General-partner

Ms. Lamb has written some very good books but this is not one of them. The story is predictable and the characters are shallow so it is unconvincing.

Up to this point, I have loved all the Clancy books I have read. This one was simply horrible. Please note that the author of this book is Steve Perry, not Tom Clancy, and it is not up to par with the works Clancy is known for.

The story line is very simplistic and they characters are very one dimensional. About 50 pages from the end you could predict the ending with a good degree of accuracy.

If you haven't read any of Clancy's books (the ones HE wrote), then pick one of those up. This one isn't worth the time or the money. Too bad 0 stars isn't an option.

I wrote my review about 40 pages from the end of the book. I must now revise it and remove all points. This has got to be about the worst book I have ever read!!!

I picked this book up because it was sitting there, I was out of reading material, and it had Tom Clancy's name on it. I was skeptical when Clancy hadn't written the book, but I thought that if he put his name on it, he believed in it.

There is no story here. Nothing happened. Nothing! ... A few disconnected scenes of people practicing martial arts, some guy drinking beer in virtual reality bars looking for clues (ridiculously stupid angle), and a conclusion that must have been written in one afternoon because the author was bored. The problem is, as is customary, I read to the end of the book to find that out.

... There were some parts that held some promise, but there is no coherency, and the conclusion is so bad that I wanted to destroy the book and any credibility it has. ...

overall i thought the book was excelent. the book kept me on my toes thinking about what was going to happen. the book was action packed with not only the whole gun slinging scene but also in the scence of how Tom portrayed the world years from now. I love how he made everything electonic. and how everything was made into a thechnologicaly advanced system.
the plot kept moving making the book a page turner. the only thing i disliked about the book, but made it flow however, was how it would jump between charators. beyond that i loved it.

I bought this biography because I have always been fascinated with Hillary Rodham Clinton's role in her husband's administration. I was hoping for an objective look at her contributions to policy, instead, this novel is full of acrimonious allegations and innuendo. It seems that the author is completely unable to separate HRC the person from her politics. This book is horribly slanted and I would not recommend to someone who truly desires insight into either one of the Clintons.

I could not even finish the book. The negativity in virtually every chapter oppressed my soul. I wanted facts and to gain some knowledge about Hillary, and all I got was nausea. Milton's bias was oozing from every page. The information was second, third, and fourth hand, unsubstantiated, and based on assumptions and innuendo. It was like reading a tabloid that went on for over 400 pages. Milton spent too much time explaining what Hillary thought and what all of her "ulterior motives" were for virtually everything she has done in her life thus far. Did she know Hillary's inner thoughts by osmosis or through some Vulcan mind meld? Come on! Don't buy it, don't even check it out from the library. I would have given it a negative 5 rating, but that was not an option. A complete and utter waste of paper and ink.

I want my money back, badly -- but the purchase was my own fault. I am a historian and a teacher of writing, and I bought this book thinking that it would provide substantive political analysis of Hillary Rodham Clinton. This book, however, is not really designed for that. When "People" magazine recommends this book as "gossipy" and "well-written" -- and I don't read People precisely because it is gossipy and lacks literary substance --I should have thought harder about the money. Although the author is exhaustively thorough in documenting the charges against the Clinton's, she relies heavily on ring-and-run ideological attacks, anecdotes that do not really clarify the assertions she makes, and, most painfully, mean hits against every personal decision Hillary has ever made (including the decision to change her hairstyle, which demonstrates conclusively the contradictions of feminism). I would understand the attacks if all of them centered on H.R.C.'s political differences from the author. But the author attacks all of Hillary's parenting choices -- including her decision to spend time bonding in the hospital with her new infant (something Hillary had learned at the Yale Child Study Center, and thus proves Hillary's obsession with being an "expert"), her commitment to child safety (mocked because HRC was "determined to do everything by the book"), and even her intentions to protect Chelsea's privacy (a specious concern because Chelsea herself "entertained 72 sleepover guests" in the first four years). The most awful attack is when the author chastizes the Clinton's use of role-playing to help Chelsea deal with the nasty things opponents would say about Dad, Mom and Daughter. This effort was bad, says the author, because "the nastiest things Bill Clinton's opponents said about him were essentially accurate" and so Hillary was passing the "legacy" of denial on to her child, "training her to believe that the truth was a lie." To make a long story short, this author has ensured that her biography will be replaced momentarily by a more serious author. If you want gossip, buy this book... then throw it away before smarter friends see it on your coffee table.

First, I must say that I am saddened by the horrifying experience that Jacine Gielinski went through in April of 1997. This reveiw, however, focuses on Partners in Evil, Steve Jackson's book regarding that horrendous incident.

