DC Washington Books

This map was too abbreviated to meet our needs so we returned it to Amazon. We used our Rand McNally map to enjoy our visit to DC.

Perfect for carrying around for quick reference to the DC area. It is sturdy, and won't rip apart. Having the metro map is a huge plus.

This map is very easy to read, and a great tool for getting around DC. The laminated cover keeps it durable, and the size makes it easy to pull out and look at anywhere. I recommend it highly.

We used this guide everyday of our trip to Washington, DC. The subway guide was especially useful. I never felt lost, and didn't waste any time trying to figure out where to go. It was such an important thing to have each day, we double checked each time we left the hotel to make sure we had it. I highly recommend it.

This is a nice map because it is plastic coated. It is normal map size which makes it a bit big to carry but has all the landmarks noted pretty well.

This book provides little tidbits of information that we don't necessarily know about the first families. In some cases the authors left out some things that might have explained why the families were the way they were. The book becomes a bit tedious if read for too long a period of time. Read sparingly and soak it in, don't rush through it.

Former White House curator Clement Conger calls this one of the best White House books he's read. White House scholar William Seale also endorses it. I found it full of fasincating stories that really show what it was like for forty families to live in one house over 200 years.

I was so excited when I got this book. I love stories about Presidents. However, everything in this book I had read somehwere else. Same old boring stuff. No new pictures. Basically, I thought it was awful.

This book is a waste of time and money. It presents nothing that two other more significant works do not already present in more accurate, better edited ways. These two other works are: 1)Inside the White House: America's Most Famous House, The First 200 Years by Better Boyd Caroli, published by Canopy Books; and 2)The White House: Its Historic Furnishings and First Families by Betty C. Monkman, published by Abbeville Press. Caroli has much more research experience with the White House and the nation's first ladies, and Momkman actually worked in the White House Curator's Office.

If it were not for sloppy editing and factually incorrect information, the Whitcomb and Whitcomb book would be a nice addition to these two more accurate, and frankly more interesting works. Grammatical and punctuation errors pepper the entire book and really take away from its readability. Worse are the blatantly wrong facts presented in this book. For example, on page 371 in the chapter on Lyndon Johnson, Clark Clifford's wife is erroneously called "Mary." Her name was actually "Marny," which was a nickname for Margery (Margery Peperell Kimball). The authors interestingly cite Clark Clifford's memoir, Counsel To The President published by Random House, as a source of infomration for the chapters on Presidents Truman and Johnson.

On page 395, in the chapter about Richard Nixon, the authors state that Daniel Ellsburg was a psychiatrist. Had the two authors consulted Ellsberg's memoir, Secrets: A Memoir Of Vietnam And The Pentagon Papers, published by Viking Penguin, they would have seen that Ellsberg is indeed NOT a psychiatrist, but that he earned a doctoral degree in economics from Harvard and later worked in the Pentagon under Secretary McNamara. The authors are undoubtedly confused; there was a break-in at the office of Ellberg's psychiatrist (a Dr. Lewis Fielding...the real pshychiatrist), which was a scheme carried out by G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt.

Another misconception put forth by Whitcomb and Whitcomb on page 395 is that the so-called "White House Plumbers" were the infamous Watergate burglars. The team known as the Plumbers consisted of four men: Liddy, Hunt, Bud Krogh, and David Young. Only Liddy and Hunt were present at the June 17th break-int. However, they were not members of the break-and-enter team. Hunt had recruited five cuban nationals and two Americans, one of whom (James McCord) worked for the CIA and was director of security for the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP) to go into the Watergate. The authors negelected to consult the most accurate account of Watergate and events leading up to the infamous burglary, Watergate: The Corruption Of American Politics And The Fall Of Richard Nixon, published by Simon and Schuster. This book is the accompaniment to a documentary on Watergate developed by the BBC and the Discovery Channel.

These mistakes make me wonder what else the authors got wrong....and such factually inaccurate information really takes away from a historical work. I encourage readers to consult the Caroli and Monkman books for all things White House, as well as the independent biographies and memoirs of the presidents, first ladies, and their staff members (e.g., the memoir by Clark Clifford) instead of wasting their time and money on this sloppy attempt at historical writing.

I found this book full of information about the different Presidents and their families and how they adjusted to living in the White House.

There is a lot of information about earlier, less known Presidents, and I enjoyed reading those chapters.

I was also interested to read about all the pets over the years.
Every family seemed to have all sorts of animals.

It was interesting to read about the First Ladies and their "quirks". Mary Todd Lincoln ran up clothing bills that she tried to hide---just like Jackie.

Other stories that I found amusing were that Nixon would not allow guards or policemen to speak to him or Mrs. Nixon. Betty Ford couldn't understand why they ignored her greetings until this was explained to her.

Ronald Reagan served tea to Prince Charles who did not touch it because, as he explained later, he didn't know what to do with the little bag!

Many such amusing stories made this a truly enjoyable book. I recommend to anyone wanting to know about living in the White House.

