This was a bit of a disappointing finale to an otherwise excellent trilogy. The previous book ("One King's Way") and part of this one build towards a climactic battle between Shef's kingdom and the new Holy Roman Empire, but fizzles out towards the end. Harrison's theories on holy relics of the Christian faith is somewhat interesting, but he apparently has some misgivings about Christianity and lets it show through in the story. The ending was a definate disappointment, and I almost get the feeling that Harrison simply got tired of the storyline and just wanted it to end (something which I felt in his last Stainless Steel Rat novel, as well). Overall, I truly loved the trilogy, but this last "chapter" of the story is by far the weakest link.

I loved the first two books in this trilogy (as well as many other books by this author), but there's something about this book that bugs me. While respecting Mr. Harrison's creative license with his characters, I thought this was a conclusion unworthy of the other two books. The characters were mostly well done, as always, but the plot was flawed. The excessive Christ metaphors and intellectual leaps and bounds (especially towards the end) took attention away from the main point of the story-- THERE'S A WAR ON, REMEMBER??? and futhermore it leaves the reader hanging more than it should, since the overly-neat wrap-up at the end is too fake to be realistic. I was left with a sense of "is that all there is?" after reading this. The technical aspects of the book-- catapult artillery and so on-- are both interesting and amusing, and the battle scenes ought to have been more involved. All in all, it was a poor ending to a great story. Mr. Harrison, if you read this, I suggest some sort of post-Shef account of events up north.

I love this trilogy, from the start of book one to the end of book three, the historical aspects are pointed out in a way that fits as part of the story and they don't overthrow the plot, lending the books a very authoritative tone. The Characters are great, (Brand is one of my favorites) and there's plenty of action. What I like best about these books is that Harrison really makes you feel inside the story, the way he handles the characters attitudes towards each other and their surroundings really makes you feel like you're right with them weather it's Anglo-Saxon England, Scandinavia, The Frankish Empire, Muslum Spain or what's left of Rome. As for character development, Harrison has a great way of using the third-person point of view in a way that can convey things unknown to the characters yet at the same time the tone of the narrative is flavored with the particular character's personality, culture and view of their surroundings, helping the reader understand more fully the motives and inhibitions of the people he describes. I read these back in high school and loved them then as much I still do now.

I felt that this book was well worth the time that it took toread. Groden and Livingstone wrote in-depth all of the inaccuracies ofthe Warren's Report and other conflicting evidence that our government states as being the truth. The only negative thing that I can say about this book is that it can be a bit confusing and takes quite a bit of time to read. I am sure that I will be re-reading it again to pick up on parts that never did sink in. Others have put this book down by saying that Groden made all of the evidence fit his "theory" of a conspiracy. A theory is a speculation just like how the Warren's Report is a theory, its not true fact and most of use would agree with that.

Overall, very good book, worth the time to read. Remember, keep an open mind.

"High Treason" is a document written in blood about how government really works. Every American interested in their rights and in our system, should read this book with care. "High Treason" is a magnificent work because it understands the structure of power and how powerful men work. I have not read a more convincing book on the conspiracy to kill JFK. Posner and Livingston present an enormous amount of convincing evidence. I would place this book by Oliver Stone's masterpiece, "JFK." "High Treason" is an important book that I think should be read in schools. Not so much as to educate on the Kennedy assassination, but on the workings of our government and how power really works. I'm glad it has been republished with new information. I was so enfuriated by Gerald Posner's load of shit, "Case Closed." "High Treason" REALLY looks for the truth. And in the end, is disturbing.

This book took me by surprise after reading the 26 volumes of the Warren Report. This book shows you a concise, detailed account of all the evidence ignored by the Warren Commision and the House Select Committee on Assassinations. I highly recommend this book to anybody who believes that JFK's Assassination issue is closed.

This book definitely tries to be too much: A bit of Thriller, some Psychologoy, Philosophy, Literature, etc. And this is unfortunate, as Harrison definitely is a good writer: Porter Wren, Hobbs and Cynthia are good characters and the description of New York is great.

The plot is a bit a mess, but sometimes the narrative is strong enough to cover it up and it has enough drive to keep you going.

If the editor had done a better job and shortened this book by 80 to 100 pages - very often Porter Wren is just rambling on about stuff, nothing to do with the story and not very insightful -, it could have been a slick yuppie thriller!

