I bought the book because I was interested in the battle of Malabon. Specifically, to get a history of the 71st Company, Coast Artillery Corps and the 3rd U.S. Infantry involvement. The battle for Malabon is not mentioned in the book even though companies of the 2nd Oregon Volunteer Infantry and the 1st Washington Volunteer Infantry were engaged on 25 March 1899. There is no mention in the book about the C.A.C. and just two brief entries about the 3rd Infantry. A definite waste of my money.

It is evident that the author spent a great deal of time researching, cataloguing and organizing this tale of the Philippine and American conflicts that occurred in the Philippine Islands, resulting from the Spanish American War. Probably no other text, has succinctly described an often confusing dilemma which existed between the Filipinos, who were fighting for their independence, and the Americans who were fighting to quell the rebellion as their benevolent benefactor. The book more than adequately covers the phases of the conflicts which occurred throughout the islands. The initial phase of conflict was the Filipino frontal assaults in and around Manila. Failing to achieve lasting victories, their frontal assault strategy gradually evolved into guerilla warfare; a harbinger, many years later, of what America would face in Vietnam. To adequately understand the locations and occurrences, the reader needs to purchase a medium scaled map of the Philippines. The book lacks maps and graphics which adequately give the reader a visual image of where the conflicts happened. In about a half dozen, or more, instances, the author has a problem with describing accurately locational directions. For example, he states that a place is west of another place when in reality it is definitely east of that place. This problem becomes minor when considering the amount of information the author relates to the reader. An excellent read for anyone having an interest in Philippine History.

Whether the US won the Philippine war due to tactical expertise or due to the Filipino leaders' internal factions is up to debate; as much as the notion that it is America's moral responsibility to make the conquest in the first place. The Philippines, Vietnam, the Gulf War and the smaller, intermittent wars will always be in America's conscience not so much due to the fact that they happened at all than to the self-imposed dissection of America's moral everytime they happen.

As its initial attempt to being a colonizer, the Philippine War could have warned the US to its other, later exercises of might. Was it benevolence assimilation or misguided principles? McAllister Linn may not have provided an answer but this is history writing at its best - sans sentiments and judgement. But if the saying that history is always written from the point of view of the victors, the book can forcefully argue that America has lost a (moral) victory on this war.

An interesting book in that it gives a number of diverse viewpoints. The POWs come from a variety of backgrounds and have different strengths, weaknesses, faults, and redeeming qualities. The number of POWs giving accounts makes it a little difficult to follow until you are well into the book. Human nature, good and bad, manifests itself not only in the treatment meted out by the captors, but in the actions and reactions of the POWs. Some handle themselves admirably and unselfishly while others who were unable to handle the oppressive conditions fall apart and go so far as to betray their fellow POWs and attempt to join the NVA. These individuals attempt to justify their actions through intellectualization but one gets the impression that they know, at some level, that they have betrayed the other POWs and their country. I would give this book 3 1/2 stars. The main drawback is that the individual stories are necessarily limited in scope and we do not delve deeply enough into each man's thoughts.

Zalin Grant does a masterful job of merging the interviews of the different POW's. The reader is able to take advantage of a wide array of viewpoints on their situation as prisoners. I found myself trying to decide which prisoner was the good guy and which was the bad guy. There was more animosity between some of the prisoners than their was between them and their captors! Anyone who drools over the prospect of learning more about POW life needs to add this tale to their respective library and enjoy!

