William Shirer's book, Berlin Diary, is an excellent insight into the rise of Naziism before the Second World War. He accurately predicts much of what was going to happen from the fall of western Europe; the Allies kowtowing to Hitler prior to the war; the machinations of the Nazi machine. The Allies should have used William Shirer as the next Nostradamus - he was that good. Nevertheless, I just read the 1940 1st edition of Berlin Diary and he certainly gives the reader a "you are there" feeling. I've read lots of WW2 German history and I was quite surprised to read how accurate his predictions were. Well worth reading.

There was a previous reader review of "Berlin Diary" on this site. It gave it a 3 on a scale of 10. I could not disagree more strongly. This is probably the most fasinating book I've ever read. I was sad when it ended. The previous reviewer criticized William Shirer as hardly being objective in the manner required of a journalist. Keep in mind you are reading a diary. A personal account of the beginning of our century's most horrific period. It was written by a man who was the right person in the right place at the right time. Berlin, Munich, Paris and Compiegne. It is the observations of someone witnessing peace slipping away because of driving tyranny (German) and bungling diplomacy (The Allies - where was the U.S.?) If I were teaching a class on WWII, "Berlin Diary" would be the text. Not only does it give us insights into a wide array of subplots to the war but it is the most readable bit of history ever written. I stand by that statement. Read the book.

If you haven't yet read Herr Schirer's all time classic "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", or if you just completed it, this is the greatest companion book. Heck - even if you don't intend to read "The Rise and Fall" - read it anyway. It gives such great insight into the mind of one of the greatest correspondents of the modern era and the great historians of the Third Reich. It also helps you to see the war from the side of the German people - after all, they did have to deal with Hitler - and his legacy the longest. As you will see, this is Shirer's personal diary, in which he speaks lovingly about his wife and newborn and worries about their safety in Switzerland. He deals with his trips to the front and contacts in the foreign ministry. Extremely well written - and a great reference during the long haul of "The Rise and Fall" (Personally, I'm still pushing through "The Rise and Fall" after a year and a half - and yet it's one of the greatest books I've read) Come on! Buy it! You'll thank me! It's an investment you won't regret.

This is a review of Shadow of the Empire which is available as a hard cover book of 340 (ISBN 0553574132) pages, a comic (isbn 1569711836), a novelization of 176 pages (isbn 044013036) and audio cassette (isbn 0553100890). This story tales places between ESB and ROTJ. I always felt it was one of the more important stories of the Expanded Universe given that Xizor became an action figure as did Dash Render and his ship (Outrider). The whole gang is in this one even Han, though is encased in carbonite. We get Vader, the emperor, Fett, Guri, Boosk, 4-Lom, Jabba, Zuckuss and Wedge along with the regular gang of heroes.

Apparently Dark horse did have available any pictures of Lando or Leia because the artists did a lousy job of drawing them. Most of the time Luke was OK, but sometimes he looked like Jessica Lynch. They did do a great job drawing Fett, Vader and dash however.

Everyone is searching for Han, but he has not be taken directly to Jabba. Xizor has risen to lead Black Sun which has thrived since Darth Maul wiped out the old leadership. His newest ambition is to replace Vader as #2 in the empire. Xizor orders Luke killed knowing that Vader wants him alive. Then Xizor captured Leia.

This is one of my favorite of all the EU stories. Steve Perry has created a new and exciting Journey. The novel is 4 stars and the comic is 3.5 stars, rounded up to 4. Considering that Dark horse released this in 1997 before some of their awesome new production techniques, this is a very well done comic. The abridged audio cassette is good quality, but at on 2 ½ hours to much is cut.

This book deals with all that happens between "Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi." One of the main charactures is Prince Xixor. He seems to be another of the Emperor's cronies. Like Darth Vader. Han Solo is frozen in carbonite. Leia and Luke are trying to find him and bring him back to "the land of the living." Anyone who enjoys watching the movies and reading the books should read this book without delay.