D.C. is my favorite U.S. city, and I have to say that this guide gives a thorough and straight-forward representation of the nation's capital. As much as I like to travel mentally, I don't fancy many travel guides (they're so boring to read)....but travel guides by Dorling Kindersley are outstanding!! You'll appreciate the pictures, helpful and less-known tips, and the organization of the book. Everything a traveler needs to know upon arrival is here. Happy traveling...

I have used other "Eyewitness Travel Guides" before and I really like having all of the pictures, renderings, and map layouts. It makes it much easier to correlate what is in the book vs. what you are seeing in front of you. There were a couple of attractions (like the capitol or Washington monument) that were a bit tricky to get into or get tickets for, and it would have been nice if the book had covered those better.

The book was sufficient to be the only that I need, but still sufficiently small to stash in a bag and carry around with us.

First Eyewitness guide and I love it. Wish it was a bit more up to date.

For the first time visitor to Washington, D.C., this book is invaluable. With it's excellent descriptions and insights, grasping a sense of the city's many offerings is easy and fun. But what truly sets this book apart from other travel guides, are the unique and informative full color layouts of the city streets, complete with 2-D images of the buildings for reference. It's nearly impossible to 'get lost' with this guide in your hands!

I usually love the DK Eyewitness Travel Guides, which may have raised my expectations of this one on Washington, DC. There could easily have been an extra twenty or thirty pages - or am I just being greedy?

As I live in Australia, I thought Washington DC would mean the entire capital. The book mainly focuses on the areas along the Potomac, such as the Mall, Georgetown, and Foggy Bottom. Areas such as Dupont Circle and Kalorama have been relegated to the 'Further Afield' section, which I found disappointing.

There's quite a good section on the White House and the beautiful buildings which surround it, but again I was left wanting more.

It's still a beautiful book though, and the photographs are clear and crisp, but there just wasn't enough for this armchair traveller. I guess I'll have to get out of my armchair and experience Washington DC for myself. At least this travel guide has whet my appetite!

My husband and I have just returned from DC and found this guide very helpful. It helped give us brief snapshots of the places to go and see in specific neighborhoods. The reason I didn't give it a five star rating is the maps. We ended up buying a seperate map because they were very limited. The size of the book was a plus, it was easy to stash in my backpack. Having this to plan our trip prior to arriving in the city, was a great asset and helped make our trip more enjoyable. I'm planning a trip to NYC and plan on buying a Top 10 Guide for that trip.

I like the size of the book and the different categories. It may not be as complete as some others, but it has a lot of information in a size small enough to carry.

My son chose this book for researching our trip to DC. So far it is the usual great quality of information from DK Publishing. So many small maps, pictures with facts and great reading information. These are great for kids and adults. Thanks DK Publishing! ...We did take the trip to DC and found that this book was easy to carry with us and had ton of very valuable information. This was that best book for Washington DC. We got it for our son but we ended up using it alot!!!

If you are looking for a guide to carry with you when exploring DC than this is the guide. It lays out excellent recommendations on where to eat and visit. I would plan your trip with a bigger guide but this is the one I would carry with you on your day to day travels in DC.

My ultimate opinion on how to rate a guide book is the frequency with which I use it while traveling. I spent 6 days in DC, bought this book on my first day there, tried to use it that day and the next, and finally just gave up. While the graphics are very attractive and while the guide LOOKS very helpful, the appearance proves to be mostly superficial. It seemed like, whenever I'd consult the book with a question about a particular site, it lacked the information I needed. I found myself using it mainly for the phone numbers, which I think I easily could have obtained without paying for a whole book.

A guide book should provide quick answers and clear directions and information, but I got very little from this. Instead I found myself consulting other sources. I had a map from my hotel, several National Parks brochures, and a pamphlet from the Smithsonian institute, all of which proved infinitely more useful than this book. And, as previous reviewers have pointed out, I found the restaurant section very lacking. I carried this book around with me for the duration of my stay, but whenever I reached into my bag for information I invariably grabbed something else.

