Churchill Books

Really below the level I was looking for. I was looking for therapeutic activities and these are very general and introductory. Good intro level

This book is one of the main sources of ideas and techniques that I currently employ when working in a group scenario. The client base with which I work are mainly adults who are experiencing an acute psychiatric episode. It allows for a large variance in the abilities of clients and invites the practitioner to modify techniques and methods to best suit the group he/she is working with. Most of the activities described require a minimal amount of equipment and the instructions are clearly set out and easy to follow. My only critism is that perhaps it lacks detail in explaining the theory behind some of the more complex groups.

Many fine books have been written in the last 10 years regarding the treatment of pain. This, in my opinion, is not one of them. The depth of this text leaves much to be desired. No new approaches or considerations are highlighted either. For a single volume overview, I'd pick Rachlin & Rachlin's 2nd edition of Myofascial Pain and Fibromyalgia: Trigger Point Management over Baldry's by far. CC Gunn's The Gunn Approach to the Treatment of Chronic Pain: Intramuscular Stimulation for Myofascial Pain of Radiculopathic Origin and Wong's Manual of Neuro-Anatomical Acupuncture: Vol. 1: Musculo-Skeletal Disorders add some new dimensions to the treatment of stubborn myofascial pain syndromes with acupuncture. Of course, for trigger points, all you need is already presented in Travell & Simons' 2 volume classic. The needling techniques can be easily adapted to dry needling with acupuncture needles. Trigger point treatment strategies are well addressed in Clinical Mastery in the Treatment of Myofascial Pain by Ferguson and Gerwin and Chaitow & DeLaney's 2 volume Clinical Application of Neuromuscular Techniques.

An essential reference for all Doctors and Physiotherapists interested in Acupuncture for the treatment of muskuloskeletal pain. In fact it should be an essential reference for all Doctors and Physiotherapists full stop. Contains readable account of neurophysiological background, is well-referenced, and very practically orientated.

A simple clear and enjoyable read, with particuar emphasis on asthma. Stephen Holgate and Martin Church have produced a book which puts across simply all what is needed to be known by any student interested in Asthma

This book has excellent pictures and tables, however it lacks in depth and substance. For example, in the atopic dermatitis section, there is no discussion on differential diagnosis/other clinical conditions to consider. The drug allergy chapter has a nice chart for drug desensitization, but the chapter lacks a good discussion on any of the most important drugs...IE the PCN drug section is skimpy at best. And for some reason, they don't even have devoted chapter on food allergy. Overall, I am disappointed with this book. This book is best applicable to medical students and residents. In my opinion, it will not fit the need of Allergy/Asthma/Immunology fellows or practicing staff. I highly recommend "Pediatric Allergy" (also from Mosby) which is an excellent resource for Pediatric Allergy. Patterson's Allergic diseases is also good reference.

I bought this book 13 years ago. It's been sitting around ever since. It's not that I wasn't interested in the topic: rather the opposite actually. I just never got around to reading it. I'm almost a collector of obscure and unnoticed events from World War II and from warfare in general. The assassination of Admiral Francois Darlan on Christmas Eve 1942 is one of those events that gets mentioned in history books, but usually without much elaboration beyond that it happened, and that Darlan's death cleared the field for de Gaulle, who wound up leading the Free Frech movement unchallenged. Darlan was Marshal Petain's deputy in the Vichy French government for a while, and then contrived to be in North Africa when the Allies launched Operation Torch and overran the place. He convinced the Allies (notably Eisenhower's protege General Mark Clark, and his diplomatic deputy Robert Murphy) that he was the only person who could provide stability in North Africa, and began ruling the provinces in the name of Marshal Petain, still in metropolitan France, and soon a guest of Hitler. Darlan was a shady character, an admiral who wound up being best known for his political maneuvering, and his flexible ethics--within the same year he met Hitler and pledged support to the Third Reich, and then met Eisenhower and pledged support to the Allied cause--made him a slippery character at best, and one the Allies knew they couldn't trust. His death benefited the Allies in general (though the Americans, according to the author, weren't aware of it at the time) and De Gaulle in particular, leaving him an almost completely clear field in his run for leadership of the Fighting French movement.

This book is an examination of Darlan's killing, and the events that led up to it. While this subject is fascinating to me, the book itself is so poorly written it's almost impenetrable. Verrier supposedly was a journalist at one point, but you have to wonder: if he was a journalist, did he forget how to write? Or perhaps the publication he wrote for preferred the prose in their publication so dense as to defy understanding? I don't know. One way or the other, what we get here is so unreadable I found myself falling asleep, something I virtually never do when reading a book.