This is one of the greatest books that I have read on the Vietnam War subject, and I have read many; its limited scope notwithstanding. Ostensibly, this book is the graphic of the experiences of a discrete number of men kept captive by the VC/NVA command. However, due to the complex subtleties of the book's structure, it becomes a bit more than this, especially because it encompasses a wider array of U.S. prisoners, and also Europeans, and South Vietnamese soldiers and mercenaries. The author has chosen to extract excerpts of interviews that he must have given to those men who volunteered to speak with him. The largest part of the book is given over to a group held in high mountain jungle camps in South Vietnam, and then of their march North to Hanoi and finally of theirs and others experiences in the so-called Hanoi Hilton. We are privileged to experience the lives of these men through their own eyes. We witness brutality, humiliation, bravery, cowardice, fear, humour, death, disease, insanity, depravity and, yes, love and friendship; both internecine and between the prisoners and their 'enemies.' The Vietnam War was, for the United States, a complex situation to say the least. The POW experience there does a wonderful job of conveying the complexities and difficulties this war posed for our society. Suffice it to say that one is left with a sense of awe for the strength and forbearance of these 'survivors' (but for one of the men, Theodore Guy, whose understandably disturbing and distorted views are explored a bit later in the book). One of the most beautiful aspects of this book is the testimonials that various POW's give to explain and ameliorate the weaknesses and 'failings' of their fellow prisoners. I was also struck by the underlying humility with which the prisoners spoke of their own experiences, some of which involved personal valor and heroism that all but one of the prisoners left unsaid, only to have their secrets unveiled by a different prisoner. I say that there is one stand out voice here that is filled with anger, hatred and braggadocio and that voice is Mr. Guy's. It stands in stark contrast to the testimony of the other prisoners, and one can't help but think that the author intentionally included this point of view. Guy was the senior officer in the so-called Hanoi Hilton for much of the time he was imprisoned and was unrepentantly gung ho during his tenure there. He set up lines of communication between the prisoners in order to help give strength to his fellow Americans and to enforce his policies of resistance to the enemy and to maintain this united front. He is embittered by the fact that a small contingent of the Americans there, members of the so-called Peace Committee, were cooperating with the enemy by making tapes and writing letters that condemned the American participation in the war. He even went so far as to attempt to stir up a firestorm after he returned home by going to the press with allegations of treason against some of these now-returned prisoners. Oh, and he also gets a few kicks in against his wife's activities while he was held prisoner. What makes this unadulterated venom such a bad reflection upon Guy's character is that, while he despises these men for their weaknesses, he admits himself that he was guilty of doing very similar things, but of course he only does them after he has reached the end of his mental and physical limits. It is an unfortunate truth that self-centered people are simply incapable of comprehending that different people are well, different. To wit, every man has his breaking point, his was simply different than those he condemns. Furthermore, he alone, in the telling of his initial capture incident tells of gung ho die hard heroic battle in the face of overwhelming odds. It strikes one as darned odd that nobody else, even men who describe fighting to the end, try to make themselves look like heroes. Anyway, you as the reader will be the judge of whether Guy's contrapuntal account strikes you as being somehow self-serving and inappropriate. Oh, there are two other accounts in the book that are equally disturbing. The first is of an American fellow who went over to the Vietcong. One wonders what that guy was thinking, tellingly, the prisoners who knew him best offer very interesting insights into his motivations and character without being accusatory. There is another account from one of the fellows that Guy hated most, John Young who was the 'chief' collaborator in the 'Hanoi Hilton.' He activities seem to have been disliked by every one, even those who were sympathetic to the so-called Peace Committee. I suppose that it goes to show that there just may be one in every crowd, and also that it is precisely for this that we should avoid placing our fellow countrymen into situations that can expose these fatal character flaws if at all possible. Our nation lost a lot of currency in waging war in Southeast Asia, let us hope that we are not on the brink of doing the same now in the Middle East.

The book starts with a section on Thai place names and has sections on Thai names and food. Why they are in here I do not know other than to practice your Thai reading. They take up valuale space.

There is a little grammar follwed by excercises, but I could have done with more grammar. It's typically Thai - half done.

This is a follow up book to "Thai for Elementary Learners", though how you go from elementary to intermediate in one step I don't know. You don't in learning English.

That said it is one of the better books around. But I'd love a good one.

There are not many textbooks for the intermediate Thai student, so it's our good luck that this is a good one. Ajaan Becker has lessons on most of the really puzzling idiomatic usages of the language, such as "^hay" (to give, basically, but lots of other things, like "~phom ja tham ^hay"), "gaan", "khwaam," and many other useful things including the all important particles such as 'na and ^na. There is a list of all the 76 provinces of Thailand, which is very useful. A suggestion for future editions: associate the list of provinces with a map or maps of Thailand. Another very good aspect of this intermediate book is that it strongly encourages you to make the leap from Thai in transliteration to Thai in Thai script. Another tool you might consider if you are serious about learning Thai is the Linguaphone Thai Course. It's always good to surround yourself with lots of Thai-learning materials in any case. Highly recommended!