If it's sitting in your bookcase (as in my case), read it. If not, don't bother to hunt it down.

I have to agree with much of what Mr. Brenner said in his review of this novel. Yes, it does start out very well, and continues to hold interest, but the end sort of peters out, almost as if Mr. Harrison was either rushed or just got bored with what he was writing. The end of a mystery should be the most intense part, in my opinion, and the beginning and middle seemed to hold more intensity than the conclusion.

But, there are a great many things I enjoyed about this book. The "devil may care" attitude of narration was one of them. Porter seems to know he's not a "good" person in others eyes, but it doesn't seem to affect his storytelling. He doesn't apologize to the reader, but is trying to work things out for himself.

I also enjoyed the character of Caroline. Her personality wasn't immediately shown as the typical girl of noir novels who comes into the detective's (in this case journalist's) office with a hat pulled over one eye, wanting him to find out who killed her late husband. She subtley changes as the relationship between her and Porter becomes more familiar. Even in the end, although much is revealed, she remains not quite mysterious, just not understood.

This isn't a bad read, but it is disappointing. I'd like to see Harrison avoid the realm of mystery and perhaps try something more general. The writing is good, even though the story is somewhat lacking.

Colin Harrison is an enigma. He writes some of the best thrillers out there, but he has a real tendency to frustrate me as a reader even while I'm marveling over the brilliance of his work. Harrison is an absolutely spectacular writer, and his gifts are especially well suited to his particular niche: the thriller in which the ordinary man finds himself in dangerous and threatening situations. One of the things I like about Harrison's thrillers (with the exception of his most recent and most disappointing book, "Afterburn,") is that his heroes tend to find themselves dragged down into desperate struggles because of their own human frailty than because of some madman terrorist bent on revenge or a serial killer in the process of "becoming."

In "Manhattan Nocturne," the protagonist, struggling under the prodigious name Porter Wren, is a newspaper columnist who falls for a seductive beauty, who wants his help in recovering a lost videotape made by her dead film director husband. Meanwhile, a powerful media magnate wants the same tape, and threatens to expose Wren if he doesn't find the tape for his (the magnate's) purposes. The plot leans a bit toward the needlessly rococo at times, and I felt the ending piled it on a bit too thick, but it still gripping, page-turning, and utterly pleasurable to read.

This is a novel with tension, drama, interesting and three-dimensional characters, and genuine energy. But like Harrison's inexplicably out-of-print masterpiece "Bodies Electric" (very possibly the best thriller I've ever read), "Manhattan Nocturne" gets bogged down a bit under the weight of the author's detailed sexual ruminations. I am not a prude, but I find myself thinking "enough already" pretty quickly. However, I will say in defense of these protracted sex scenes that they are relevant to the plot and to the nature of his protagonist(s). Harrison seems genuinely interested in how identity is linked to sexuality, a worthwhile subject, and because his protagonists tend to fall down their slippery slopes owning to their sexual desire short-circuiting their common sense, the pornographic fantasias always come across as guiltily relevant. Do we need to know the details of every position Harrison's mind can conjure? Probably not. From an over-heard bit of conversation in one of the first scenes, we get the sense that this is a novel fueled by the fear of impotence (indeed, the protagonist confesses, at one point, that a familial history of prostate problems leaves him feeling that his sexual days are always numbered), so we must remember at all times that this is a pre-Viagra thriller.

One of the other reviewers complains that Harrison goes on and on about things that have nothing to do with the plot, but Harrison's writing is strong enough that I'd read a novel he wrote about taking out the garbage. His dissertations on moral issues, poverty, New York culture, sexuality, etc. are all at the heart of what makes Harrison a superior writer. "Manhattan Nocturne" is not a flawless novel, but it is without doubt a superior novel and a must-read for anyone who expects more from their thrillers than the paper-thin characters, the by-the-numbers plotting and the clunky writing that we find scattered all over the best-seller lists.

Harrison Livingstone is one of the assassination investigators who only write books to stabilize his cash flow. His new work High Treason 2, does not stay on the track and is a dead end. I will not recommend this book to anyone...Instead buy HIS FORMER co-author Robert Groden's book THE KILLING OF A PRESIDENT. ...