This isn't helped any by the author's premise, which is (near as I can tell) that many people benefited from Darlan's passing, but none of them beyond his killer had much to do with his death. There's much discussion of various individuals telling one another that "Darlan must be eliminated" and then the author follows that with a notation that there's no evidence the individual had anything to do with the assassination. Verrier goes into excruciating detail discussing the various machinations that Darlan went through as he attempted to gain control, first of North Africa, and then of metripolitan France once the Allies liberated it. Apparently he sensed that Roosevelt would want someone pliable to run France when the Americans were occupying a large part of the country, and imagined that he might fulfill that role, edging from it into a real leadership position in the country. The author makes it clear that as far as he's concerned, it was very unlikely that such a thing would have happened. He quotes several Fighting French officialas who insisted that if the Americans tried to install some sort of government in France, with Darlan at its head, this would lead to a civil war in France. Apparently no one else at the time thought it a good idea either, other than some of the Americans who almost instinctively disliked de Gaulle at first sight. The author follows the various principles through a series of conspiracies, misunderstandings, arguments, disagreements, negotiations, betrayals, and other interactions that would be bewildering in any case: with Verrier at the helm, the whole things virtually incomprehensible.

I was looking forward to this book, and frankly I was very disappointed with it. The information it provides isn't earth-shattering in any fashion, though some of the details of the various diplomatic maneuvers might be of interest to a specialist. The writing kills any enjoyment anyone might get from the book. I know history isn't written primarily for entertainment, but I'm reminded of Barbara Tuchman's observation that if history is so poorly written that no one reads it, it does no one any good.

One last thing: this book has numerous quotes included in the text in French. It really detracted from my understanding of the book. After finishing the book I found a section at the back headed "Translations". I've never seen this before, didn't know to look for it, and find it awkward. If anyone else reads the book, you should be aware this section is here before you start.

Admiral Jean-Francois Darlan, heir-apparent to Marshal Petain, is revealed in this book to have been a key player in a pivotal episode in World War II. Behind the mystery of Admiral Darlan's presence in Algiers in November 1942 was a conflict between Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill on which hung the fate of France.

Darlan in fact was involved in a plan to keep Petain's Vichy government in power as a counter to the growing streangth of Communism. When the terms of the plan was revealed, they shocked all those in Britain, France, and the United States who were backing Charles de Gaulle. On December 24, 1942, the Gaullists, supported by the British Secret Service and the American OSS, and probably with the knowledge of Churchill himself, stood back while a certain "patriot" entered Darlan's office and shot him dead. Drawing on interviews and new-found sources, the author tells the full ugly story of the unknown turning point in the secret battle over who would lead France.

Those especially interested in the specific intersections between Winston Churchill's fabled career and Malta's military role leading up to and during the two great wars of the twentieth century will find this book quite useful.

The author, writing from a British Empire perspective, keeps on the strick task expressed by the book's title and, as a result, does not give much attention to either the general history of Malta or how its ordinary citizens handled the intense bombardments and food shortages of World War II.

If you have a Malta wing to your library, buy this book. If you have a Churchill wing, use your discretion.

This book describes what Churchill felt about Malta and it's people and what those people felt about Churchill. As the corollary to the book's title indicates, it was a very special relationship.

Churchill was one of only two men to hold cabinet positions at the outbreak of both WW1 and WW2. In Churchill's case he just happened to be First Lord of the Admiralty on both occasions. Whilst there had been other jobs in between, it was his own understanding of naval matters which made Churchill the right man for that particular job as war loomed. With Malta being so strategically placed in the Mediterranean, her survival against invasion was crucial.

Churchill visited Malta on 6 separate occasions spanning a 40 year period which included two world wars. In so doing, he came to understand and appreciate the nation and the aspirations of it's people. In 1907, he sought to create a greater awareness of what the country wished to achieve for itself as an independent nation. Many years later, as Prime Minister, the bonds grew ever stronger as he sought to supply and defend the tiny state against overwhelming Axis forces.

The author was born in Malta in 1934 when his father was serving in the Royal Navy and this is his second study of Maltese elements of British history of the early 20th Century. In this particular work, he has made extensive use of Churchill's private papers plus government records in order to provide yet another important contribution to the complex jigsaw that is British history.

With an immensely readable style of writing, this book becomes harder to put down, the further you progress. I would consider it essential reading for all those with a wider interest in Britain's history, especially her military history of last Century, plus those with a more refined interest in either Churchill or Malta - or both.