Once again, Benjawan Becker has written a great book on reading, writing, speaking and comprehending the Thai language. Lists of streets, provinces and names provide great references, and are taught in the context of conversations. Emphasis is placed on learning to give and take directions, hold conversations, and express impressions and emotions. Altogether a natural and beneficial follow up on her first book. Highly recommended for anyone serious about learning the mechanics of the Thai language.

Keating ignores solid documentation on POW/MIAs and combines old Defense Department lines with unsubstantiated rumors. Her comments about the key area of satellite imagery and pilot distress symbols ignore basic published facts. All in all a total misrepresentation of the POW/MIA issue.

Rich Daly Researcher and Board member of the Minnesota League of POW/MIA Families and Minnesota Won't Forget POW/MIA

Ms. Keating has produced a first class expose of the deep and tragic situation that surrounds the subject of P.O.W.-M.I.A's of the Vietnam War. She shows with astute research and a concise writing style the way that so many money hungry glory seekers have perpetuated the myth of men left behind in Vietnam. It is a shame that many patriotic Americans have been taken in by this sham, kept alive by those more interested in money than in the lives of servicemen. It is time to face reality and lay aside this fiction. The evidence presented in this book should leave no one in doubt. We owe it to the men and women who served to honor the memory of their sacrifice and move on to a new day.

Susan Katz-Keating has written one of the three best books on the Vietnam War MIA issue. Sadly, the issue has been -- and continues to be -- exploited by charlatans, frauds, wannabes, and some honest people who have been misled by the others. Ms. Keating puts the claims of the MIA enthusiasts to the test of logic and reality and their case loses at every turn. Tragically, the real losers in this whole affair are the families of the missing men, many of whom are still having old wounds ripped open by shameless self-promoters. The other two books that I recommend are: "M.I.A.: Mythmaking in America," by H. Bruce Franklin, and, "M. I. A.: Accounting for the Missing in Indochina," by Paul Mather. The Franklin and Mather books are also available from Amazon.com.

I was really dissapointed when I was reasearching to find that to get the right info, you have to buy the actual book. what happended to finding simple info without spending money--these days the internet is such a joke! I can't even find info on my topic! I really wish if you advertise you could at least give a one page interpretation. I need the real stuff!--

The syncretic religion of the Philippines has often been seen as a failure to fully grasp a chosen truth. In Contracting Colonialism, Rafael is able to clarify this misunderstanding with a combination of historical accounts and a powerful insight. With this book, Vincente Rafael not only presents an excellent exercise for the mind, but he also establishes a strong reason for Spain's 'sweeping conversion' of the Tagalog tribe of the Philippines...Rafael has loosened the knot of faith's blindfold.

Indian Influence to the Filipino What are the Characteristics of a people to become a "Datu" in the early time ? How does the early times classified the people ? What is the difference between Democratic and Monarchy Government ?

I had much admired Lyttleton's journal articles, but found this book to be disappointing. He doesn't mention the low HIV prevalence in the region where he did his work until well into the book. The naive reader may feel misled; the knowledgable reader will know that much of what Lyttleton has to say is not placed in a proper context. His effort to develop a fairly conventional neo-Marxist polictical economy of HIV in NE Thailand falls flat when one considers the low prevalence and the lack of linear links to economic conditions. This should not avert attention for ineequities but, in telling the story of HIV in Thailand one should attend to sexual networking, mixing patterns, social patterns, etc. His treatment of areas where he did not do original field work is often superficial, woefully incomplete, and/or muddled. Topics such as homosexuality and vaccine research are hampered by this. The relative success of Thailand's first generation prevention efforts also gets short shrift, which seems typical of many "critical" analyses. The need for new directions need not negate what has been accomplished. Like too much of the writing on HIV in Thailand, the effort to present a rather predictable agenda gets in the way of telling the real story which is far more nuanced and complex than the one offered here.