Five stars to Gregor Dallas! He has written one of the best history books on WW1 that I have read at any time and with a particular interest in WW1 this mean I have read many. It is eminently comparable to Massie's "Dreadnought" in depth and readability. Come to think of it, the one complements the other since there can be no better introduction to the origins of WW1 and no better narrative of the transition from war to peace.
I read Dallas' "The Final Act" which relates the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the transition to peace through the Congress of Vienna in 1815. Thus, his latest book treats the same process after the "War to End all Wars" and where appropriate he draws useful parallels. The difference between the two transitions is striking: after 1815, Europe remained peaceful for almost exactly 100 years, except for the altercation between France and the newly formed Germany of Bismarck in 1870, but after 1918 the peace lasted just over 20 years before another world war.
The seeds of WW2 were sown during the peace process which began with the armistice of November 11, 1918. The entry of the United States into WW1 came at a late hour and by the time US military intervention began to have any effect the war was virtually over. Indeed, we learn that the refusal of Pershing to integrate the US Expeditionary force into the allied command had two consequences. One was Pershing's naïve belief he could do what the allies could not by making mass frontal attacks. Both the British and French had taken years to learn this was not the way to win a war, but in the typical NIH syndrome that we seem to suffer from, Pershing refused to listen. Thus he made three attempts to break through the German lines and failed miserably each time, incurring horrendous losses quite on a par with anything the allied command had inflicted on their own forces. Meantime, both the British and French were forging ahead: Clemenceau expressed his frustration on two occasions at the slowness of Pershing to effect a contribution in accordance with the plan. Finally, on the 4th attempt, Pershing broke through, but by then the German flanks were in great danger from the allies on each side. Only in the last week of the war did the US army make a significant contribution, but Wilson took little time to announce it was America that won the war!
The book relates the formulation of Wilson's 14 points, written with his friend Colonel House (who was not a colonel at all!) without consulting either his cabinet or the Congress. He then sent the 14 points to the German government without informing the allies. This contrasts with Lloyd George, the British premier, who was careful not only to keep his cabinet informed, but also parliament, so that when he did make his policy speech, it was with the support of the elected representatives. A lesson of democracy, indeed, when compared to Wilson's method! Clemenceau equally was careful to keep all those that mattered informed of his thoughts and intentions.
Wilson's misplaced and naïve idealism in the end cost the allies a good deal as Dallas demonstrates. Wilson was never able to comprehend the French concern about the future and its imperative to prevent Germany from making war again. The British understood this very well, but placed themselves in the middle. The question of German reparations for the extensive damage they caused was a common aim of the allies, but Wilson did not really want to see Germany stuck with reparations, though in the end he accepted the principle he did not foresee enforcing any payments. In short, the intervention of Wilson directly lead to WW2 far more than any so-called 'appeasement' by Chamberlain or the French. While all parties concentrated on Germany's western borders, no one bothered too much about what was going on in Poland, nor for that matter in Germany itself. Thus the myth of the non-defeat of the German Army was allowed to fester and to lay the blame, later, on the Versailles Treaty not to mention 'appeasement'.
Reading other critiques on this site, I find the claim of errors by one critic nonsensical and, moreover, the allegation is unsupported by evidence. I also note the typos are not as frequent as alleged, but even more important, I wonder what typos have to do with the substance of the work? I accept the truth is hard for many of us to swallow, brought up on the usual myths of US hubris, but the critics should say so and not use subterfuge to denigrate a serious, excellent book.
This is an important book, because it overturns accepted ideas, places a perspective on the aftermath of WW1 not found, to my knowledge, elsewhere. It is thus not only a rattling well told story, but also a work of scholarship.

Gregor Dallas has gifted the world with a splendid introduction for history laymen like myself on the question of what happened after the war ended and why we let it get that way. The short answer is that after November 11, 1918, Europe burned only at one end instead of both. Dallas's genius lies in giving you the overly-long answer and, as a consequence, a very nice bookstop once you have finished reading its contents.


If I sound a bit miffed about the length of the book, please don't take it quite that way. I found certain passages that soared upon the wings of swallows. Others, however, merely shuffled along like an arthritic elephant. Mr. Dallas's tome shuffles a bit too much. It needed tighter editing. I was also distracted by the number of typos I ran across, including one of my all-time favorites the "the the" mental stutter, which is liberally salted throughout the book.


So, what about Dallas's historical analysis of the events surrounding the Armistice and its aftermath? He's on his firmest and most fascinating footing when recounting mayhem, most notably Germany's descent into near anarchy, the swirl of conflicting groups contesting one another for control of Berlin or parts of it and the rise of paramilitary groups that ultimately curbed the unrest in a bloody, extra-legal manner.


Dallas's greatest achievement lies in reminding Western readers that when the guns fell silent in the trenches in France, they continued to roar everywhere in Europe east of the Oder. He takes the time to explain why the Bolsheviks were able to seize and consolidate their control of the new Russian state. There are plenty of books already out that will give you a much more thorough account of the convoluted fighting between Red and White armies between 1919-1921. Dallas, however, is interested in the question of how the vicious civil war in Russia and its outcome affected all of Central Europe in the interwar period. Poland's defeat of Russia in a brief war in 1920, often overlooked in Western accounts of the aftermath of the Great War, is placed in a much more appropriate context here.


This is a book you read once, put back on the shelf, then return to over the years as you learn more about that particular era of history. Dallas's palpable dislike of Communists along with Americans in general and liberals in particular may put off some more patriotic readers, but it doesn't detract from the book's worth as a reminder of what happens when peace is not waged with the single-mindedness, intensity and ingenuity of modern war.

What a year 1918 was on the western front! 1917 had experienced the mutinous near-collapse of the French Armies, the economic near-collapse of the British Empire, and the actual collapse of the Tsar's Russia. The first was only quelled by Marshall Petain's promise to his army to sit-tight until the Americans came, and the second by the gargantuan financial and munitions assistance provided by those same Americans. In the spring of the new year the Germans gathered divisions freed from the war now ended in the East and proceeded to almost win the war in the west with their Kaiserschlacht in the spring of 1918. Its quite a history, and I picked-up this book in hopes of finding more of it fleshed-out.