All right, Star Wars fans! You waited for the story of what REALLY happened between the Movies (Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, and Star Wars: Return of the Jedi) and now you got it! Wondering "How did Luke all of a sudden become a Jedi Knight in Return of the Jedi?"? Or maybe "When did the second Death Star start?"? Well, here it is! And if you liked the game... You'll LOVE the book! Han Solo is frozen in Carbonite... Luke Skywalker is becoming a Jedi... And the Empire has the alliance in their grasp! What will happen? The suspense is endless. The battles in this book go into so much detail, you'd swear you were actually there! Pick it up... YOU WON'T PUT IT DOWN! The best Star Wars book to date! Experience Shadows of the Empire!

Alan Sears and Craig Osten, of the Scottsdale-based Alliance Defense Fund, expose the homosexual agenda and its fight for "gay" rights for what it is - an unrestrained, no-holds-barred attack on the family and religious freedom. Using quotes from radical homosexual leaders as well as documented examples of legal battles, entertainment industry complicity and the support of the public schools, this exposé outlines in detail not only how much progress has been made to date in accomplishing the homosexual agenda, but also the grave implications of further progress.
This book is not, however, about "bashing" homosexuals. Sears and Osten make it clear from the beginning that the God of the Bible loves all of us, that we are all sinners, and all are undeserving of His grace and mercy. Homosexuality, like any other sin, can be forgiven through the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. But the Bible does call on Christians to speak the truth in love. In fact, staying silent on the destructive consequences of living a sinful lifestyle - no matter what the sin involved - is not a loving act, and is contrary to the Christian call to be "salt and light." The authors also make it clear that there is hope, and through God's intervention, many have already escaped from the destructive grip of homosexual behavior.
Christianity, however, is a primary target of homosexual intolerance. In Canada, where even more progress has been made towards achieving the homosexual agenda, individuals can be forced to pay damages to homosexuals who are offended by "hate speech." ...This book makes it clear that we must stand together and fight before it is too late. It is mandatory reading for anyone who is concerned about the latest front in the battle for our culture.

Alan Sears and Craig Osten, of the Scottsdale-based Alliance Defense Fund, expose the homosexual agenda and its fight for "gay" rights for what it is - an unrestrained, no-holds-barred attack on the family and religious freedom. Using quotes from radical homosexual leaders as well as documented examples of legal battles, entertainment industry complicity and the support of the public schools, this exposé outlines in detail not only how much progress has been made to date in accomplishing the homosexual agenda, but also the grave implications of further progress.
This book is not, however, about "bashing" homosexuals. Sears and Osten make it clear from the beginning that the God of the Bible loves all of us, that we are all sinners, and all are undeserving of His grace and mercy. Homosexuality, like any other sin, can be forgiven through the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. But the Bible does call on Christians to speak the truth in love. In fact, staying silent on the destructive consequences of living a sinful lifestyle - no matter what the sin involved - is not a loving act, and is contrary to the Christian call to be "salt and light." The authors also make it clear that there is hope, and through God's intervention, many have already escaped from the destructive grip of homosexual behavior.
Christianity, however, is a primary target of homosexual intolerance. In Canada, where even more progress has been made towards achieving the homosexual agenda, individuals can be forced to pay damages to homosexuals who are offended by "hate speech." A Christian man in Saskatchewan was forced to pay $1500 to three homosexuals after placing scriptural references in a newspaper ad during a local "gay pride week." Hate speech legislation in the United States has exactly the same implications for religious freedom here. Recent legislation in California may force churches and Christian businesses to hire transsexuals or homosexuals by force of law. This book makes it clear that we must stand together and fight before it is too late. It is mandatory reading for anyone who is concerned about the latest front in the battle for our culture.

This is an excellent book. It reveals in telling and highly persuasive detail how people who engage in homosexual behavior are NOT, by any means, a poor, persecuted "minority" who need special rights and legal protections. Rather, as Sears and Osten meticulously document with hundres of footnotes, "gays" comprise a wealthy special interest group that wields enormous and dangerous power in every institution that matters in America--politics, entertainment, government, religion and the academy. Sears and Osten make the irrefutable case that radical homosexual activists, while preaching "tolerance," are themselves extraordinarily intolerant toward those who disagree with them. These activists are a serious threat to religious freedom (and freedom of speech), Sears and Osten reveal, because they have made it clear that they fully intend to see laws enacted that will silence their opponents by criminalizing anti-"gay" speech. It is already happening in Canada and some European countries. Sears and Osten show it will also happen here unless people get involved to expose and oppose the deliberate and well-funded plans (already well underway) to "homosexualize" America and punish those -- like Christians, Orthodox Jews and others who object to immoral behavior on religious grounds -- who refuse to go along. The overwhelming conclusion the reader will draw from this book is that the homosexual activists who shout the loudest about hate and intolerance are in fact egregiously guilty of both themselves, and in fact openly admit that "this is war." That is why Sears and Osten believe the homosexual agenda is the principal threat to religious freedom today.