Harrison Edward Livingston is certainly right in saying that a conspiracy killed John F. Kennedy. There is too much evidence that proves something strange and suspicious was going on in Dallas on November 22, 1963 and in Washington. His book, "High Treason 2," a follow-up to the bestseller "High Treason" which Livingston wrote in collaboration with renowned JFK assassination expert Robert Groden, is both an informative, eye-opening investigative work and a slippery search for facts and answers. The areas dealing with the medical evidence are meticulous and very important with it's testimonies and detailed accounts of Kennedy's wounds and the evidence that the shot that killed him came from the front. There is a good deal of evidence that Martin Luthor King Jr.'s assassination was also plotted and Livingston provides some interesting insights into the FBI's harrassment of King at the hands of J.Edgar Hoover. He also makes you wonder about the facts behind the assassination of Robert Kennedy and the attempt on George Wallace. However, Livingston's fault is that he writes with a saintly-look at Kennedy and gets too paranoid at times. I can buy that King, Kennedy and Wallace were victims of shady doings, but to also say the attempts on Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan were results of conspiracies is a little too out there. Also the notion that even the Zapruder film is fake evidence makes for too much paranoia. But what shows Livingston to be more of a radical than just an investigator is his attack on Oliver Stone and "JFK," claiming the movie is damaging to researchers when in fact, it aided in the release of more documents and many researchers, including Robert Groden (who even consulted on Stone's film) have called it a brilliant collage of assassination research material gathered by those trying to prove a conspiracy. Livingston also goes on to attack Jim Garrison, who in my opinion, is a social hero for speaking out and even pushed for the Zapruder film to be shown in colleges so young people would start asking questions. It is easier in this paranoia-driven age, when events like Watergate, Iran Contra and others have made our trust in the government dissimate, for Livingston to speak his ideas and conclusions. Garrison was one of the first to speak out publicly in a time when government conspiracy was still seen as an impossibility by a lot of ordinairy Americans and the government had an easier time shutting people up. He also denounces L.Flether Prouty and his claims eventhough Prouty worked in the intelligence community and military industrial complex for many years, Livingston hasn't. While he is an investigator, Prouty actually lived it. That said, "High Treason 2" in the end is well-written, with some good information and it sure works better than Gerald Posner's "Case Closed," a fascist piece of lies. Livingston has uncovered a lot of valuable things, but once in a while, he tries to put too much icing on the cake, or case.

This 1992 book is very readable and contains many interesting essays that may educate you. Chapter 1 tells how HEL remembers the 1950s. The election of JFK made a difference due to the people; the times they were a-changing. Pages 43-4 tells of the "bureaucratic phenomenon" but doesn't ask if any clique or secret society is responsible. Chapter 2 tells of JFK's medical history. He quotes the curious comments of Dr. Humes on the adrenal glands (pp. 55-6). There would be no reason for covering up any Addison's disease. HEL suggests the use of cortisone by JFK affected his personality: euphoria, strength, endurance, warmth, and libido (p.59).

Chapter 3 tells certain findings are conclusive: the back of the head is missing (p.71). If the photographs and X-rays don't show this, they are forgeries. Or from another body. HEL derides the theory that "the Mob killed Kennedy" on the grounds that they couldn't do a cover-up. But their controllers could! Chapter 5 discusses the events at Bethesda. The face in some of the autopsy photographs does not look like JFK, but of a younger man (p.135). Chapter 6 discusses the conflicts of the autopsy. This is one of the most important chapters in the book!

Chapter 14 tells of the discussion for a 1991 documentary. "The large hole in the back of the head was an exit wound" (p.287). These witnesses insisted there was not entry wound in the back of the head (p.293). Chapter 16 quotes the House Committee report that the authenticity of the photographs was never established (p. 314-6). Chapter 19 discusses some other major political killings following the assassination of JFK. HEL notes that if George Wallace ran for President he would have taken enough votes from Nixon so McGovern would have won (p.403). Friends of this lone gunman soon died or disappeared (p.407). More potential witnesses were bumped off when the House Assassination Committee started in 1977 (p.414). Page 418 summarizes the bottom line of American political history.

