be much worse in "Political Poison," and that is Zubro's continually interjecting explanations for a character's actions or of police procedure. It was a moderate bother in the other book, but in "Political Poison" it is a major impediment to enjoying the book. The editing was slipshod as well, with many typos and other errors in the text. Zubro apparently has improved at telling his stories by letting the characters reveal what is going on, rather than stepping into and stopping the flow to provide an explanation.

Most mystery readers are savvy enough to know how things work, and don't need constant reminders on why police do the things they do.

If you haven't read any of Zubro's work before, don't start with this one. He is a much better mystery writer than what this novel exemplifies.

Clinton Arnold is associate professor of the NT at the Talbot School of Theology at Biola University in California, which is a fairly conservative Protestant institution. In his preface Mr Arnold comments that the Western church has failed to take seriously "the involvement of a figure named Satan and his powers of darkness" and cites the needs of his Asian, African and East European students. As such it is also conceived as an 'answer' to the modernist approach found in Walter Wink's 'Powers' books (i.e. 'Society is the devil').

Personally my main interest was in the first 5 chapters which purport to deal with "First Century Belief", but even here it soon became obvious that Arnold is only interested in cherry-picking from 1st Century evidence that agrees with his own beliefs in literal supernatural evil.

One particularly crass example of this is on p.61 (and again p.98) where he tries to press Isaiah's Lucifer into service as evidence for Satan's fall. This in itself might be forgiveable, but when he then goes on to claim that "this connection was certainly how early Jewish interpreters understood this passage" he passes the limit between being selective with the evidence and downright falsification. Always beware of commentators who say "certainly" and don't give any footnoted evidence. Which early Jewish interpreters saw Satan in Isaiah 14:14? Not Isaiah (14:16). Nor Josephus, nor Philo, not even the demon-packed Dead Sea Scrolls, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Not Hillel or the early Rabbis. Not Peter who used the same Greek name for Jesus 'Morning Star'. Not the generations of Christians who following the Vulgate version of 1Peter named their children Lucifer. In fact no one, neither Jewish nor Christian, until Tertullian and Origen. And it is Tertullian and Origen who Arnold is following here - not "early Jewish interpreters".

So, in sum, this is a pretty standard book on evil angels, not much different from any others on the 'Spiritual Warfare' shelf at your local Christian bookstore. Which is fine. But Christian writers should resist the temptation to rewrite the Jewish evidence to fit their own variant of a belief in fallen angels.

"The Predatory Society" is quite entertaining. Blumberg clearly wants to get everyone mad about Capitalism, but he is so silly about doing it that he actually does the reverse. Most of the book centers on the diffuse nature of knowledge in society. Given extreme specialization and the costs of monitoring people that you trade with, there are always opportunities for people to cheat each other. Of course, Blumberg does not quite see things that way. To him, the profit motive makes people corrupt and under socialism people are nice to each other. Bumberg avoids the more dogmatic assertions that simple-minded Marxists make about overthrowing Capitalism, but he is still absurdly naïve about government. To him, advertising, ala Capitalism, has corrupted American Politics (as if American Politics was once pure as the wind-driven snow). Also, in Communist China Socialism breeds a wonderful sense of community- not the repression, mass murder and starvation that it is known for. All we need to do is to elect "progressive" politicians and trust them. Blumberg acknowledges that businesses have some incentive to be honest- to maintain their reputations. But he discounts this factor without providing any real statistical evidence to support this. Blumberg also acknowledges the productive nature of Capitalism, but he fails to acknowledge the extreme waste, fraud, and abuse in the public sector. Blumberg wants us all to patronize consumer cooperatives, but fails to recognize that the same problems with monitoring the operation of these concerns exist with these organizations as well. Workers at coops might not lie to customers as much, but they can slack of, steal, and cheat in other ways. The absence of a profit motive makes these problems worse than under for profit enterprise. Blumberg blames a lot on Capitalism. Recessions and the Depression are all the fault of Capitalism- the Federal Reserve is completely innocent in these matters despite its position in financial markets. Capitalism also alienates us from our true moral selves. The fact of the matter is that Capitalism is imperfect, but so is government. The same informational asymmetries that lead to fraud and waste in markets lead to (arguably greater) fraud and waste in government- at least I see the stores I shop at, who knows what those bureaucrats in DC do with my money. In short, Blumberg is an ideologue. He hates markets and loves government. He harps on market imperfections, some large, others small, a few imaginary, to try to justify the intrusive regulatory/welfare state that he worships. He trivializes government imperfections- that gave us disasters like Tuskegee, Vietnam, WWI, Japanese-American interment camps, Social Security (a Ponzi Scheme like no other) the Philippine-American War, Prohibition (Alcohol then, and MJ now), The Depression (courtesy of the Fed), and our vast array of Pork Barrel spending programs. But, to an ideologue like Blumberg there is no reason to bring up all the little problems with government that have come along through the years- what he needs to do is to demagogue issues of consumer fraud. Fortunately, Blumberg is so brazen in his biases that it is obvious that he is not a serious or thoughtful critic of markets. His book is an interesting and informative read- one that will make many consumers more alert to some of the tricks and gimmicks that await us all in markets. However, his desire for a more civil and communitarian society through big government is absurd. Read his book to hone your shopping skills, but for social theory and philosophy try reading F.A. Hayek, L. Mises, or Ayn Rand.