As evident by the subtitle (The Shocking True Story of a Fantasy Turned Deadly), as well as the material appearing on the back cover, which is replete with emotionally charged adjectives and adverbs, it is more than obvious that the intent of Jackson and his publisher is to intice readers to purchase and read what promises to be a titillating account of a "gruesome" crime and its "twisted" perpetrators who are filled with "sexual bloodlust."

Apart from the obvious sensationalism, it seem as if Jackson is confused as to what type of book he wants to write. Partners in Evil tries to be at times a "true crime" novel, at other times a diary of the thoughts and feelings of Jacine's family, and at still other times a nonfiction account of the history and righteousness of the death penalty in Colorado. It's possible that if Jackson had chosen just one of these premises, his book would have seemed a bit less disjointed. Even so, I believe that the book would still display its large number of typographical errors and its strong one-sidedness, as well as its questionable accuracy.

The one-sidedness (Jackson uses the book as a pulpit from which to extol the virtues of capital punishment) and typographical errors (indicative of a lack of attention to detail by both Jackson and his editor) will be obvious to any reader. But how, you may ask, can I accuse the book of being less than accurate? I can do this because I am one of the crime scene investigators who was involved in the case, as well as in several other cases touched upon in the book. In fact, a number of the photographs appearing in the book and credited to the Colorado Springs Police Department were taken by me and the captions under at least two of the book's photographs are obviously not correct. The inaccuracies, however, are not confined to Salmon and Woldt's case, but extend into other cases mentioned in the book as well.

A reviewer before me says that Jackson has "done his homework." If that's true, then it appears to be the type of homework that a student does when he prepares for a book report by purchasing and skimming through a copy of Cliff's Notes instead of reading the assigned book. I have no doubt that lovers of "crime fiction" and of "true crime" will enjoy this book. It is, in fact entertaining, as I am sure that it is intended to be. But a mild word of caution as you turn the pages: don't believe everything you read.

Please do not assume by this review that I feel that what happened to Jacine Gielinski is either trivial or excusable. It isn't. I feel badly for Jacine and for all that knew her, especially her parents, Bob and Peggy Luiszer. I understand that Steve Jackson may have felt that this story needed to be told. But maybe for Jackson's next "true" crime book, he will decide to look at all sides of the issue and to be a little more thorough when doing his "homework."

Steve Jackson writes this book for the family of the victim of a heinous crime. He stomps his foot up and down and bemoans the injustice of the justice system, unfortunately, his foot is stomping on the US Constitution. The book slanders defense attorneys and Judges that Jackson doesn't even interview or, it seems, attempt to contact. Jackson admits that it was written with cooperation only from the prosecutors and the victims family presenting a completely one sided, liablous,travesty that does not even attempt to explain the justice system and does not mention the Constitution, the foundation of the justice system; once.

This book is not very compelling. The story could have been told in half the pages. Since the crime and the arrest of the suspects took place within a couple of hours, along with written confessions from both players, there really wasn't much to this story. The book is packed with filler, giving way too much background on the history of the death penalty in Colorado.

Tom Clancy's latest Net Force offering falls short of the high standard he has maintained for his novels. Those accustomed to his technical detail, his political manuevering, his non-stop action will find that this novel focuses much more on personal relationships than previous books.

For instance, VR expert Jay faces the greatest challenge as he must track down the computer responsible for creating situations resulting in mass deaths. For the first time, Jay experiences physical dangers in VR and his experiences are tense and shocking. From VR, however, the book switches to Tyrone and his high school romance, something that has no place in this book. The teenage jargon, the infatuation with the school beauty queen and the boomerang trials are hardly subjects relevant to the book but rather interrupt the flow of the story.

A good deal of the action takes place in England, which provides the opportunity for interaction with MI-6 and British intelligence. Again, however, there is more focus on romance with a British counterpart and the resulting problems than action. The plot is thin and the exciting finish we have grown accustomed to in Clancy works is missing.

In other books Clancy has co-written, Op Center, Net Force, etc., it has always been possible to see Clancy's style and direction. Night Moves has much less of the Clancy style - and it shows.

I've read some of his other books that have been better. The story was a little disjointed. He had some characters like Mikhaly Ruzhyo, and a few others that had great potential, but he got too many things going at the same time and too little time for each of them to develop properly. I did like the way he portrayed Lord Coswell, the English billionaire. He figured he was a law unto himself and seems to have gotten away with murder (kinda like what's happening here in the United States). I enjoyed the book but it wasn't his best.

