to be quite frank, he could have done better, the content was informative but his explanation were too wordy and repetative. he could have explained his system thinking theory's in half as much time by sticking to the point, not adding paraphrases that were confusing and misleading. question is "does he get paid by the number of words he uses or the content?".

Ackoff presents his organization design based on democracy and free market as organization principles. Most people generally believe democracy and free market are good principles for societies, while most business and government organizations have internal organizations based on autocratic authority and monopoly of services, resources and markets. Why does this happen? Ackoff is very objective in his view of the corporations as social systems, which must satisfy their stakeholders. He presents very objective solutions for the problems of quality of working life, power and authority distribution, performance evaluation and control and structure design. The title of this book promises a radical prescription, and that is a very good description of the contents. The book is dense with well thought, well developed ideas, with examples of their successful application! If you have a position about democracy and free market you should carefully read this book, even if you don't agree with everything Ackoff proposes.

This is pure propaganda written by the husband of S. A. Mud's grandaughter. Mudd, a slave owning, beating,and shooting Confederate mail agent is portrayed as an honost Union man. A man who had met J. W. Booth 3 times before and plotted with him is said to be an innocent bystander. This is pure lies.

Yes, Mudd may have been a slave owner, but that night of the assassination, he was purley doing his job! I am a Mudd...I believe he was completely innocent. Maybe not of slave owning, but of the helping of teh assassination.

When the colonies broke away from the mother country the new republic was based on the principles of democracy and equality. But as long as slavery was the cornerstone of this republic the ideas of democracy and equality were tainted. The Emancipation Proclamation set in motion the actions, which would make these principles true for all. In the book The Emancipation Proclamation, the author John Hope Franklin, tells a story of the emancipation of slaves through as it pertained to the author of the Emancipation Proclamation, President Abraham Lincoln. He leads us through the action before, during, and after the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation in an attempt to give us a greater understanding of the actions taken by Lincoln in the freeing of a race.

Early in 1862 many people were calling on Lincoln for the emancipation of the slaves. But at that time Lincoln didn't think it wise to emancipate them for a few reasons. First of all, he knew that emancipation would culminate in a crisis in the Border States, because many weren't willing to fight to free the slaves. Secondly he doubted the legality of emancipating the slaves. Also he wasn't really sure if whites and Negroes could coexist in peace.

But by late summer of 1862, Lincoln was convinced that the time had come for a change in policy toward slavery. Several foreign governments sympathized with the South. But they condemned slavery as evil, and thus did not dare support the Confederacy. Freed slaves could serve as Union soldiers. Besides, many Northerners who had been indifferent to slavery now believed that it had to be stamped out. Lincoln decided to issue a proclamation freeing the slaves. He did not ask the advice of his Cabinet, but he did tell the members what he intended to do. On Seward's advice, he withheld the proclamation until a northern victory created favorable circumstances.

The Battle of Antietam, fought on Sept. 17, 1862, served gave Lincoln his chance. He issued a preliminary proclamation five days later. Lincoln declared that all slaves in states, or parts of states that were in rebellion on Jan. 1, 1863 would be free. He issued the final proclamation on January 1. Lincoln named the states and parts of states in rebellion, and declared that the slaves held there "are, and hence-forward shall be, free."

This was met with a wide variety of reactions. Some people sympathized with the Confederacy. Others doubted that it was even legal. But as Union victories fell into place a vast majority of people came to support the proclamation.

Actually, the proclamation freed no slaves. It applied only to Confederate territory, where federal officers could not enforce it. The proclamation did not affect slavery in the loyal Border States. Lincoln repeatedly urged those states to free their slaves, and to pay the owners for their loss. He promised financial help from the federal government for this purpose. The failure of the states to follow his advice was one of his great disappointments.

The Emancipation Proclamation did have a great long-range effect. In the eyes of other nations, it gave a new character to the war. It gave the North a new weapon in Negro soldiers. Also in the North, it gave a high moral purpose to the struggle and paved the way for the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment, adopted in December 1865, ended slavery in all parts of the United States.