Terry Craig's book is one of the better fiction novels I've read in a long time, both from the Christian and non-christian fiction wall. I would recommend it to saved and unsaved friends alike. I cannot wait until the next ones come out!

While this is not the most captivating or engrossing religious fiction book that I have read, it is a very nice book that deserves a look. The book mainly follows two separate story lines, one of a candidate running for president of the United States and the sinister forces he discovers, and the other of a small group of people who work around a large city medical clinic and their personal relationships and religious discoveries. The storys and plots all come together very nicely in the end, and I think this book would be well enjoyed by many people.

This is perhaps the best religous fiction book that I have ever read. The author weaves several different character groups amongst a common set of events. The chapters are short and very exciting. Of course, this makes the book impossible to put down. In addition, the religous aspect of it is low-key. It would make a great witnessing tool for the unsaved fiction lover! This is an awesome book.

The material abundance and individual freedom that is the hallmark of capitalism rests on upon the ethics of self-interest, but today perhaps no code of morality is more misunderstood and maligned. In a profound yet easily accessible text, Craig Biddle demolishes the conventional wisdom that holds sacrifice as a moral ideal and offers the honest reader a compelling alternative.

Through examples drawn from today's headlines, historical analysis and the thoughtful examination of leading intellectual thinkers, Loving Life clearly demonstrates that morality is a matter not of divine revelation or social convention or personal opinion-but, rather, of the factual requirements of human life and happiness. Biddle shows how a true morality is derived logically from observable facts, what in essence such a morality demands, and why it is a matter of pure self-interest.

Loving Life exposes the baseless nature of the various moralities that call for human sacrifice and lead to human suffering and shows how a true morality is derived logically from observable facts and what such a morality implies-personally, socially, and politically. With clarity and elegance, Biddle demonstrates the principles, values, and virtues that are essential to human life and happiness; and he defines and defends the social and political conditions that are required for people to live together as civilized beings.

This book is the perfect book to give to a friend or relative who needs an intellectual jumpstart in their lives.

This book demonstrates why the ethics of religion and subjectivism (whether social or personal) lead to psychological torture--then offers an alternative morality, explaining what supports it and the virtues that it requires.

Rejecting from the start the popular myth that morality comes from God, Biddle declares that "it is not a matter of divine revelation." Nor, he continues, "is it a matter of social convention or personal opinion. Being moral does not consist in obeying commandments, or in doing whatever is culturally expected, or in doing whatever one wants to do."

True morality, he believes, is not "a matter of faith or conformity or feelings" but "of the factual requirements of human life and happiness." Because of this, the subject of morality--for Biddle as for Rand (the philosopher whose ethics he presents in this book)--is "an indispensable guide to living well and loving life."

Thus, if you love your life and want to live it to the fullest--"if," the author says, "you want to achieve the greatest happiness possible"--then this book is definitely for you. With eloquence and above all clarity, Biddle demonstrates the essential means to that end--a proper, meaning objective, morality.

This book will challenge both Conservatives and Multicultural Relativists. Conservatives view the drift away from religion as the cause for our cultural demise, as they equate the abandonment of God's word and loss of religious faith with an ethical free-for-all. The Relativists see religion as a failed system of dogma, which must be replaced by ethical values of our own making - depending on a collective consciousness defined by society, race, class, gender, ethnicity, or the latest victim classification of the day. Biddle will have none of this. He takes both to task for failing to find and ground an ethics appropriate to human life.

Faith, upon analysis, is as subjective as social relativism. Biddle provides ample quotes by religious authorities to buttress his analysis. The arbitrary nature of faith and religious commandments, uncut from the necessity of reason and evidence, cannot escape the charge of subjectivism. Conservatives claim that Socialists and Multiculturalists replace God with society. Biddle's analysis implies the converse is true also.