Chapter 20 summarizes the changes in America since the Nixon and Reagan reigns (p.422); it doesn't cover the 1990s. Page 458 claims the Schoolbook Depository rifle was not fired that day (from negative evidence)! Chapter 24 discusses JFK's "intent to withdraw from Vietnam", while the military sought to send in combat troops. That happened with the new President. Vietnam is important since it borders the oil-rich South China Sea; and Big Oil is the most powerful special interest in the country.

Chapter 25 tells of Jim Garrison's investigation. "A secret investigation ... pointed in the direction of Hoffa, Marcello, some Texas oilmen, and a few involved with the CIA in the New Orleans and Dallas area" (p.511). But Garrison couldn't get a conviction of anyone. David Ferrie, and others, soon died (p.513). Pages 518-9 discuss the justice system: "too often a case can be rigged". Jim Garrison was the first official to question the Warren Report in the 1960s. Oliver Stones's "JFK" was based on Garrison's book; he make a popular film about a Presidential assassination - a Hollywood first! It did renew a wider interest in the books on this case.

Chapter 28 gives HEL's ideas of "What Really Happened", and summarizes this case. Watergate and Nixon's removal were caused by Nixon's use of political murders. Page 571 imagines an "ice bullet" that would disappear; isn't it more likely that a plastic bullet would not show up on X-rays? Pages 573-7 gives HEL's ideas on how the real government works: politicians are like actors on a stage, spouting the lines written by the invisible government. He says "our elections are rigged from the
start". And that a vast amount of money was made by those who sold short on the morning of 11/22/1963 due to advance information. The Warren Commission and the Administration were from the high-level banking and financial interests that control our nation.

I don't know how this book got linked to Dean Koontz, but it is NOT written by him. I ordered it, and eventually returned it because there is absolutely no reason to suspect that he had anything to do with it. If you are trying to be a Dean Koontz completist, save the money you would have errantly spent on this and buy one of HIS books. On the other hand, if you'd like to know how to steam open your neighbor's mail, then this book is for you!

Time was when you could ask three questions of science/nature writing: Is it important? Does it matter? Would anything change if the reverse conclusions were reached? The answer had better be "yes" to at least one question. Of course, the answers to those questions when asked about A Rum Affair are "No," "No," and "No.'
One thing was determined, however, and that was that a book can be written about anything---the spare change in your pocket, the color of dirt, whatever. It seems curiously reversed that I paid money to read this book when someone should have paid me a hefty sum to read it. Just awful.

I am really quite puzzled as to just why the author wrote this book. By his own admission Sabbagh isn't a scientist, and by his writing it is apparent that he doesn't understand Botany, Botanists or Biogeography. In spite of this he has chosen to write about all three. The story is a rather sad little affair which could be interpreted in a number of ways. In one a botanist is suspected of fraud by members of the scientific establishment, the case is investigated, the suspect records are quietly dropped from publication, and everyone eventually retires and dies. It is clear that Sabbagh, for reasons that escape me, would rather that there had been a public trial, with any guilty parties being tarred, feathered & ridden on a rail. Since this DIDN'T happen when anyone involved was alive, Sabbagh sets out to do it to the dead. Starting by gaining access to a manuscript whose author had specifically requested should remain sealed (there are some weird aspects of class struggle throughout this book by the way, Sabbagh boasts that since he is "a Kingsman" -a graduate of King's College Cambridge- the widow of his hero is confident that the ms will be "in safe hands" -false hope as it turns out.) Sabbagh sets out to develop a case against his villain, John Harrison. This "case" is based in part on excerpts from the sealed manuscript by the book's hero, John Raven, in part on wild speculation, and in large part on every bit of gossip, hearsay and innuendo that Sabbagh seems to have dug up. It is clear from the outset that there were people -especially particularly well-connected people in the British scientific aristocracy- who didn't like John Harrison. It also seems likely that Harrison wasn't particularly likable in general. Whether this dislike could have engendered the sort of plot that Sabbagh suggests seems somewhat far-fetched, and is based here on second and third hand gossip & sometimes ludicrous "reading between the lines" of selected letters. While there is clearly the POSSIBILITY of fraud in the behaviour of "villain" Harrison, what also emerges is that both the "hero" John Raven and the author are what I was raised to call "cads". By Sabbagh's own account Raven gets access to Harrison's study sites on false pretexts, in spite of repeated sensible warnings that the study area is remote & inhospitable Raven shows up without food or camping supplies -and manages to burn down his tent! (Sabbagh has previously suggested that Harrison is being obnoxious by telling Raven to bring supplies, but he automatically forgives his hero when he fails to follow either courtesy or caution). Raven then spends less than three days on an island where the Villain has been working for many field seasons, decides that some specimens of rare plants have been literally "planted" and then leaves to write a report which goes nowhere. Another interpretation of the whole affair is that Harrison was hounded by people who didn't like him, investigated by a talented amateur (Raven may have been a cad, but he was certainly talented) who failed to turn up much serious evidence of fraud (Raven mis-identifies a key species of plant in the course of his investigation). Faced with at best a verdict of "not proven" the establishment does the sensible thing and drops the whole matter. There it would (and should) have remained except for the energies of Mr. Sabbagh. We read this sort of book for the same reason we slow down at car-wrecks or scan the front pages of the tabloids. This is a sick entertainment that ennobles nobody.