Instead I found history rewritten and the American contributions not just downplayed but actively mocked.

I eventually stopped reading this absurdly biased book when I got to the part (early on) where the author scorns the AEF, the U.S. forces, for losing 9000 men in their first day of fighting in the Argonne - a rate of loss he claims to be higher than anything else in the war. Have the 60,000 lost by the British on the first day of The Somme been relegated to the memory hole? Can the four years of bungled leadership and slaughter of the French and British armies be ignored: a British army whose courage is certain, but whose history of losses is bitterly encapsulated by a phrase describing their decimation in the first months of the war as "The First 100,000." For almost any day of actual battle that the British generals sent their men forward nine-thousand lost was trumpeted as a smashing victory!

This pathetic attempt to highlight Pershing's flaws leading the AEF over the genocide committed upon British soldiery by Haig and upon the French by Joffre and Foch and Nivelle was enough for me to realize that Mr. Dallas is of that breed of monomaniacally Anglophile WWI historians who occupy a special roost amongst the vultures picking at the corpses of the prior century. Factor in Dallas's apparent amnesia with respect to one of history's most infamous slaughters and one must wonder at what, exactly he might be fleshing out except the long-dead corpse of British martial and imperial glory.

Rather than trust your own background on the war to allow reading this fat book with balance, consider some others instead:

(a) Dallas holds the Germans 110% responsible for the war. Read Niall Ferguson's "The Pity of War" instead for a view that strongly supports the idea the Brits need not have entered the war at all and did so through the sly manipulation of fact and public opinion. Read McCullough's "How the First World War Began" for a detailed look at the manipulations of British and French militarists in the 20 years prior to 1914. For that matter read David Fromkin's "Europe's Last Summer" for a more studied view, albeit one leading to the same conclusion as Dallas.

(b) Dallas considers the Americans to be bumpkins and military incompetents. For alternative views read Mosier's "The Myth of the Great War" (or almost any contemporaneous German military report of their reaction to the arrival of one million fresh American troops on the front). Even Fleming's "The Illusion of Victory" presents a more considered view within its critique of the Wilson government's trampling of liberties at home to feed the hungry maw of the Franco-British war machine.

(c) Dallas considers the leadership of the British war effort to have been an astute bunch. For alternative views consider Laffin's "British Butchers and Bunglers of WWI" or Denis Winter's "Haig's Command." For anglophilia that at least honors not the butchers but those who actually fought and died read any of Lyn MacDonald's books.

I admit I never got to the parts of this book where it, presumably, treats with the armistice and the creation of the peace. It seems certain that you'd do better to read Fromkin's "A Peace to End all Peace", or the aforementioned Fleming book, or Macmillan's "Paris, 1919: Six Months that Changed the World."

Two stars for a good example of how malleable history can be at the hands of apologists for fools.

Most books that speak about the beginning of World War I parcel out the blame among several different countries, on both sides of the conflict. The author of this book is pretty unambiguous: the fault is entirely that of the German Empire. Once he gets down to the peace treaty, he does tend to apportion blame for its ultimate failure in several directions, not the least among them the United States, for its indifference to Europe and its insistence upon being paid back every penny lent during the conflict. The book covers a lot of territory, and its broad scope tends to limit its coverage to any one particular region, which leaves the average reader wishing for more information, particularly about the fighting in Poland and the eastern portions of Europe. Also, this book is badly in need of a good proofreader, for there were many sentences which contained too many words, and then there were some that were missing words. This tended to distract the reader, and I found it extremely annoying. All in all, the work is well done, and gives some different insight into a conference that changed the course of history, unfortunately for the worst, rahter than for the better.

'1918' is a grand book about the end of the most significant war of our times, It aiso illustrates how making peace can do more harm for future generations than the war itself.

The peace was negotiated until 1926; the Treaty of Versailles- June, 1919- was first on the agenda so Europe could contain Germany as soon as possible- at least on the Western Front. The war in the East was germany's problem for a while. However, the treaty was just the beginning of how the Paris Conference played a role in changing the whole world.

Nearly every country on Earth was held in the balance after the war that was to end all wars; four empires died their timely deaths, leaving behind the debris of centuries. All wanted what they believed was rightfully theirs: self determination.

The Great War did what Napoleon failed to do: it ended the Age of Empire. Prior to the war, European Empires ruled the world through their colonies, money and weapons.
But the 1918 armistice and the peace worked out in Paris ended that age of domination. The men meting out peace created countries, changed borders, gave promises of independence. They shaped the world- and its problems- we live in today.

Although the USA was not in the trenches for long, it had the biggest hand to play- because the United States was the only major player left with any money.
Therefore, Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations theory and Fourteen Points (he really had nothing but a theory to offer) had to be accepted first so Europe could get funding to
contain Germany.
France insisted any peace plan had to keep Germany far from its borders. France's self interest was a demilitarized Germany. France, the victim of Germany, did not win here.