"Endangered Relations:Negotiating Sex and AIDS in Thailand" by Chris Lyttleton should be a required textbook for all college students studying sociology, anthropology, and public health. The author is certainly a pioneer that has ventured into third world countries to teach the indigenous people the devistating effects of contracting AIDS and how this disease kills the individual, and the strength of their society and nation. The time, effort, thoughtfulness, and sensitivity of this book is unparrelled in our time. I thank Chris for sharing his genious through this book with us. A must read for college students so they will not forget the AIDS pandemic, in hopes too that they will follow Chris Lyttleton's lead and help educate the young and old of all countries.Truely a book that is above politics.

This book is a first in telling the story of HIV/AIDS in Thailand. There is little in which to compare it with in terms of publications on HIV/AIDS because despite the volumes of reports, numerous chapters in books, and other analyses on HIV/AIDS in Thailand there is no one book that tries to capture the history of the epidemic and the lessons learned. It is a complete exegesis of the epidemic in that it devotes much time to the response of the unfolding epidemic of the early 1990s, and the epidemiology of the spread of HIV, while at the same time exploring culture and context. Thus it is a valuable critique of policy and programming in the early days of the epidemic, but an even-handed critique that never entirely moves away from what is the strength of the book and that is the ethnographic context. The critique is not so much a basis for confronting the supposed wisdom of the time but for presenting another view of the world of sex and sexuality which can never be reducible to simple formulae. Thus it is a thorough anthropological exploration of gender and sexual cultures, as well as disease and contagion and the meanings that villagers bring to these, especially in the context of interventions and media campaigns. This exploration is invaluable given that there are as many as one million HIV positive people in Thailand and increasing numbers in surrounding countries. If lessons are to be learnt from the Thai experience it is documentation like this that needs to be read and digested. It may not be an easy read for a bio-medical person or someone who is looking for the definitive epidemiological study, for the focus is on unravelling the layers of meaning behind behaviour and attitudes, but this is in a narrative style that is very accessible. There are no broad theoretical constructs but there is much theory that supports the empirical findings, and which rather than detracting from the narrative serves to edify, and often amplify that what may seem simple is in fact often complex.

Long needed, a well written and well organised field guide to the birds of the Philippines is finally available. The 72 color plates illustrate all the species of the islands. A nice color distribution map and a short summary of status and occurance, along with identification information is opposite each image.

Unfortunatly the book follows the current trend in bird guides of using more than one illustrator. The result, though well done in some other books, often results in a clash of styles, and worse, inconsistancy. This book is illustrated by twelve artists and suffers a little from the latter. The work here is uneven, some of the illustrators being better at capturing the look of the birds than others. The proportions, build, and "facial expression" are not correctly drawn for many species. Experienced birders will have fewer problems translating what they are seeing in their binoculars to what is on the color plate. But beginners and more casual observers may encounter some frustration. For example, the figure of the Citrine Flycatcher on plate 62 resembles the bird only in general color pattern. This species usually appears brighter, and you would not be far wrong if your impression on seeing it, is of an all yellow bird. Also, given the head size, the body should be shown slightly larger and more filled out. The folded wing is incorrectly drawn, as are those of every other bird on the plate. Though not unique to this guide, many of the species that have olive or yellow-green upperparts are shown too dull and gray. The White-eyes on plate 70 for instance are bright, trim little characters, that may remind North American birders of Wood Warblers, not the dull, misshapen things depicted.

My guess is that so many illustrators are being used to save time, and perhaps the money needed to pay a really good one to produce 70 or 80 plates. Whatever the reasons, the result here are some illustrations that betray a lack of knowledge of the form of birds that really shouldn't be in a modern field guide. Not with the high standards achieved in other works, which this book otherwise seems to meet.

Despite these problems, all of the plates are adequate for identifying the birds, indeed, many are quite well done, and the authors and artists have produced a work of lasting value. It certainly will be a useful book in the field or reference on the shelf.

This book is definitely the best field guide yet that came out of press. The plates are good and rendered better. Although, what is lacking is the description of the different races of each bird. Only the nominate race is described and I still have to refer to the book "Philippine Birds" by DuPont for the info lacking in this book. Still waiting for a better one.