Overall I found the book to be well written and very delightful. It gave an accurate account of the time during the Emancipation Proclamation. You could tell that the author held Lincoln in very high esteem, and that he felt Lincoln was the greatest instrument in the freeing of the slaves.

The Emancipation Proclamation John Hope Franklin

When the colonies broke away from the mother country the new republic was based on the principles of democracy and equality. But as long as slavery was the cornerstone of this republic the ideas of democracy and equality were tainted. The Emancipation Proclamation set in motion the actions, which would make these principles true for all. In the book The Emancipation Proclamation, the author John Hope Franklin, tells a story of the emancipation of slaves through as it pertained to the author of the Emancipation Proclamation, President Abraham Lincoln. He leads us through the action before, during, and after the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation in an attempt to give us a greater understanding of the actions taken by Lincoln in the freeing of a race.

Early in 1862 many people were calling on Lincoln for the emancipation of the slaves. But at that time Lincoln didn't think it wise to emancipate them for a few reasons. First of all, he knew that emancipation would culminate in a crisis in the Border States, because many weren't willing to fight to free the slaves. Secondly he doubted the legality of emancipating the slaves. Also he wasn't really sure if whites and Negroes could coexist in peace.

But by late summer of 1862, Lincoln was convinced that the time had come for a change in policy toward slavery. Several foreign governments sympathized with the South. But they condemned slavery as evil, and thus did not dare support the Confederacy. Freed slaves could serve as Union soldiers. Besides, many Northerners who had been indifferent to slavery now believed that it had to be stamped out. Lincoln decided to issue a proclamation freeing the slaves. He did not ask the advice of his Cabinet, but he did tell the members what he intended to do. On Seward's advice, he withheld the proclamation until a northern victory created favorable circumstances.

The Battle of Antietam, fought on Sept. 17, 1862, served gave Lincoln his chance. He issued a preliminary proclamation five days later. Lincoln declared that all slaves in states, or parts of states that were in rebellion on Jan. 1, 1863 would be free. He issued the final proclamation on January 1. Lincoln named the states and parts of states in rebellion, and declared that the slaves held there "are, and hence-forward shall be, free."

This was met with a wide variety of reactions. Some people sympathized with the Confederacy. Others doubted that it was even legal. But as Union victories fell into place a vast majority of people came to support the proclamation.

Actually, the proclamation freed no slaves. It applied only to Confederate territory, where federal officers could not enforce it. The proclamation did not affect slavery in the loyal Border States. Lincoln repeatedly urged those states to free their slaves, and to pay the owners for their loss. He promised financial help from the federal government for this purpose. The failure of the states to follow his advice was one of his great disappointments.

The Emancipation Proclamation did have a great long-range effect. In the eyes of other nations, it gave a new character to the war. It gave the North a new weapon in Negro soldiers. Also in the North, it gave a high moral purpose to the struggle and paved the way for the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment, adopted in December 1865, ended slavery in all parts of the United States.

Overall I found the book to be well written and very delightful. It gave an accurate account of the time during the Emancipation Proclamation. You could tell that the author held Lincoln in very high esteem, and that he felt Lincoln was the greatest instrument in the freeing of the slaves.

I would like to say something about christianity. For centuries white christians have surpressed and enslaved other races or religions.Why would I want to convert myself to a religion that didn't even have laws that inspired people from all races and beliefs to live in harmony and friendship.One advice.Read de koran:You won't be disappointed About the book then.Does the author even now that the Bible during the roman occupation was forged(just like the juish book the thora)

This certainly rates more than the single star given by another reviewer. Billingsley's book is a fine work of scholarship!

Read this book if you are looking to read a work of fiction. On that level, the book is amusing. Don't read it if you are looking for a definitive book on the Kennedy assasination. The bibliography starts out by saying that the book "contains incomplete information about its sources". That gives you some idea about the substance of this book. This book is about a "Rumor". The "Rumor" makes for good fiction, not fact.

The obvious answer to the book's rhetorical question title is yes.