Soon enough, Germany wanted to punish France- For the Germans believed it did not lose the war. They thought France, backed by the USA, decided to blame its losses on them.
It is a fallacy France let Germany roll over them during WWII. It was a mere 20 years earlier French soil was soaked with the blood of millions of Europeans, most of them Frenchmen.
When Hitler invaded, France wanted to keep the orphans of the Great War from the fate of their fathers.

Chamberlain, blamed for Hitler's land grab, was in the same position. England was not ready to fight again. By letting Hitler take the Sudetenland, hopes were high that was as far as he would go. The area was mostly German anyway (and intensely anti-semetic). A more perceptive negotiator would have seen Hitler was determined to even the score over WWI. But so many turned a blind eye, since no one wanted another war.

Signs of The Great War can be found all over Europe; very few were untouched by its impact. No country anticipated a brutal war that would go into a stalemate within months. Not one country believed the battle could last four years.

Dallas spells all this out in a book that I could not stop reading. He takes on each country, its current status as of 1918, and its war and peace interests. Dallas is honest; he uses the leaders' personalities as part of the process- because that's how the peace was finally made.

'1918' is a must read for many reasons, especially anyone interested in how Europe was forced to cut the roots to its empires.
The book shows how a war that could have been fought longer finally ended, with France finally achieving victory over its invader. it also shows the perils of peace. Haste fomented resentment; haste laid the ground work for the next brutal war- only 20 years later.

'1918' is also a fascinating read for those curious how we got to where we are today. One example: Iraq became a country created by the Paris Conference.
History haunts us all.

WHAT? Give me a break! To even suggest that the US was behind the biggest tragedy many of us have ever seen is absurd. I find it hard to even comprehend where the author collected his turdbucket of information. It's almost as stupid as a Jordanian taxi driver once claimed to me during the summer of 2002, "Israel was behind 9/11. You will see!" Yeah...what would Israel have to gain? What would the US have to gain by beating the hell out of itself? That suggests we made attacks on ourselves to pin the blame on Arabs and wage a war. Whether you think the war in Iraq OR Afghanistan is worthwhile or not, if you have one iota of common sense you'd know that this book makes NO sense. Utter crap.

A littany of distortions and fabrications, on par with Holocaust-denial. Think the USA provoked WW-II? That the USA faked the moon-landing? Then you'll love this book. A series of cherry-picked factoids, "cleansed" of anything that would undermine the pre-developed hypothesis, ignoring of eye-witness testimony where it undermines the conclusions, etc. Other investigative reporters went and interviewed many of the people Meyssan quoted in his book, and found he had manipulated their words. In an article "Panoply of the Absurd" (Der Spiegel, 37/2003 - 08. September 2003 online versions in both German and English) Meyssan's deceptions were unmasked: "Another example is the use of statements made by TV journalist Mike Walter, who witnessed the attack on the US Department of Defense as he was driving to work. Meyssan used Walter's statement to support his theory that the Pentagon was destroyed with missiles or remotely guided aircraft. Walter is still furious about this manipulation. He saw the aircraft fly toward the building and accelerate in a "soft curve." Then, says Walter, "it went into a dive and hit a light pole. Shortly after that, it slammed into the Pentagon. The wings collapsed, I heard the explosion, and then I saw the fireball. The guy who was flying it knew what he was doing. It behaved like a cruise missile." Meyssan only quoted the last sentence.

For ordinary people, this is called **lying**. Likewise his use of photos where smoke shrouds the images -- only those which support his murky conspiracy theory are used. The man is an America-hater, in the same manner that some people are Jew-haters, for irrational emotional reasons. Save your money.

The events of 9/11 were devestating, this book doesn't try to refute those facts. This book does, however, bring forth several ideas backed with enough logical evidence that makes a person think twice about what was really going on that day and how the government used the event as leverage to forge war. A few of the ideas mentioned in this book are; the 767 hitting the pentagon, yet no piece of the plane was ever recovered (the first time in history there's been no recovery of ANY piece of a plane after crashing on american soil), the mysterious stock-dumping of the airline companies affected on 9/11, and a very intresting piece on the heroin trade in afghanistan as being the main reason to forge war. As an American, I'd stand behind this book 100% with what's presented, it's obvious there's more going on than meets the eye.

The book indeed shocks you for many reasons. The author does not claim that the victims of the American Airlines Flight 77 who took off from Dulles Airport are false, or that we shall not join the grief and anger that the events of 9/11 brought to US citizens.

What the author argues is that departing from the physical evidence gathered at the Pentagon as well as from the graphic documentation of the crash, indeed a huge explosion occurred at the Pentagon. The problem is, that such evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that such damage could no be caused by a Boeing 757 travelling at a speed of no less that 250 mph.