Social subjectivism also receives a scathing critique. Secular philosophy fails to ground values in fact - on principle! Accepting a faulty analysis and fatal dichotomy, modern philosophy paves the way for subjectivism while seeking to avoid the obvious pitfalls of blatant individual whim by adapting a collectivist subjectivism. Once again, Biddle provides ample quotes illustrating the unabashed subjectivist nature of those who currently claim to provide an alternative to religion.

With both positions, Biddle illustrates the logical consequences and resultant human misery. I tend to view Conservatives as rightfully reacting to the horror of 20th century history unleashed by subjectivism - see Paul Johnson's "Modern Times" as an excellent example. And one can view modern Social Collectivists as rightfully reacting to the backwardness and oppression of dogmatic religion.

Biddle reviews the argument for an objective ethics first presented by Ayn Rand in "The Virtue of Selfishness"; for a more in depth presentation see Tara Smith's "Viable Values". His presentation is good and fully adequate for the novice. Hopefully, he'll motivate the reader to the other sources. Peikoff's "Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand" is an obvious next step.

The latter half of the book discusses normative issues and political philosophy. It is a good presentation with ample examples from daily life to society in general. However, there are very few references to the substantial literature of people with similar views to parallel his treatment of the Religion/Subjectivist chapters. Thus, he fails to present Aristotle's contribution and limitations. His discussion of individual rights is lacking a description of John Locke's classic work, which underlies our American Revolution and the views discussed in the chapter on political philosophy. His discussion of self-esteem is impaired by his lack of any quotes of Nathaniel Branden (see my review of Branden's classic "The Psychology of Self-Esteem"). His description or egoism avoids the standard misconceptions but it could be improved by reference to David Kelley's "Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence". One can argue that a slim book focused on the essentials cannot go into a more lengthy exposition. However, we would expect to see these and other relevant books in the bibliography. The philosophy presented in this book has an important tradition - it should be referenced if not discussed.

Overall, I recommend this book to those who think the alternative is religion vs. subjectivism. Hopefully, the reader will realized the vicious circle of this false alternative.

Philosopher William Lane Craig has spilled a lot of ink over the topic of the (alleged) resurrection of Jesus. Craig argues that the best explanation for the apparent resurrection of Jesus is that God actually did raise Jesus from the dead. More recently, Craig has taken to defending his ideas in debate with liberal theologians who doubt that Jesus really was resurrected from the dead. This is the second book Paul Copan edits that records such a debate. In the first, *Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?*, Craig's sparring partner is John Dominic Crossan. While the first is a dud (Craig and Crossan largely talk past each other, and Craig repeatedly questions Crossan's rationality), but this second installment is much better. In *Jesus' Resurrection*, Craig and Gerd Ludeman do more to confront each others' positions directly.
Craig bases his belief in the resurrection on what he sees as four incontrovertible facts: (1) Jesus was buried, (2) Jesus' tomb was discovered empty, (3) Some people report having seen Jesus after his death, and (4) Jesus' followers preached the resurrection when they had every reason not to. Craig argues that the best explanation for these facts is that God did indeed raise Jesus from the dead. Ludeman argues instead that Jesus' followers had visions of the risen Jesus for psychological reasons.
Craig certainly comes off better in the debate. Craig is a brilliant debater (even though he tends to blithely appeal to scholarly consensus, and is by no means above declaring his opponents irrational or prejudiced against him), and Ludeman is not. Not surprising--one would expect a philosopher to be a better debater than a historian. Because of this, many will conclude that Craig comes away the victor, as having demonstrated his case.
However, when one gets to the responses to the debate by four excellent scholars that one gets to see the gaps in Craig's arguments. (Craig himself does an excellent job of making the gaps in Ludeman's arguments apparent.) In particular, Michael Goulder's piece develops an idea similar to Ludeman's in a way that is far more sophisticated than Ludeman's view.
In the end, as with most debates, the issue ends unresolved. Craig is surely right that Ludeman's theory does not explain (or explain away) facts (1) and (2), and does not do especially well at explaining facts (3) and (4). But Ludeman's hypothesis is not the only, and I doubt even the most plausible, naturalist alternative. And Craig never really considers the possibility that (1)-(4) are not well-established facts at all. Only for Jesus' crucifixion do we have any references from non-interested sources. In his debate with Crossan, who denies that (1) and (2) are facts at all, Craig's only response is to claim that Crossan's position is not that of most Bible scholars, as if mere consensus determined truth. It is too bad that Crossan did not take Craig to task when he had the chance.
In short, while Craig does a good job of confounding Ludeman's arguments, he does not do so admirably when his own views are called into question, generally responding with blatant appeals to consensus and personal attacks. (As an aside, I take especial offense at the claim he makes in nearly all his apologetic works that his opponents deny his view because their philosophical commitments prejudice their evaluation of the evidence, while refusing to acknowledge the possibility that his belief in miracles has prejudiced HIS reading of the evidence. Sometimes I feel that Criag doth protest too much.) Yet for all that, Craig is undoubtedly a brilliant thinker who takes his task seriously and approaches it accordingly. His arguments cannot be ignored. And neither can the arguments of his opponents, which in their own writings (not in the context of a debate) are presented with much more force.
*Jesus' Resurrection* will not resolve the issues, but it does an excellent job of showing what the issues are. This is certainly not the place to finish an examination into the (alleged) resurrection, but it is a great place to start. With patience and care, one can get a lot out of this book, whatever one's religious persuasion happens to be.