The merest possibility that a geographic botanist would actually falsify a discovery and violate the sanctity of the British scientific aristocracy is not only enough excitement for one book, but plenty for a sensational story. However, you might have to be an unabashed fan of all things Anglo like myself; also perhaps a talented amateur horticulturist who thrills to the details of the growing conditions necessary for the disputed "discoveries" of J. Heslop Harrison (the names of the characters alone make this a fun read). Sabbagh navigates the touchy territory of real peoples' reputations with great subtlety and renders a fascinating picture of the British universities, their scientists and personalities. Of course there is no silly confrontation scene! All the drama is handled with typical British restraint, which makes the book and this true story all the more enthralling for the right type of reader.

The book's description on the back cover doesn't even match the content nor does the CD-ROM. It looks and reads like a thrown together blob of stuff ... can someone tell me where to find the durn spreadsheet widget .. its mentioned on the back cover but not in the index, the table of contents nor on the CD-ROM....

I don't recommend purchase lightly. I've been wearing out its pages for two weeks now, with occasional bouts of furrowed brows and impatient snorting. I've come, though, to a conclusion in which I'm confident: if you're a Tcl user, you should invest in *Tcl/Tk Tools*.

Why? Because you'll use it, and use it well. Almost everyone involved in Tcl has questions (so how do I really compile a Tcl script? How much does it take to do drag-and-drop and tool tips? Are the RDBMS extensions current with vendor features? ...) answered here. Simplify your life by putting these 650+ pages on your shelf.

What is *Tcl/Tk Tools*? It's a collection of descriptions of different popular extensions to Tcl and Tk. While lead author Harrison gives the impression they're written by "the extension authors themselves", there are a few exceptions to this pattern. The book is not written as a tutorial or introduction to Tcl, sagely pointing to John Ousterhout and Brent Welch's books for that role (although I've been thinking of experimenting with putting *Tcl/Tk Tools* in the hands of novices, to see what would happen. I suspect they'd survive in good shape).

*Tcl/Tk Tools* isn't exhaustive. It doesn't include several of my favorite extensions, including Scotty, NeoWebScript, stooop, tclMsql, the PlusPatches, ... It doesn't matter. If you care about only *one* of the extensions described here, you'll do well to have your own copy.

Harrison and his co-authors do a good job of hitting the target of telling "Here's the philosophy behind this package, and here are some examples of how to use it effectively" that he lays out in the Preface. While it's easy to move from one chapter to another, it's not at the expense of the authors and their personalities. D. Richard Hipp's thoughtful precision and De Clarke's care in engineering effective solutions come through, as do the assurance and lucidity those in the Tcl community expect of Don Libes. Less successful is the forward look that Harrison intended, toward "the plans the extension authors had for future enhancements and extensions." I assume this was in part a casualty of the realities of the publishing cycle; certainly many of the chapters appear to have been finished before the appearance a year ago of 7.6's betas.