Indeed, looking at the reasoning of Mr. Meyssan and the evidence he places before you the reader feels at loss to explain how the crash of the Pentagon would be the only case in the history of aviation when after the collision not a single piece of the plane is recovered because all the plane is melted in an explosion, which oddly enough does not affect the green grass on the field right in front of the building. Or how a plane of that size and with such a wide wing span makes a crack on the building which is al least 50% smaller that the size of the plane. In other words how is it possible that the wings and the motors did not touch the building? Or how a plane of that size and characteristics gets into the most heavily guarded air space of the USA and no single civil or military radar cares to wonder what is it doing there.

Mr Meyssan feels that such lack of coherence of the official version with the stark reality of the facts only proves that the US government is knowingly lying to its citizens in order to hide that what really happen on 9/11, including the destruction of the twin towers was a coup d' etat by the industrial military sectors of the US, covered up as a Muslim conspiracy against the US, in order to gain sufficient support from its citizens to attack Afghanistan and Irak and make a [heck] of a profit with the blood of honest, kind, patriotic but misguided Americans, while simultaneously gaining absolute control of the petroleum of the region.

If he is right or not I do not know, but indeed the absence of a single piece plane debris, together with the photos that the damage suffered by the Pentagon do not have the scale that should occurred if a real Boeing 757 had fallen against it makes you uneasy about how right Mr. Thierry might be.

Besides the version of the facts proposed by Thierry Meyssan which can leaves the reader septic, although it is more logical than the one given by Washington, the elements brought here cannot leave us inflexible, as for example the testimony of the lieutenant Vreeland to the Canadian authorities on AUGUST 12TH, 2001, which contained a precise description of the attacks such as they occurred 1 month later. Obviously independent, we have to recognize the quality of the information here condensed, among which some very rare although they are essential to understand these events. Thierry Meyssan goes of revelations to revelations, quoting for every assertion his sources which each can reach. Every sentence bases itself on facts, and the author never flares up in silly reasonings, although they're horrifying. Far from the catchy title obviously advertising, it's a TRUE SERIOUS work of investigation which goes much further to wonder whether yes or not, this plane was crushed on the Pentagon... Don't buy the book for the Pentagon Plane Crash thesis, there are only 20 pages about it. This part is much more detailed and convincing in the last Thierry Meyssan's book "Pentagate". "The big lie" is however essential and still the best book about the Attack.

This book by the daughter of President Harry Truman offers a wonderfully insightful and fun-filled look at life inside the most famous home in the United States. Margaret Truman's membership in that exclusive club of former residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has given her the opportunity to extensively research the private historical documents and records pertaining to the White House, as well as unique access to others who have shared those living quarters over the years.

Ms. Truman has a very engaging writing style that is entertaining, humorous and informative. The book is arranged topically into such sections as political history, social customs and events, the importance of the behind-the-scenes employees, the architecture and various pets who have inhabited the White House, just to name a few. Her discussions with many of the Presidents and members of their families, beginning in her memories of her own occupancy and extending through to the current administration, make these stories particularly interesting and full.

She takes a fairly non-partisan and no-holds-barred look at the Presidency of many of these men, and gives a very frank assessment of how some of the issues in their lives and relationships impacted their terms of office. But, throughout the book, the White House itself remains the central character, and Margaret Truman's love for the building and its rich history comes through clearly on each page.

PLEASE NOTE: I am reviewing the HARDBACK version of Mrs. Truman's book. The first time I ordered this book, I got the paperback version, which is an abridged and edited children's edition with very few photos. The hardback version is much more complete and has a lot of pictures!

For people who have an interest in the White House, I would highly recommend this book.

I listened to the Audio CD version of this book.

In terms of strong historical value, there is not a lot to this book. It really is pretty fluffy in its tone and approach. Margaret Truman is a credible source however and she does make it very entertaining to listen to.

The organization is interesting. The language is conversational. You'll come away with better knowledge of the White House, its residence and our Nations History.

Former First Daughter Margaret Truman offers the reader an entertaining, anecdotal account of life at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Her focus is on the White House as a home, though its role as a seat of power is not neglected. As a result, you can expect to learn more here about the first wives, children, doormen, Secret Service agents, maids, gardeners, cooks and others who have lived and labored behind these famous walls..although the presidents themselves aren't entirely overlooked.

The exterior the White House presents to the world has changed little in two centuries...but the interior has been undergoing an almost constant process of destruction and renewal. We learn about the 1814 torching of the president's house by invading British troops; the addition of greenhouses, which gave way to the west wing at the beginning of the 20th century; almost constant sprees of redecoration and reconfiguring of the public and family rooms, all of which culminated in the complete reconstruction of the White House during the Truman years.

There are chapters about the rambunctious children, the unusual pets, the glamorous weddings, riotous inaugural balls and other historic events that have enlivened this historic mansion. You will get a sense of the behind-the-scenes preparation that goes into welcoming a visiting head of state or similar dignitary. There are two sections of illustrations, one in color, that further help the reader share in Truman's wonder and appreciation of this historic house.--William C. Hall

While Margaret Truman isn't on the same level as Ken Burns, Shelby Foote or other historians her books are a fun read. Who better to tell you about the White House than someone whose parents spent seven years in residence (although due to renovations it was not technically seven years - they spent some time at the Blair House).