Diction, different ways of speaking a language, and dialect, the author's word choice, all affect this novel extremely. Because of the fact that it has a dual setting in both England, and Quantico, Virginia, make the author's word choice one of the only ways that the reader can discern between the two settings.
In this passage, the diction used implies that we are in the U.S. "You're in the Neuro Ward at the base hospital. You had a CVA, a cerebrovascular accident. A stroke." Compare that to a different passage a little bit farther along. "Not much, my boy. I was ringing you up to see about that, ah . . .small matter we discussed recently over supper." What a difference! Just by reading the two quotes, one can immediately distinguish that the first was set in an Army Base, in America. The second set in a castle in England. The use of the words my boy, ringing, and supper insinuate that the reader is now in a different place, where people speak with different drawl.
The dialect used in this novel also helps us distinguish from the settings, but it also allows the reader to discern between the upper and lower classes. For example: "Oh, and Applewhite? Se if you can't drum up major Peel. If you should happen across him, tell him his lord wishes to dine with him." Compare that to this quote. "Come on ya blimey old codger! Give us your money afore we beat your bloody coat red!" This almost automatically allows the reader to tell that the first was the higher class, and the second, the lower.
Diction and dialect were two dreadfully important literary devices in this novel. Had the author not used these devices, the readers mind would be a jumble of places, and people.

This book is completely worthless. It only provides the answers to the questions that already have answers in the back of the book. Don't waste your money, there's nothing worthwhile in this book.

Don't waste you money! I bought this book thinking it would help me with my chemistry class. I hoped it would add extra problems for me to work and help when I was studying, doing the calculations outside the classroom. The only thing it helped was the publisher's profit margin. This book is all but useless. About the only thing it's good for is adding weight to your backpack. It gives you no more information than what's in the back of the book. The only problems worked in the book are the ones with answers in the back of the book. There is really nothing extra. No explanations on how the problems were worked out, no detail in the calculations, no extra examples or problems for practice. Nothing is described or shown in any detail whatsoever. All that's there is the answer and a small portion from the end of the calculation. No explanation as to how the problems are worked or how they arrived at the answer. To top it all off, it was written by grad students and some of the calculations are wrong. After reviewing it, my professor even said it was a waste of money and doesn't recommend buying it. You'd be better off buying the STUDY GUIDE that goes with the text instead of the solutions manual. Again, don't waste your money on this book!

I didn't think the book would help at all but when I spent some time looking at it and reading it, it makes alot of the subjects more clear. I would definitely recommend it to everyone.

Akin's offering on Flagler is chock full of factual information. However, it is written in such a scholarly manner (practically every paragraph has a corresponding footnote) that it is difficult to get through. It's well researched, but not well written.

I was particularly interested in Flagler's Key West Extension to his Florida East Coast Railway. Akin gave "the eighth wonder of the world" just one chapter. Pat Parks' "The Railroad That Died at Sea" was more informative regarding the extension--and a far better read.

I was glad that I finished "Flagler...", though I considered it something of a chore.

Although Lipson rightfully points out that democratic institutions are more easily observed, this in no way explains why they are reliable partners. A more profound question would be why don't democractic governments, once the government has changed, fully reverse policies of predecessors (whether foreign or domestic). For example, a woman's right to vote, income tax, social security, anti-trust laws, etc. The answer lies much more in the social character of democratic societies, as first explained in the profound work, Toqueville's Democracy in America. In general, the social character of democratic countries is one that leans towards social progress, equality, the rule of law, keeping your word, etc. Lipson entirely over-looks the character of democratic societies that make them reliable partners for both foreign countries and their own citizens.

To be honest, I haven't read the whole book. I am the type of person who once I start reading a book I will read it regardless of how good or bad it is. For some reason, I feel an obligation to either myself or the author. This book was so bad I had to quit. This was my first read from this Net Force series. The author tried to get fancy with technology/futurism by describing the mundane use a computer as a virtual reality exercise. That literary 'technique' turned me off. After discussing how much I disliked the beginning of this book with a friend, I was turned onto Clive Cussler (Flood Tide) and am really enjoying that.

My wife picked this up for me - she thought I might enjoy Tom Clancy. In fact I do - but this isn't really Tom Clancy at all and, in fact, I'm embarrassed for him.

The good news: It's an easy and almost fun read.

The bad news: The writing is absolutely dreadful. I mean really really bad.

I will give some other Net Force books a chance some time. The premise is interesting and there are supposed to be some good books in the series out there. This, unfortunately, is not one of them!

This seventh book in the now stale Net Force series offers nothing new and is better left alone. The Net Force series started off fresh but the books have since grown forced and clichéd. Writers Perry and Segriff seem to still follow the same plot blueprint that most of the books have followed: ruthless bad guy with a diabolical scheme (even though we never learn what it is), a lowlife assassin, a new set of net viruses (a requirement), and Net Force saving the day. At least in this book the writers decide to change the status quo a little in the ending and provide a jumping-off point for bored readers.

There are a wealth of better alternative books: readers looking for military/political thrillers should check out Tom Clancy's REAL books, while readers wanting action/adventure should try Clive Cussler's writings, and readers looking for future/tech should try some of William Gibson's books.

I did not find this E-doc to be at all helpful. It does no more than espouse team approach; it offers only generalities. I downloaded and printed this and was dissapointed. It even used a ridiculous amount of ink to print.