Although I agree with Mike Ramos on the quality of the text of this book, I disagree with him concerning plate quality. Often multiple artists can lead to varying quality and lack of uniformity, however in this Philippine guide, which has 12 artists, the plates are surprisingly uniform in layout and generally of very high quality. This book has a winning combination of excellent plates accompanied by clear, concise distributional maps and useful, abbreviated texts all at the users fingertips when the book is opened to a particular plate. There are a few problems with the order and names of authors on the Amazon listing. Robert S. Kennedy is the first author, followed by Pedro C. Gonzales, Edward C. Dickenson Hector C. Miranda, Jr. (his name is incorrect in the Amazon book listing) and Timothy H. Fisher.

this rough guide isn pretty much the same as the other guides.. as usual in singapore it contains the usual places.. orchard, little india, sentosa, east coast and the usual touristy places. It does not include the heartlanders area eg. Hougang, Yishun etc. For eg, in woodlands.. it only mention the the zoo.. did you know that's a big Shopping Mall in Woodlands called the Causeway point.. nect to the MRT station.. As for eating places.. it fail to capture the good places for local food.. may interest the food lovers and those adventourous enough to try..

It should include a portion on the heartlanders.. I'm sure some tourist may want to see our locals their way of life.. for eg a tour of an HDB estate (public housing) that may include the market, the coffeeshop, look at the flat inside out.. etc.. the peculiar and distinct characters of the heartlanders.. etc.. otherwise tourists may think S'pore is just of the "place"

This guide is great, at least from a pre-trip standpoint. When it comes to planning a trip to Malaysia, the historical and cultural aspects of the book are above reproach. The authors clearly know their way around the country. But that doesn't translate into using the book when you get to Malaysia. While hotel prices are listed, they're done so using a code system, forcing readers to continue flipping back to the key located early on in the guide. I've relied on Lonely PLanet's guidebook before, and I'll keep doing so - only because its layout is superior to the Rough Guide.

Even if your not planning on taking a trip to Malaysia anytime soon, this book will prove an interesting read for those who love learning about the world. I recently took on the task of writing a paper about Malaysia for a college-level geography class. There were certainly more traditional reference guides at my disposal, but I found this book to be more informative than any other book I used. Unlike most other travel guide series', Rough Guides do an excellent job of not only making sure travelers know where to stay and what to eat, but how NOT to make fools of themselves by ignoring local customs and traditions. This guide through Malaysia is no exception. The section on Singapore and Brunei provide significant, and substantial information, while the chapter on Malaysia's capital city, Kuala Lumpur, answered every question a traveler could possibly think of. Every part of the guide proved truly helpful in my research and study. And more than anything, it has inspired me to visit the place that I've learned so much about as a good travel guide should.

The book, "The Singapore Dilemma", written by Malay academic Lily Zubaidah Rahim can be summed up in three sentences:

1)The Malays are marginalised in Singapore society. 2)The marginalisation is not their fault. 3)There is no meritocracy in Singapore.

The Malays are a minority group in Singapore with about 14% of the population. The other groups are Chinese (77%), Indian (7%) and others (2%).

The author is trying to make the case that the Malays are poorer and less educated than the Chinese because of racial discrimination in a Chinese dominated society and not because of the Malay's cultural characteristics (or what she calls the cultural deficit theory). This theory posits that Malays are lacking in ambition and diligence. She also challenges the widely held view that Singapore practices meritocracy in that one's place in society is achieved by merit.

This is not surprising since she believes that their relative poverty is entirely not their fault. If Singapore is a true meritocracy then of course, the Malay's relative poverty must be their own fault.

Besides blaming the Chinese dominated government, she also blames the previous British colonial administration that left nearly half a century ago. For instance, she blamed 19th century British administrators for not providing Malays with education because they thought that the Malays at that time to be disinterested.

She also blamed colonial policies discouraging Malays from growing cash crops. The author reminds me of some African intellectuals blaming European colonial rule for their poverty even though the colonialists left half a century ago.

While she could successfully cite instances of discrimination in government policies, I feel that she has not made a sufficient case that their lower incomes and educational levels are entirely other people's fault.

To do so she must explain the questions raised by even a casual reader of her book. For instance, how could she account for the fact that the other minorities, the Indians and those in the "Others" categories did much better than Malays?