She crafts a nice balance between telling you little known stories about the former first families while sprinkling in her opinions; much like a chef would throw a dash of spice into a recipe. One of the most pleasant surprises is that she is bi-partisan in her narrative. If she is wry in her observations about some of the first families, it is based more on her observations of character rather than party loyalty. She speaks glowingly of some of the Republican inhabitants - most notably the Coolidges.

I definitely recommend this book for those who love historical trivia. Plus much of the reading material (White House pets for example)can be shared with kids for those times that you'd like bedtime reading to be a little more stimulating than "Captain Underpants" or "The Day my Butt went Psycho"

Margaret Truman is, of course, the daughter of President Harry Truman and his wife Bess. She is the most prolific writing child of any American Chief Executiv. Margaret Truman has written several mysteries and histories about life in Washington which are written in a popular style easy to understand and enjoy.
As Ms. Truman opens the door to our White House she lets us discover the fascinating men and women who have lived at 1600
Pennyslvania Avenue. She discusses such various topics as:

1. White House Weddings.
2. Relations between the Presidents and the Media
3. The Children of Presidents who have lived in the White House
4. White House Presidential Pets
5. The kooks and crazies who have tried (and in some cases been successful) in assasinating our chief executive.
6. She describes the growth of the White House from its first occupancy by John and Abigal Adams in 1800. The history of the White House building, grounds, gardens and additions are discussed.
7. How the routine of a White House day changed with every administration-when they awoke to what they liked for dinner!
Ms. Truman has written in a charmingly simple style which is nevertheless based on her well done historical research. This is a book anyone regardless of age or party affiliation could enjoy.
I recommend it highly!

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book about the history of our nation's capital and why it came to be located where it is. Bordewich explains how the location of the capital was closely tied to the importance of slavery in the South. He describes the details of the negotiations in Congress and how ultimately, to the disappointment of Philadelphia and other contestants, a compromise tying the assumption of debts from the Revolution to the location of the capital placed it where it is today.
But the location was tenuous from the beginning as George Washington's vision of a grand capital was fraught with all kinds of problems -including the involvement of land speculators - that would keep the capital from maturing for many years to come.

Bordewich reveals the role that slave labor played in building the capital and the ironies that abounded becuase of that, particularly the personal struggle that some, like Washington himself, dealt with to reconcile their ownership of slaves with the egalitarian pronouncements of the new republic.

The characters involved in this real life plot are engaging: Pierre L'Enfant, the architect originally commissioned to build the City; the land speculators and the founding fathers - Jefferson, Hamilton and Madison, as well as Washington himself, who is also revealed as having self-interest via land-holdings in the development of the City. In the end, however, his deity-like stature remains for posterity.

What I always find striking in books of American history of this period, is the erudite manner in which people communicated, ways that apparently have been lost to more recent generations, and makes me wonder whether we simply think differently and therefore do not have ready access to the forms of expression that were the signature of our forefathers, but I suppose that is another book.

I strongly recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn about the genesis of our nation's capital.

This well written, easily read account of the decade long saga that is the history of Washington, D.C.'s creation as our national capital brings a bit of scholarly background of the Founding era to a general readership. The political, personal, international, financial, religious, medical, national security, and geographical details that each came to play in the selection and completion of this project are clearly explained. Whether famous or infamous, the players are presented fairly, but without omission of their very human motives and behaviors. Slavery is presented just as it was in this new Republican land-of-the-free: protected by the Constitution and a powerful force when expressed in the Federal Ratio. The quoted sentiments of many contemporaries bring the text an enjoyable contemporaneous quality. There are many poignant anecdotes, including the sheriff's arrest of a sitting Supreme Court justice and co-father of the Constitution, James Wilson, for failure to pay his debts. Without doubt, the lack of maps is a major disappointment. I found myself digging out my old tourist guides each time reference was made to today's geography. There is a place on the bookshelves of everyone interested in American history for this informative volume.

This is simply a superb book. Extremely well told, rich with historical texture, with detail new even to those who "already know" this story, and especially fascinating to anyone who works in commercial real estate or finance, particularly those of us in DC.

To the real estate player, this is a development case study that will astound, amaze, and amuse on almost every page. To the financier in any industry, it will remind you our business never really changes.

Buy the book, you will find it hard to put down.