Established Fact #5: On the day this book was published, the Resurrection theories of Gerd Ludemann, Michael Goulder, and Roy Hoover were laid to rest by William Lane Craig.

Ludemann, Goulder and Hoover tried their best to attack Dr. Craig's argument, but they failed miserably. Dr. CRAIG ANSWERED EVERY SINGLE CRITICISM THAT THEY HAD. After reading Dr. Craig's final response, there is no question who had the better theory.

This was an excellent debate. Read it. (All of it!)

What better way to write a book on the resurrection than to use a debate format? Only 36 of the 206 pages in this book contain the transcript of a debate which took place between Gerd Ludemann (anti-resurrection) and William Lane Craig (pro-resurrection) at Boston College in 1997 regarding whether the resurrection of Jesus is truth or fiction. This oral debate is merely a framework for the book at large. After the transcription of the debate, articles were written in response to the debate by Robert Gundry and Stephen Davis (pro resurrection); and also by Roy Hoover and Michael Goulder (anti-resurrection). Following the critiques by these four scholars, Ludemann and Craig are allowed to write a final article in response to the critiques and to make a final case for their arguments.

The basic issue at dispute in this debate is whether or not miracles are possible, and all of the participants seem to recognize this. Craig, Gundry, and Davis actually make a few arguments in favor of the possibility of miracles, while their opponents seem to simply assert their view as dogmatic truth without so much as an argument citing some evidence in support of their claim that miracles are impossible and that god does not exist.

The argument over the resurrection itself centers around Craig's claim of four well established historical facts: the burial of Jesus in a tomb, the discovery of the tomb as being empty, post-mortem appearances of Jesus to some of his followers, and the origin of the disciples belief that Jesus had been physically raised from the dead. Much to my surprise, Ludemann concedes the burial of Jesus as being probably true (p. 52) and he also strongly believes that the followers of Jesus experienced "visions" of Jesus after his death, yet he says these visions were only in the minds of the followers and not actual cases of seeing an external object. However, Ludemann does not believe the tomb of Jesus was ever found empty (the body decayed), and he's a little unclear about exactly what he thinks the disciples thought their visions meant. Hoover and Goulder seem to recognize that Ludemann has dramatically weakened his case by agreeing that Jesus was buried in a tomb. They know that once this point is conceded it becomes extremely difficult to say that nobody ever bothered to check the tomb for a body while the disciples in Jerusalem were claiming Jesus had risen.

As a Christian, its obvious which side of the debate I'm on, but speaking as objectively as possible, I honestly believe William Lane Craig was the clear winner of this debate. His arguments were much more thorough and he directly addressed the points raised by all three of his opponents. Meanwhile, Ludemann shied away from addressing some of the main critiques of his opponents. This was especially true regarding some of Gundry's critiques. Of the four respondents, I found Gundry's to be the most helpful both in addressing Ludemann and in fine-tuning Craig's argument.