NM

This is the first mycology book I've come across that actually has a chapter on MYCOTOXINS and HUMAN DISEASES! Mycotoxins are the missing link between the common illnesses that farmers encounter every day and our common, chronic, human diseases (such as heart disease, infertility, and cancer). Just killing the fungus is not good enough to establish good health. Rather, reducing ones exposure to mycotoxins is equally as important. This one chapter makes the rest of the book well worth it!

Clinical Mycology is on balance weak in many areas, but most notably diagnosing trauma related opportunistic fungal bone infections. Many references are made to "uncommon" and "unusual" cases, but little mention is given to diagnostic methodolgy. See Clinical Mycology Online--"Opportunistic Fungal Infections" Reference--"Aspergillus seldom isolated from blood, urine, CSF." Author doesn't tell you that C.T. scans are an unreliable tool for diagnosing some fungal infections. See A.M. Sugar & C. A. Lyman "A Practical Guide To Medically Important Fungi And The Diseases They Cause" P.69 This is minimum information that you will not find in this book. A better alternative are two books, one by Fisher/Cook "Fundamentals of Diagnostic Mycology" and the other by Sugar/Lyman. Of course, there are also many strong articles worth reading in this book, and for that reason it is worth bookshelf space--

First of all, i am sure that this book is really comprehensive as they say
But it is not easy to use, and not that "friendly".

I bought this one a while ago and i hardly use it, although i really want to learn more of the French tenses and all the French grammar.
can point exactly why i hardly use it, perhaps because this book is a reference, and i hoped something for "beginners",

I won't recommend this book for beginners or people that want a book in which they can easily learn French grammar in a nice and easy way.
and this book isn't cheap also, so think if you really need it, my guess
most of us probably wont.

Most of the times i don't really bother to look for something in the
book, if i have some grammar questions i just use the internet, instead of
trying to find something in that book

i bought several book, to try to learn the French grammar with a lot of examples,in a nice easy and friendly way, still haven't found one.

will be happy to find one though :) if someone can recommend one for me.

I should first point out that I can't critique the content too well, as my French is still firmly in the "Beginner" category, so I don't know if some of the explanations are correct, incorrect, misleading, etc. All I can say to that is that everything I've looked for I've been able to find (I'll get back to that, though) and I haven't yet found myself confused by any explanations.

What I can critique, however, is the somewhat poor layout of the book. The first issue is the numbering of the entries: they're simply numbered from 1 to 715. The reason this is a problem is because it is extremely easy to find yourself stopping briefly at page 115 when the index was actually referring to entry 115. This is made all the more difficult by the lack of putting any of the entry headings in bold, which itself results in often going past an entry because the entry number doesn't stand out from the rest of the text. Further adding to the confusion is that the entry numbers for each page are located on the inner half of the top of the page, with the page number on the outside corner. Of course, that is the normal location for a page number; in this specific case, however, the result is that, when you're flipping through searching for an entry, you have to hold the book open wider so you can see the entry numbers, while also actively ignoring the page numbers.

For example, one left-hand page has across the top "484 Adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions 616" all in that formatting except the "484" is italicized, and the only thing you really need to see is the 616... yet it's pushed in towards the center binding, so you need to have the book open nearly all the way to see it--and not only that, but the only thing that IS formatted to stand out from the rest is the page number, which is irrelevant! At first glance it seems so minor and inconsequential, but after dealing with it for the 30th, 40th, 50th time, it really starts becoming aggravating--all the more so considering that there's really no need for page numbers in a book like this: the index points to entry numbers, not page numbers, so why would you even need to know that you're on page 484?

I think the publishers should've followed a separate numbering system--I'd personally recommend something similar to that used in Hammer's German Grammar: "12.1.3(a)," referring to chapter 12, section 1, subsection 3, letter (a) and so on. Either that, or just not numbered the pages at all. After all, this is in effect a grammatical dictionary--when was the last time you needed to know what page a specific word was on? C comes after B, and entry 18 will come after entry 17--the page number is irrelevant.

The other major issue with the layout is that the index doesn't get specific enough for many of the entries (which ironically makes the page numbers often a more precise method of finding an item, yet the index doesn't offer page numbers, so they remain useless!). I think this can be best illustrated by detailing one of the real cases I found of this problem.