Allow me firstly to say I went in initially with high expectations for this book. The history of Washington, D.C. had been an area that I knew very little about and was greatly excited when I finally found a book about this on the shelves of my local bookstore. But, how my expectations have changed after reading this book.
Bordewich gives the reader a cast of characters that otherwise have been regulated to the dustiest pages of history, and whose contributions are indeed worthy of note.
The problem that Bordewich forces his readers to endure is his insistence of turning several chapters into abolitionist minutia history. Where one chapter of anti-slavery background filled the reader with all they really needed to know about the people and abolitionist history, Bordewich insists on dragging his readers through information that he's already stated in other chapters. I found myself actually speed reading through those chapters in about 45 seconds and skipped to the next chapter.
It appeared as if Bordewich needed `filler' to round out the more informative and better written chapters. Overall, I came away disappointed from a book that I had such high hopes for. Buy this if you need a reference book, but not for pleasure.

If there is truth in advertising this book should be entitled Washington The Making of an American Capital & A History of Slavery in the United States 1789 - 1801. In an attempt to show the part that African - Americans played in the founding of he nation's capital he spent half of the book talking about the plight of free blacks and slaves in the middle atlantic states during the first dozen years of his country's history. While the book is a very good read it gets tiresome in points and goes overboard in the name of "political correctness"

Authors' tone indicates they are clearly amazed by Washington DC, but this doesn't translate into any new or interesting information about the city for visitors. Lots of info out of date.

I found that this book was an interesting and direct source of information that helped me to find places to visit as well as how to get there. It is a wealth of information for where to take kids of all ages that would be of interest to them in Washington, D.C. I found it helpful also to know the phone numbers to be able to call about questions that I might have before visiting the places. I would highly recommend this book to anyone such as teachers or parents who are interested in taking kids to the Washington,D.C. area.

I ordered this book to help plan a trip to Dc for my family. I was excellent. This book was also passed to our high school principal who used this book for a personnel trip to DC. This was his favorite book to use for learning about DC.

I found this book VERY valuable and will be used for future trips to the area.

While this is a great guide for parents, it is particularly helpful for those who may not have children at these ages. An Aunt, Grandmother, family friend who wants to spend time with children but doesn't know where to start and may not have a crew of friends with children needs this book. It can be the beginning of really great time with and for the children and adults together.

This guide may be good at highlighting attractions, but it's woefully impractical for real-life touring.

We used--or, I should say, tried to use--this guide on a recent trip to Washington, D.C., and we wound up very frustrated with it. We were attempting to do as much as we could by Metro and taking the car only when it was practical and necessary. We followed the guide for Metro stops and wound up walking, sometimes miles, with two young kids (aged 6 and 3).

For instance, we took the Metro to the zoo, got off at the stop recommended in the book and had an uphill walk for more than a mile. Someone told us later that there would have been ample parking, had we driven. I wish the guide had mentioned it. Another time, we followed the instructions on which Metro stop to use for the Lincoln Memorial. We popped out of the station onto a street filled with mainly government office buildings and no signs directing us to the memorial, which, again, was a long hike away. (A kind man saw our "lost" looks, asked if we were looking for the memorial and pointed the way there.) We found out from locals that it would have been better to have taken Metro stops along the Mall--possibly the same distance but with more diversions, like a carousel and grass to run around on, for youngsters.

This is not a trivial complaint when you're dealing with kids. And, given that this book is specifically about touring D.C. with kids, I would have expected the authors to do better.

By the time we were leaving, it had become a joke to consult the book's maps and station recommendations. We came to the conclusion that whatever it recommended, we should do something else.

I love this book! Many other hiking books for the D.C. area list hikes that are much further out, but this book lists easy to get to, fun hikes that don't require an entire day for the hike and travel time. I have purchased this book for friends in the area as well, and we are looking at future hikes together.

Just tried to use this book for hike in North Point State Park and found it difficult to follow. Luckily, we had another guide with a map. This guide often does not have maps and the directions lack points on the compass, i.e. north, south, east, west.

Having been on many trails in the region (and now many more thanks to this guide), I highly recommend100 Easy Hikes. It's as good as it gets for hitting all the hot spots in the Washington DC area- from nearby jaunts on the trails of Rock Creek Park to the lesser known gems in the Shenandoah. Additionally, the author's insider tips and her clear directions to the trailheads make this guide exceptional.

I was particularly impressed the "best of" recommendations. They were right on target. Neither bluebells nor waterfall classics escaped her attention. The maps, as you'd expect from the National Geographic Society, are clear and easy to follow. Anyone looking for a basic resource on the area should have this guide.

I have been looking for a book just like this for some time now. Having hiked a fair amount in and around Washington I was running short on ideas for new hikes. I had tried the Appalchian Trial Guides and some other books that are out there but felt that while they were great on trail details they didn't provide much of the practical information that you want when heading out to a new destination. Especially enjoyed the author's editorial comments and trail descriptions which combined to make the book a pleasure to read. The author must be a dog lover as well which earns her points in my book. She marks each trail to let dog owners know if their pooches are welcome.

There's several books with basically the same theme and roughly the same hikes - e.g. those by Alan Fisher and those by the Appalachian Trail Club. This one does have more hikes described than any other single volume I've seen, but it doesn't have enough maps or sufficiently good trail descriptions to make it a hiking "bible". Only recommended for those folks who've already exhaused the other available guides and are looking for more.