So buy it, read it, and your appetite for political ectoplasm will either burgeon to obsessive proportions or fatally wither quickly. If the former becomes the case...

Try and get your hands on Farewell America (still valuable), The Stargate Conspiracy (best new expose), Report from Iron Mountain (satire), and Blowback (first version).

Learn all that you can from Madame Blavatsky's Baboon, Messengers of Deception, Space Aliens from the Pentagon, The Great UFO Hoax, and The Murder of John Lennon.

Then try any book from Jim Keith, Tex Maars, Paul Krassner, Alex Constantine, Constance Cumbey, John Keel, Wilson Bryan Key and Robert Anton Wilson, just for fun and spiritual guidance. Avoid Bill Cooper, Edgar Cayce, Phillip Corso, Dr. John Coleman, Peter Moon/Preston Nichols, Elizabeth Claire Prophet, Jim Marrs, Richard Hoagland, Dr. John Leir, Mark Lane, ALL UFO-related magazines(since WJB bought the only really serious one)except the lighthearted Excluded Middle and Fortean Times and ANYTHING by the LaRouchies, Birchers, Scientologists or Liberty Lobbyists (except the exasperating Final Judgment) however.

If I need to warn you about abductee books of the Streiber/Hopkins/Fowler/Jacobs variety, death books from the Kubler-Ross/Moody/Brinkley school, or all the Merovingian Kings/Holy Bloodline books, you're probably a New Age victim/sucker and won't follow the rest of my sage advice in this delightful review either.

(I'm still reserving judgment on Jon Rappoport, John DeCamp, and Ted Gunderson until I learn more about their REAL military records.)

Walter Bowart, God bless and save his tortured soul, probably had most of the answers in Operation Mind Control, a quarter-century ago, before all the Cathy O'Brien/Brice Taylor forced-disinfo was spread to muddy the waters, but WERE WE CONTROLLED? really started the ball rolling even earlier with its tawdry first, quickly out-of-print little edition.

It's hugely gratifying to see it back in print again: mistakes, oversimplifications, distortions and all. It still is a very useful and comfy place for unbiased researchers of the "Dallas unknowable" to begin. "Lincoln Lawrence lives!" (Which is more than he [?] could ever say...)

Just why Childress decided to re-publish IT, and not the Bowart or Hepburn (pseud.) material, or all that great, nearly unpublished John Judge, Peter Dale Scott, Dave Emory, Mae Brussell, Sherman Skolnick and Carl Oglesby stuff, for the gigantic mass market his Stelle/Keininger-derivative pulp-press now succeeds in reaching, thanks to a very-friendly buyer (ha ha!) for the Borders chain, remains yet another unsolved (for now) mystery.

Maybe David's a widow's son too, and hopes to see the Golden Cap in place on NEXT New Year's eve. (I know Kenn Thomas isn't, but his current entrancment by the pseudo-demonic dot-s lady may be an even worse fate.)

Of course, "Lincoln Lawrence" can neither sue nor collect royalty checks...

Lincoln's previous book, Japan's Unbalanced Trade was written in 1990, but the way he constantly blurbs it in Troubled Times you would think it's the sequel. Never the less, Troubled Times (Brookings, 1999) builds on Lincoln's theme of a Japan that shortchanges its trading partners through protectionist measures, both lawful and structural.

The first half of Troubled Times is a mind-numbing malaise of number crunching. It's Lincoln at his best (or worst), presenting a litany of charts and graphs,accompanied by similarly disinterested text, that intimidates the reader. It compels him/her to meekly nod in agreement with his findings.

Lincoln summons the economic gods of Intra-Industry Trade, comparison pricing, Direct Investment (foreign and domestic)in order to make his points, at one time proclaiming:As the yen appreciated rapidly from 1993 to 1994, retailors did not adjust prices continuously(69). Interesting!