Who should read this book? Agnostics wondering whether or not there is a god. Ex-Christians who think Christianity is for the weak-minded and gullible. Christians doubting the truthfulness of their faith. Christians wanting the perfect resource on the issue of the resurrection. Anyone else who has ever wondered what all of the hype over this "Jesus of Nazareth" character is about.

No matter what your background is, you will learn something beneficial from this book. Read it with an open mind and you might learn even more than you'd imagined. This is definitely the best book on the resurrection that I've ever read. Buy it !!

I learned alot about the world of small village life. The doctor's experience of having to follow a "guide book" and being thrust into a situation where she felt completely overwhelmed felt very familiar to me (student teaching) and I could relate to the madness of her everyday challenges. Although, in my situation, no one's life is at stake. I am a complete "Foodie" and got very interested in the type of foods that were being discussed in the book. I really liked the turns in the story and the characters were fun to root for (except the kidnapper). The faith that guided many of these characters can give all of us hope not matter what type of challenges come our way. Thank you to Craig Danner for this wonderful read.

We read this book AND were fortunate enough to meet the author and his wife, who lived much of the story...this book is an amazing experience! There was so much to talk about. My favorite parts were the beautiful characters. I loved all of them by the book's end, even the creepy ones. They'll haunt you forever. Also loved the education on religious practices and Indian Gods...treat yourself to this book! Don't pass it by! If you've ever wanted to travel or immerse yourself in another culture, this is your chance.

Let me say up front that I know Craig Danner and this book well--I'm his sister-in-law. But I'm also an avid reader, and this is an unforgettable book that demonstrates a rare understanding of women's experiences and a dazzling sense of place. The central character is Doctor Mary, who flees Baltimore after her husband's untimely death for a remote Indian village high in the Himalayas. As she struggles to make sense of her new life and her past experiences, Mary finds herself intertwined with a diverse cast of characters--the waiter in the local dhaba (cafe), a lonely and insecure British traveller, a desperate and aging addict, the unpredictable hospital nurses--and as they change her life, she influences theirs as well. The way Craig writes about Mary's emotions and experiences shows his deeply felt insight into women's lives, and is one of the strongest aspects of a compelling book. Craig knows from whence he writes. He spent more than a year working in India as a medical care provider, and his book resonates with the authenticity of a writer who has been there. His descriptions of the dynamics of village life, of the Himalayan tourist trade, and of the conflicts that occur when people of different cultures live and work together, all ring true. "Himalayan Dhaba"'s sense of place is lyrical and haunting, with gorgeous descriptions that make you feel like you're there as the story unfolds. "Himalayan Dhaba" is a story that will draw you in and stay with you long after you've put the book down. The characters are finely drawn and memorable--they're flawed, human, struggling and hopeful. The setting is exotic, yet the story sounds universal themes of human hope and triumph, and reminds us all of the beauty in everyday life. Don't miss this book!

I first would like to challenge the last reviewer to explain when Turkish Cypriots ever accounted for a 33% minority on Cyprus during those turbulent years. Statistics consistantly show the number to be around 18%. With that said, this is not a book which engages in finger pointing. Atrocities were undoubtledy commited by both parties. In fact, the authors on several occasions give us numbers of the Turkish Cypriots killed, wounded, or fleeing. I wonder just how much one reviewer took a hard look at this book when mentioning pictures seen in occupied Cyprus of Turkish Cypriot children dead in a bathtub, yet the picture is IN THE BOOK!!! Personal acounts and personal tragadies of the invasion and events leading up to it are not the main focus of this study. Rather it is the 'how' and 'why' of the unfolding events.

O'Malley and Craig do a good job of this I believe. I would have liked to see a more detailed analysis of how exactly the US pushed the junta in attempting a coup to remove Makarios. Did Kissinger know Turkey would invade and the cards would play themselves out, or did Kissinger have to work more with Turkey "under the table" to broker what seems to be a playing out of the 1964 alternate plan to partition Cyprus? Two other brief criticisms are 1) the sometimes general and arbitrary footnotes to "Interview with the authors." O'Malley and Craig interviewed several people so it can be confusing just what "interview" they are refering to, and 2) the sometimes frustrating footnotes to the House sub-committee papers and other government documents, which to no fault of the authors, isn't exaclty readily available at the local library for personal reference.