I didn't know how to say, "I was just doing something," and looked in the index for a possible entry. I found "just ('to have just done')." Perfect! Next to it is "538." Okay, entry 538. So I flip back through the book, searching for entry 538. I have to ignore the first "538" my eye focuses on, since I soon realize it's a page number. I flip further back and arrive at entry 538 "Miscellaneous verbs" on page 412. The first verb listed is "approcher," which takes up the whole page; on the facing page is "changer." Since I of course have no clue what verb I'm actually looking for, I start looking through the entry for each verb: approcher, changer, couvenir, decider, devoir, manquer, rester, servir, tarder, traiter... nothing, until I finally arrive at "venir," TEN pages later! If the item in question, "venir de," had simply been labelled 538(k)2 both in the main book and in the index, all of that time spent reading all ten pages of entry 538 would've been saved. The index could've also simply given me the page number, but then why have any entry numbers if the index is just going to give you the page numbers?

As it is, the index sends me ten pages from where what I'm looking for is actually located. How useful can such an index really be?

What you end up with is a book with two separate but visually indistinguishable numbering systems that are not only incredibly easy to confuse--especially when flipping through at high speed, looking for a particular entry--but in fact will send you far off from the specific item you're looking for.

It's a shame that this book is so poorly formatted, especially considering they'd be rather simple fixes, as it does appear extremely detailed, and as I said above, everything that I have looked for I've found and been satisfied with the explanation. If only it were so much less aggravating to actually arrive at this wonderfully detailed information!

I give it 5 stars for detail and content, but the poor layout demands that it be knocked down one star. I sincerely hope that the publishers fix this formatting issue in the next edition, because I would happily buy a book with this content but with better organization.

The previous reviewer was I think a touch hard on George, so I feel compelled to defend the great man's honor, even though nobody is ever likely to read this review (judging from the book's current Amazon.com ranking -- 700,000 or so). Lets get a few things right out in the open. This book, though originally conceived as a serious attempt to provide a concise history of English letters, no longer remains viable as literary criticism. It is ceaselessly crotchety, absolutely conventional, consistently moralistic in its tone, and unwaveringly English in manner and style. It is also fantastically old-fashioned in every way imaginable. Sampson is scandalized by TS Eliot's nihilism. Joyce, to Sampson, is a flash in the pan and, moreover, unreadable.

Ok, then, if Sampson's opinions are ridiculously out of date and his tastes conservative by Victorian standards, why go out of your way to hunt down this tome? One reason is because George Sampson has read everything ever written in the English language up to 1935 or so. This, if you think about it, is extremely funny. He has read the complete works of, for instance, George Wither (1588-1677). (His biographical sketch of Wither is hilariously condensed: "He had a stormy life"). He has an intimate knowledge of the educational reforms advocated by Richard Mulcaster in his two legendary tracts "Positions" (1589) and "The First Part of The Elementarie" (1582). Also, Sampson can dismiss a minor author (or a minor work of a major author) with an abruptness which is laugh-out-loud funny. Here some poor nobleman, probably a person extremely proud of his literary gifts in his own lifetime, is mentioned in passing as being "intrinsically unimportant", there a lifetime's exertions are described as "infinitely mediocore". Thomas D'urfey is summoned from the dusty shelves of Cambridge's libraries only to be accounted "a man of very slender talent"; John Crowne (died 1680) is revived from darkest obscurity to be treated thus: "very little is known [about him] or need be known", and there was Thomas Rhymer (1641-1713) "whose criticism of Shakespeare ... achieves the depths of ineptitude". Colley Cibber's laureate odes "no longer trouble us", just as Thomas Southerne's "numerous unimportant comedies ... need not be named". Richard Glover's (1712-85) "'great' Miltonic performances" will "never be read again, save by the hardier students of poetry", and as for Aphra Behn "it is idle to pretend that [her] plays have great merit".

(Oh it's not all gloomy -- here's high praise for John Parkinson an "ardent botanist and lover of flowers" whose masterpiece "Paradisi in sole Paradisus terrestris, or a garden of all sorts of pleasant flowers which our English ayre will permitt to be noursed up: with a kitchen garden ... and an orchard" deserves to live for the "excellent pun" made upon his name in the title page: " 'Paradisius-in-Sole' being 'Park-in-sun'". A fine pun indeed!)

So many men of letters are dealt with in this manner that one begins to wonder (around the 16th century or so, with over 500 pages to read) whether Sampson is going to run dry of dismissive phrases. He doesn't! He is endlessly creative in this respect and that -- THAT -- is what secures Sampson's reputation, his intrinsic importance, in the history of literary crticism. That is also why the previous (and clearly minor) reviewer was so completely off-base, painting savage Sampson as some sort of literary polyanna, which is absurd. Sampson is nothing if not consisently prickly with the "great" ones and downright brutal with lesser authors.