Yet, while Lincoln uses these numbers to blatantly intimidate and convince his reader of Japan's unfair trade practices (really, not trading enough), as well as its impact upon Japan's consumers, he also charges Japan with having a poor rural infrastructure ("What company would want to invest in a developed country where there are no flush toilets at home?"), and a "multi-layered " economy that acts as a non-tariff barrier. He dedicates more than a few pages to Japan's modern business culture, especially Japan's Amukadari (literally "descending from heavan") and keiretsu business relationships that make it difficult for foreign companies to establish in Japan, and promotes, in general, an inefficient system.

However, Lincoln's premise throughout is that Japan is developed, modern country. Which leads one to the question, how can an inefficient country, with poor rural infratructure, and an awkward (unique) business climate be considered mature, especially when you're comparing it to the ultimate hegemonic power?

Granted, Mr. Lincoln makes some exellent points that are well-taken. But, there is point at whihc one must stop and consider the situation. Japan, while light years ahead of Asian economies, has much of its development grounded in the post-war era. Despite the fact it was rebuilt by America, one cannot assume it IS America and compare it as so.

"Troubled Times" is a highly informative account of Japan's economy by a former employee of the US embassy in Tokyo. Some of the statistical material in chapter 2 would probably not pass muster with professional economists, but the description of bilateral trade negotiations between the US and Japan is the best around. Recommended reading for whomever takes office in January 2001.

Louis J. Weichmann would be little more than a footnote in the story of the assasination of Abraham Lincoln had he not shown himself to be ...individuals associated with a second, almost darker tragedy...the execution of an innocent woman.

Weichmann rented a room in the boarding house of widow Mary Surratt, where many of those who conspired to kidnap and later assasinate Lincoln lived at the time. Once the conspiracy was uncovered, overzealous federal officials alleged Mrs. Surratt was an active participant. Historical fact, as well as the testimony of the conspirators themselves, stood in sharp contradiction to these allegations. Weichmann, who was barely acquainted with any of these individuals, testified that she was an active participant. It was later determined that his motive was to curry favor with government officials in hopes of obtaining a federal job. Based on Weichmann's false testimony, an innocent woman went to the gallows. Weichmann later wrote this book in attempt to cash in on the public's thirst for knowledge. The problem is, he had none. He just happened to be in the same place as some of the conspirators for a brief period of time.

It is with this knowledge of the author's motives that anyone considering reading this book should approach it. Weichmann has earned his place in American history as a liar and a coward. As an author, he is not worthy of belief.

Over 100 years after the assassination of President Lincoln, the words of Louis Weichmann finally reveal the true events of the day. This is an invaluable work as a first-hand, true accounting of the conspiracy and its aftermath. Told not for profit or personal recognition (the book was not published for nearly 75 years after the author's death), this work seeks to preserve for history an intimate record of the words and deeds of the conspirators. It seals the fate, once and for all, of the Surratts and Booth, as the testimony of Weichmann did originally at their trial. Furthermore, the work relies not only upon the recollections of Weichmann, but is supported by historical documents and testimony of his contemporaries. It is a book not to be missed by anyone interested in the facts about what happened the day that Lincoln died.

This book was, doubtless, a factual account of abraham lincoln's life, but unfortunately had more pictures than content. frequently cluttered with irrelevent facts, it is somewhat difficult to sort out what is important. Not the best book if you're doing research, but the pictures are good for just looking at and reading the captions.

I spend a lot of time looking for quality literature about historical events that is appropriate for the younger reader. Mrs. Livingston is a celebrated poet who has really found her niche. Her style of poetry is just right for this subject.

Collier's book on Goodman is okay, but it could have been better. He has a bad habit of rarely if ever seeking primary sources. Instead he relies on past published materials, acting as an assimilator rather than a biographer. This leads to the needless perpetration of myths and errors rather than (as a biography should) the clarification and correction of facts. He also tends to psychoanalyze too much, sometimes making some huge leaps, while to the best of my knowledge he has no degree in psychology. A far better book on BG is Ross Firestone's "Swing Swing Swing," which breaks new ground and sheds some real light on Goodman and what drove him and what made him behave as erratically as he did, particularly in his later years.