That said I think the book is an excellent study into the rather unfortunate methods the United States implements its foreign policy in order to protect military interests at all costs. Lets hope that in the future the Cypriots (both Greek and Turkish) can decide their own fate rather than Ankara, Athens, London, and especially Washington at their necks. A unified, peaceful Cyprus is attainable, especially in the EU. Let's not lower our hopes and aspirations in saying that partition is the only solution.

Stemming from its strategic position; Cyprus became an obsession for the quasi-party's self serving interests at the behest of the Cypriots. Cyprus a divided stated emerged from relentless back room politics between the U.S, Britain, Turkey and Greece. Hidden away within its unassuming territory lies an overworked highly active agency mandated to keep track on advances in enemy nuclear missile technology; early warning of attacks and controlling the passage of water ways for the free flowing of oil for the free world. All this attained at a minor price of gross negligence of human rights.

Cyprus has suffered for its strategically important position in the eastern Mediterranean. Colonized by the Greeks in the second millennium BC, it was tossed from Persian, Roman, Byzantine, and finally to Ottoman empire. The Turks retained possession of the island until it was annexed by Great Britain in 1914. From the 1930s onward Greek Cypriots agitated vociferously--and after 1955 militarily--for independence from Britain and union with Greece. Reeling under the pressure for independence the British sought a way to accommodate and still retain control by dividing the two communities and giving them a constitution. In 1960, the Greek and Turkish Cypriots agreed on a constitution for an independent Cyprus, with the Greek Archbishop Makarios III as its first president and Kutchuk as its Vice President. This agreement came into being with the Treaty of Establishment, Treaty of Alliance and the 1960 constitution and Britain as the guarantor of unified Cyprus. This setup was fatally flawed, as it established a system of government envisioned by outside powers neglecting to address the deep rooted divisions within the Greeks and the Turk Cypriots. In late 1963, after Makarios made 13 constitutional changes that would abolish the Turkish power of veto over legislation on defense, security, foreign affairs, elections, municipalities and taxation lead the Turks withdrew from the government. A decade of internecine warfare and assassinations followed between the two communities that were mediated or, more precisely, "observed" by the United Nations.
Ultimately--and some would argue, inevitably--the two most interested powers were drawn toward direct intervention: first Greece, which attempted to unite the island under its own form of benign military dictatorship on July 15, 1974; and then Turkey, which responded far more effectively and invaded the place five days later. Cyprus constitutes one of the great unresolved conflicts of the late 20th century.

The Greek Cypriots feeling betrayed by the Western began to look towards the Soviets for help. With this realization and a long-standing plan to save its strategic assets on the island from what U.S. officials feared might be a left-wing takeover if the crisis in Cyprus were not resolved. Cyprus, became invaluable to Washington for monitoring both Soviet nuclear missile activity in Central Asia and potential military threats in the Middle East. Ongoing instability threatened these assets. By mounting an invasion, Turkey saved them. The Americans had judged that to let Greece and Turkey fight it out would be disastrous for the Western interests, would destroy the NATO's southern wing and leave the entire eastern Mediterranean vulnerable to Soviet take-over. According to McNally the Turks had threatened that if there was any military intervention against their invasion, they would leave NATO. Since the Americans badly needed an insurance policy against the Soviets; Kissinger put "no credible pressure" on Turkey "not to go ahead with an invasion." He then did "everything" he could "to help the Turks make up their mind that intervention was the only way they could get satisfaction." And having quietly encouraged the Turks to invade, while systematically "ignoring the advice of his own experts," he played what even the Turks called a "constructive and helpful role" by not protesting the invasion and the subsequent division of the island.

The Greeks have suspected that there was a conspiracy and insist that Turkey could not have acted alone. The Greek sentiment was described by Makarios after the Turkish attack: "The United States is the only country which could have exerted pressure on Turkey and prevented the invasion.". The charge itself is perhaps based on circumstantial events by observing that the United States tilted toward the more powerful and stabler Turkey over Greece for their interests; and that Kissinger not only knew about Turkish plans to invade Cyprus but may have tacitly approved it. Kissinger's main concern was to control the invasion and force Turkey to assume defensive postures in order not to flare up a direct confrontation Greece and Turkey two key NATO allies. United Kingdom being the guarantor of Cyprus unity considered placing their between Cyprus and Turkey to deter the Turks; but was vetoed by U.S. However U.K decided against such an action to prevent a confrontation with a NATO ally (Turkey) and create a rift with U.S.