Oh, and I'd be curious to know if anyone ever stumbles upon this review.

Confession: when I was a wee boy, I used Sampson's History as a sort of Rough Guide to Literature, mainly by virtue of its dizzying completeness. If Sampson really read all this stuff - and we're talking about thousands of writers from the Anglo-Saxons to 1941 - it's a wonder he ever had time to write anything.

Although the book was written at a time when FR Leavis was starting to shift into top gear, you wouldn't know it. Sampson is an almost perfect example of old-style, Quiller-Couchian, terminally liberal-ideological blather. Although he appears to be making judgments about the writers he discusses, he's not really; he's just presenting them all in the happiest possible light. So Shakespeare is praised for his human variety and largeness of temper, and Milton is praised for being sure of himself and a strong critic. Tennyson is good because he's so swoony and mellifluous, Browning is good because he's so energetic and chatty. And so on. He only starts to bristle when the writing gets more self-consciously Modern; Joyce is rapped for being funny without being "genial", Lawrence is damned because he was a good writer spoiled by having so many ideas. With women he's never less than a perfect gentleman, although don't expect him to be elevating Aphra Behn to quite the top of the tree. Likewise with anyone Scottish, Irish, Welsh or otherwise Colonial.

In general, Sampson has one rule: if it's famous it must be good. He's willing to write off the once enormously popular Victorian poet Martin Farquhar Tupper (who lent his name to the main character in the sitcom "Dream On", trivia fans) because Tupper is long since forgotten. He lacks the nerve to write off recently dead writers of comparable mediocrity, because they were still respected at the time of writing.

Sampson's dogged adherence to sweetness and light eventually cloud the reader's brain like a scented fog. His energy was formidable; his erudition is undeniable; his courage and intelligence are featherweight. If you ever wondered why literary criticism had to start getting spiky and radical, here's the reason.

Don't get me wrong. It's quite a nice book to curl up with if you have a migraine. But then, you're probably better off flat on your back in a dark room.

U.S. Army General Dwight David Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of Allied forces in Europe during World War II. A brilliant strategist and an expert in logistics and organization, Eisenhower planned Operation Overlord, the successful 1944 invasion of Europe by way of the English Channel. D-Day remains history's largest amphibious assault. In 1945, at the height of his military power, Eisenhower commanded more than four million troops from five different nations. He functioned as a manager of managers, directing all military activities in Europe. He was, in effect, the "CEO" of the war in Europe - and indeed, in a letter to Lord Louis Mountbatten of Britain, Eisenhower described his role of Supreme Commander as that of a "chairman of a board." How he successfully planned and coordinated the Allied military effort is the subject of this fascinating military history cum informative treatise on management by business writer Alan Axelrod. Axelrod applies Ike's down-to-earth thinking to the management of organizations, people or important projects in a series of lessons - 232 of them, to be exact. This long, unprioritized list is more than most readers can really absorb. Nevertheless, we suggest that managers who want to learn what inspired, successful leadership truly means study this history of the European conflict from the uniquely informed perspective of Eisenhower, the ultimate insider.

I rated "Patton on Leadership" by the same author a four star with the title "Great on Patton "and" Leadership." I had expected this to be of the same good quality. Sorry that I had been a little bit disappointed. Dont know whether it's the difference of the two characters that Eisenhower is one of decision making and Patton is one of action taking, or the author had deliberately based his new book primiarily on the correspondence written by Eisenhower, or simply the author had overdone it (there are 232 lessons), I found this not interesting and over stretched. I still can remember some good leadership stories I read from "Patton on Leadership." All I can recall from this is that Eisenhower possessed very strong political skills who strived to strike the balance right and use correct tone and words all the time. Great for CEOs of CEOs and those who want to improve their written communication, but so so for the rest.

I very much appreciated the solid information on the safety of essential oils, as as an MD I have been using them internally for my own health. Without a book like this and adequate understanding, that could be quite harmful. However, people should be aware that the book does not cover the therapeutic effects of the oils, nor give an adequate discussion of the issue of impurities and adulterations and how to minimize the risk of these. This book is a must for anyone practicing aromatherapy, as is a reliable supplier of essential oils who tests all their products by gas chromatography and other methods.

It is nice to find at last a book that shows the safety guidelines for essential oils. While this is by no means a full list, it is a good start. With the number of people who are self proclaimed in the science of aromatherapy, and not knowing fully the contraindications of their use, it is nice to see a beginning in bringing aromatherapy to the healthcare field where it can be more widely studied for medical use rather than a good smell. This book helps to bring some credability to a field that has been ignored for so long.