Two unglamorous aspects of the book multiply its value: the index is sound (that's saying a lot for me; I have high standards in indexing), and Harrison's Chapter 17 on what he calls "Configuration Management" lays out much valuable wisdom that newcomers need to learn. Reading the latter is painful: it has all the important, tedious subjects ("Combining Extensions ...", command-line munging, ...) one wants--but without mention of Win* or loadable libraries! These frailties are inevitable when broadcasting on dead trees, of course. What's disappointing is that *Tcl/Tk Tools* doesn't go farther in joining the Internet Age: although a two-page Appendix lauds news:comp.lang.tcl and lists the FAQs and nine URLs (some of which have already moved, of course), and individual authors take it on themselves to provide appropriate references,
* it's not apparent that there is any page where Harrison and/or O'Reilly maintain errata, updates, new examples, funny animal GIFs, or any of the other resources readers might be expected to exploit--I couldn't find one at the URL the Preface gave, nor elsewhere at www.ora.com;
* some authors supply no e-mail addresses;
* some authors give references ("look in the archives") that will be inscrutable for those not already in the know; and
* there is wide variation in the quality of information authors give about extension prospects, bug lists (a particular sore point with me), mailing lists, and so on.
Understand, please, that I'm not labeling these moral faults; as on every project, the good engineering comes in deciding where to make the cuts, and what definite values to deliver. I personally look forward to seeing books that build a more dynamic relationship with online sources, and am simply noting that *Tcl/Tk Tools* doesn't achieve that standard.

The quality of production is high, higher even than the elevated expectations I have of O'Reilly. Typos, mistakes in word choice, and code errors seem to sum to around zero to five per chapter. Screen shots are judicious and illuminating, rather than gratuitously space-filling. The CD-ROM (with binaries for indeterminate but predictable releases of Solaris and Linux) does the little I asked of it.

Summary: whether you're a full-time Tcl-er or a greenhorn, you'll profit from having *Tcl/Tk Tools* at hand. Whenever you're in a pinch, there's a fair chance the Index and/or Table of Contents will quickly lead you to a useful datum. During more contemplative moments, you'll want to read the chapters in a connected fashion, and the accuracy and insight of the authors will make you glad that you do.

This was the first book I read on Tcl/TK (a mistake), but it was nonetheless helpful. I do refer it often. I particularly found the introduction to Expect useful.

Is this a tome? I was expecting deep subject coverage. What we have instead is a reproduction of the API docs. Does that a tome make? I think not. What's missing? Complex examples. Real-world examples (who creates windows with API calls when we have TForm?). Undocumented insights behind the APIs -- things you can't find in MSDN or the Platform SDK. More than anything, this book highlights the bloody lack of good Delphi books. This one is definitely a pass.

I don't know many Delphi developers who can't at least read VB code. Obviously, the authors of this book can, because the examples are eerily similar to the VB Win32 examples in MSDN. So much so that I rather doubt a competent Delphi developer who has MSDN would really get much value from this book. If you can read VB, you don't need this book. I was expecting unique insights into the way that Delphi implements the API, particularly the graphics API, but instead got a lame VB-to-Pascal translation. Can't recommend this book.

Couldn't help but notice the obvious similarities between this book and the examples in MSDN and the Platform SDK. If you have either of these, I don't know why you'd need this book. I bought it thinking I'd get expert advice and insights. All it really is is a rehash of what's publicly available from MS anyway.

Dear Amazon.Com,
I wrote the one star book review for this book which is currently on file. The review is incorrect and should be deleted or modified. I ordered "A Short History of Western Civilization (paperback), but received "A Short History History of Western Civilization since 1600 (paperback)". I wrote the review and then discovered that I had the wrong book. I have returned the book for a refund and reordered the hardback book of the same title. You might want to note that the paperback version is a Study Guide and not a History Book. If you wish you can move the review to the correct book or delete the entry. Thank you

A Short History of Western Civilization (paperback) is a study guide and not a history book. It's great if a study guide, complete with questions, is what you are seeking. The volume was written by Joyce E. Salisbury, not Richard Sullivan as listed in the web site and published in 1994, not 1993. It's Volume Two: since the year 1600, and not a complete guide to the hardback book. The guide is about 128 pages and includes some maps. I give it one star because a study guide is not what I'm seeking.

This book traces the history of the western world, from ancient Egypt up to the fall of the Berlin wall.

The book is divided into periods of history, then further subdivided into sections about that period. You can 'dip-in' to a section easily, I find myself picking the book up for a light spot of reading with a cup of tea. I also use this book heavily in my Classics course - so it has a multitude of uses.

Overall, a thorough, unbiased, but easy to read account of western civilization. If you live in the western world, and are wondering where you came from or why things are the way they are, then get this book!