In a report submitted by the MP's of British parliament it was stated that Britain had a legal right, a moral obligation and military capacity to intervene, but choose not to do so. Britain had considerable forces at hand, and could have intervened with or without Turkey, to reverse the coup and had little doubt that either alone or as part of the U.N force, Britain could have forestalled the first Turkish invasion. The chairman declared that Cyprus crises had been a true test of Britain's standing in the world, which should be measured not by its military might or economic wealth, but by its standard of justice, integrity and humanity, and by the way it protects the weak, On all these counts Britain had failed Cyprus for reasons which the Government refused to give.

When I started reading this book I just couldn't put it down. Excellent reading, informative and well researched. The only critism I have is that I would have liked to have seen more about the role of Rauf Denktash and his TMT (Turkish Resistance Movement)organization and the fact that his design for the partition of Cyprus was the driving force in the conflict between the two communities. The TMT is only mentioned breifly in the book. Rauf Denktash and his TMT were the said "agitators" or instigators of the clashes between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. His murdering of both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots in order to get the two parties fighting, and his inflamatory retoric were the main cause of the intercommunal violence of the late 1950's and 1963 - 1968. The book's reference to Turkish Cypriots being forcibly persuaded by thier leaders to move to Turkish enclaves is correct. The leaders the book is referring to is Rauf Denktash and his TMT cronies. He was recruited by Turkey to create a case for the partition of Cyprus.

This book came highly recommended to me. You see, I wanted to understand why there are so many Christian denominations out there, who they are, and what sets them apart. This book goes some way in that direction. It lists what must be all the denominations and gives a little information on them. There isn't any depth here, which means that you can read it, and never really get what the groups believe. For example, I have talked to people, and found out that Christians often use the same words, but when you get down into it, they mean something completely different when they use those words.

Oh well, perhaps I was asking too much. If you want a book that is broad enough to list every denomination, but don't want any depth, then get this book. 3 stars.

I have gone through 3 editions of this book (5th, 6th and 8th) and can't wait to get the new one. Extremely informative about the history of the "denominations within denominations" that people in our circle of friends and neighbors may belong to. I found it very helpful to read the reasons behind the various splits which have occurred in almost every denomination, yet all this information is concise and easy to find. I am always skeptical when a new editor comes on board, yet Samuel S. Hill's contributions are seamless, and the Handbook of Denominations retains its high quality.

Our church pulled out of the United Church of Christ last year, and our denomination search committee needed a resource to get more information. We were very happy to find this book. At your finger tips are brief sketches of practically every major religious group in the United States. Some of the essays are very brief in nature, while others are pages long. Still, it is an excellent starting point, and for most people who just want the basic facts, it is all the information a person could want on the religious movements in the country. And one of the other things I like about the book is that as far as it it is possible, the authors take a very objective position. No trace of bias or sectarian coloring mars the book, as far as I can tell. There is no way of discerning which denominational perspective the authors write from, and that's the way I like it.

This book has saved my soul. I was looking to build some audio tools using JMF and there was just about nothing out there to help me. Mr. Lindley strikes a balance between the theory of DSP and how to use Java to implement the various audio tools in his book. This is a well-rounded book. I would recommend this book to anyone working with JMF. You will need to get the updated code from the publishers' ftp site. The main reason is that Sun has updated their JMF API. This is a plus. A lot of authors don't even bother updating their code. TWO THUMBS UP!!!!

This is a very good book about Digital Audio on Java. It have a lot of examples that works very fine. CD have a powerful framework to plug & play. If you don't need the frameworks, don't worry cut & past code and run it your appp. This book save my life. I had the opportunities of email to the author (not to abuse) and he response me of inmediate and plus, fix my problem. It's an excellent engineer. Ten stars to Digital audio with Java...

I have huge experiences treating many digital sound software, I think this book could be helpful to whom want to
try to develop digital music software.
Good book.