According to her book, the average monthly head-of-household incomes in 1990 for the Chinese, Malays, Indians and Others were $3,213, $2,246, $2,859 and $3,885 respectively.

She was fond of writing the phrase, "the Malays and other minorities", in the book as though all minorities are in the same boat. But the statistics in her own book expose this untruth. The Indians in 1990 were only slightly behind the Chinese and those in the "Others" category were actually ahead!

There was no attempt to explain this anomaly. If Singapore's educational and other policies favour the majority Chinese, how does she explain the relative success of the other minorities?

She also did not give sufficient airing of the views of her fellow Malays who agree with the cultural deficit theory. To her credit, she did mention their names but only very quickly in passing. The author obviously did not want to dwell too long on this topic.

Some of these Malays who agree that it was their own cultural characteristics that held them back have spent their entire adult lives trying to uplift the Malays. Again to her credit, she did mention a notable book written by one such Malay. The book is called, "The Malay Dilemma" (notice the similarity with the name of her book?). It was written by Dr Mahathir Mohammed who is today the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Singapore's closest neighbour.

In fact, the Malays in Malaysia insist on special priveleges because they acknowledge that the cannot compete in a level playing field with the Indians and Chinese. This is an implicit acceptance of the cultural deficit theory. For example, there is a mininum quota for Malays at Malaysian Universities. A Chinese with better grades must make way for Malays with lower grades in order to fill the quota of Malay students.

Malaysia is a mirror image of Singapore. The Chinese there are a minority while the Malays are the majority group. Malays in Malaysia are also poorer and less educated than the Chinese too, even though they enjoy political power. This fact must be explained for the author to prove her case that Malays' lower income and education is everybody else's fault other than their own.

She complained of the promotion of the use of the Chinese language in Singapore. This, she believes puts Malays at a disadvantage and held them back. To the author, this is an example of the race-based policies by the Singapore government elected by a mainly Chinese electorate. Does this strike even a casual reader as odd?

Does the US government (or for that matter the British or Australian governments) need to promote the use of English? Why would a Chinese dominated society need to promote the use of Chinese? What the author (conveniently) forgot to mention is that Singapore is the only country in the world where the majority race, the Chinese, gave up their language for a foreign language, English, in large part to provide a more level playing field for the minorities.

If the staff, customers and suppliers of your company all prefer to communicate in Chinese, it is tough for Malays to get a job. At the time of independence most Chinese in Singapore spoke Chinese in their offices and workplaces. But in part to give minorities a more level playing field and partly for fear of communism, the government quickly made English the main language at great political cost.

Today, the language of commerce and administration in Singapore is English even though many small and medium sized companies still use Chinese. Many Chinese today actually speak English better than Chinese. I am one of them.

This has alienate many older Chinese voters who attended Chinese schools in their youth. Therefore to appease this still significant but diminishing group of voters, the ruling party occassionlly bangs the Chinese drum. But English remains the main language in Singapore.

Of course in Malaysia, the Malays (which comprise 55% of the population as compared to 77% Chinese in Singapore) insist that Malay be the main language.

Other complaints the author made are that Singapore's Armed Forces and immigration policies discriminate against the Malays. Malays are not assigned to sensitive positions in the military and for a long time were not called up to do National Service. She sees this as another instance of discrimination that is the cause of the marginalisation of the Malays.

Singapore's defense and immigration policies must be seen in the context that Singapore is a small rich mainly Chinese city-state surrounded by larger, poorer Malay dominated neighbors. Not so long ago, Chinese people were killed and Chinese women raped during ethnic rioting in neighbouring Indonesia, the largest part of the authour's beloved Nusantara (Malay World). The Indonesian military is also believed to be behind the destruction of East Timor.

Over in Malaysia, the Islamic party, PAS (Malays are wholly Muslims) is gaining ground.They want to create an Islamic state. All these events do not inspire a feeling of security among Singapore's Chinese.

Reading her book, a reader unfamiliar with Singapore may get the impression that Malays in Singapore are getting a sub-standard 3rd world education. She spent a good part of her book criticizing Singapore's educational policies which she believes caters to Chinese interests and has disadvantaged the Malay community. Actually, this is not true.