In "The Problem with Paul," Christian author Brian J. Dodd attempts to "rehabilitate" the image of Paul, the apostle who authored many of the letters of the New Testament. Dodd's book is an uneasy blend of "politically correct" posturing and neo-conservative rigidity. Ultimately, Dodd seems to defend an approach to biblical interpretation which allows the believer to continue to wallow in convenient prejudices.

Throughout history, the New Testament writings attributed to Paul have been abundant sources of "proof-texts"--that is, texts used to justify one's position--by racists, anti-Semites, sexists, anti-gay bigots, and other supporters of destructive ideologies. (Jim Hill and Rand Cheadle have documented some of the "Pauline problem" in their book "The Bible Tells Me So: Uses and Abuses of Holy Scripture.") Dodd addresses some of these controversies and tries to re-paint Paul as a misunderstood guy with some genuinely forward-thinking ideas.

But I find Dodd's approach to be contradictory and unconvincing. He asserts, for example, that Christians need not follow Paul's restrictions regarding female headgear (1 Cor. 11:5-6) and female leadership in church (1 Tim. 2:11-15), and accuses Christians who take these verses literally of an "interpretive naivete" which Dodd deems "unhelpful." But then he turns around and asserts that Christians must adhere to an anti-gay interpretation of other Pauline passages. Although he performs ample verbal gymnastics in order to justify his positions, it seems to me that Dodd is picking and choosing which verses he wants to read "literally," and which he wants to write off as culturally bound. And woe to anyone who disagrees with Dodd's personal likes and dislikes; in his view, they are obviously wrong!

Particularly ridiculous is his chapter about Paul's comments on the institution of slavery. A large part of his argument seems to boil down to the equation that ancient Greco-Roman slavery was good, and American slavery was bad. Does it follow that, as long as Christians follow the allegedly benevolent ancient model, it is perfectly all right for them to hold their fellow humans as slaves?

Some of the ground covered by Dodd is dealt with in a much more thoughtful and morally consistent manner by Peter J. Gomes in "The Good Book: Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart." While Dodd has some interesting ideas, and is clearly a skilled writer, "The Problem with Paul" as a whole is riddled with problems.

This would be a great book for someone who has a heavy background in police training and education. Unfortunately, this type of person would already be "thinking like a cop". The "civilian" would do better with "Gravest Extreme" by Mas Ayoob, "Effective Defense" by Gila May-Hayes, or any number of other texts that keep the information simple and interesting.

When one goes about writing a book for the public that alleges it will help them "think like a cop", he must remember that most people are not interested in a submersion course of US Marine or police academy-style concepts. While the concepts presented here seem relatively sound, most people who are not used to "living by acronym" will quickly abandon this book.

The Introduction reviews the movie "The Wild Ones," gives an overview of violent crime in society, reiterates 11 headlines involving recent violence, talks about the "puncture vine" problem in California, introduces a Three Event Formula (S/U/A), gives a nifty "Enemy Schematic", goes through three more acronyms (FAP, PPVE, CTT, flashes a box diagram at us and then reviews the SUA Formula. All this, briefly encapsulated in a mere 14 pages!

Not worth the cost!

The RAID book 6th edition, a work by the RAID Advisory Board, is a bland, technical description of RAID technology. The explanations of topics are rather theoretical and/or academic in nature as opposed to books that explain things by relating them to their application(s) in the real world. To make things worse, the text is poorly proofread--errors in spelling and formatting make the reading more painful.

The one bright point about the book is that it is written and supported by the RAID Advisory Board, so the information is coming from a body of experts on the subject. This book is not for beginners in RAID but may be appropriate for advanced users and as a reference book.

Sixteen-year-old Olivia leaves her Berkley home for rural New Hampshire to give her father, a man she has never known, a chance to make amends. One year later she returns to the home she inherited from her father upon his untimely death to make a symbolic journey on bicycle, following the path her father had annually taken. In this act she proves that she is worthy of inheriting his legacy, and of being his daughter. This realistic fictional account about the relationship between a father and a daughter takes place in the modern day. Apporoved for ages 12+ and appropriate for a study on relationships. Not much action and rather slow-moving.