In internationally conducted Mathematics and Science test of 41 advanced (mostly OECD) countries, Singapore students topped both subjects in 1995 and came in 1st and 2nd in 2000. Malay Singaporean students did well, beating students from many First World countries. They certainly beat their counterparts from Malaysia who participated in 2000.

I could go on. But I will end here. Her book did write some truth but it was not the whole truth. What the author omitted distorted the truth. Why did she write this flawed book? I suspect the answer can be found in the Preface of her book. She wrote that when she was growing up, she found it hard to accept the "prevailing culturalist view that Malays were not sufficiently hardworking, motivated, industrious".

She further wrote, "Accepting this prevailing view also meant that I, as a Malay from a supposedly deficient cultural tradition, would then also have to accept that I possessed these unflattering attributes."

From this, I deduce that the thought of many people {which by her own admission includes some Malays) believing in the cultural deficit theory is very painful for her. Coming to terms with this is the dilemma she is facing. The book should therefore be more aptly named, "Lily Zubaidah Rahim's dilemma."

While some facts/evidence used by the author are outdated or have become irrelevant, the key insights and analyses wihin are plausible.
It is particularly refreshing because of extensive fieldwork done and intelligent alternatives offered for the issue of the Malay minority in Singapore.
This book will stimulate critical discussion for the reader familiar with Singapore politics.

I bought this book several weeks ago and was pleasantly surprised by the concise and accurate manner by which Rahim exposed the Lee Kuan Yew and his political mafia. The present political regime in Singapore is blatantly racist and in too many cases unashamedly so. And despite this, many people unwittingly accept Singapore as a good example of meritoracy at work. This book proves that it is not. The PAP government manipulates and isolates people to help fragment public opinion. By racialising all socio, poltical and especially economic issues, Lee Kuan Yew and his PAP lap dogs isolate public opinion for their own political ends. Rahim should be commended for a much needed expose on a little studied area.

Unfortunately this is another myopic book about the 'Vietnam War,' that would have you believe the US fought alone in Viet Nam.

Both the design and content are seriously lacking for the intended audience, grades 7+. Important facts are left out while other facts are pathetically incorrect; most captions are mislabeled, and many 'documents' are indistinguishable from the narrative text. Sadly, even in 2003 it appears America still has Post Traumatic Stress Denial with parts of our own history.

This book should be very popular with teachers who teach that wars are more than battles and dates, who want students to go beyond pop culture's depiction of the experience of the individual soldier in Viet Nam, and who want students to understand that even publicly confident leaders are often baffled, uncertain, ignorant of history, or wrong. No textbook on this complex war can even begin to cover everything, of course. Instead of details about military operations, this book concentrates on presidential decision-making, personal responses on both sides, and efforts (e.g. songs, posters, propaganda leaflets) to persuade public opinion one way or another. The material in this book on how to read documents and on propaganda by both sides should be especially effective in the classroom. In fact, the book's great strength is its inclusion of (and guides to understanding) documents such as the 1945 Viet Minh Declaration of Independence, a state department policy statement, the 1954 Geneva conference's Final Declaration, and various responses to that declaration. Defenders of U.S. involvement in the war will likely be unhappy with parts of this book, including the suggested bibliography, but no book on this war will please everyone, and probably no book on this war can truly be neutral. Fortunately the inclusion of essential primary documents allows teachers of any persuasion to use this book. The materials from the Vietnamese side are probably especially valuable here, because those materials are not familiar to American students. As a documentary history this book naturally includes no classroom activities; for that, teachers might want to consult Echoes from the Wall (a free curriculum distributed by the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund) and Lessons of the Vietnam War, by Jerry Starr's Center for Social Studies Education. A teacher might also want to supplement this history with a few disparate excerpts from Bill McCloud's wonderful collection, What Should We Tell Our Children About Vietnam?

Because of my work I see a great many books on Vietnam and the Vietnam era but this one really stands out as something special. Not only is the book an excellent introduction --it is also full of material that is fascinating even to those who know the subject well!
Steven A. Leibo Ph.D.
author of _East, Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific_ 2002