Trại Giam Tù Binh Phú Quốc - Những Trang Sử Đẫm Máu (1967 - 1973) tải về miễn phí cuốn sách

Alexander Diaz _lexander_ohn_iaz — LOVED THIS BOOK!! Encompasses all my interests. The book links various historical events to the current role the US is playing in foreign policy. Although I would recommend maybe skimming the economic based chapters, I learned a lot from this book.

Sepideh Gheysar _epideh_heysar — I read this over the course of one afternoon, and the only story I can remember clearly is the one by Ilona Andrews. I might have to go back and reread the others, since already the stories are flowing together in my mind and I have forgotten what most of them were about. There was one thing I noticed right away, though: only a few of the stories can be classified as 'romance' in the classic, HEA, sense of the word, or even the sense that they feature an actual, identifiable pairing. Some authors seem to have had difficulties with the short story format, too -- a few of the stories were about nothing much and ended without any sort of climax or denouement, leaving me scratching my head. Even so, this is one of the better anthologies I've read, and nearly all stories were enjoyable, if not perfect or particularly memorable. Also, the Ilona Andrews story was good enough to justify buying the whole anthology, at least for me.

Willis Schafer wschafer — All I can say is I loved it. What a wonderful book and I was sucked in from the beginning. I am always happy when a book can surprise me with a different twist to this story of boy meets girl and they fall in love. And you get two for one. Enough said I loved it!

Toby Oft tobyoft — I received it as a gift. I hated it! If I could give it zero stars I would. The husband and wife who wrote this book claim to be social scientists. Their style of writing is not in the least bit scientific. They do the reader the grand favor of presenting "facts" backed up by hard science and sifting through the information on gender differences so the reader doesn't have to. In my opinion, what they really did was start out with a theory and discard anything that didn't agree with it. Some of the physiological gender differences they refer to might actually be backed by scientific data. But the Peases fail to footnote any of the so-called facts with documentation of actual scientific publications or studies. And they also do the reader the great favor of telling him or her that if they disagree with their conclusions, it is only because the reader has been "victimized" by idealization. I don't think their conclusion that men and women are different is nearly as shocking as they think it is. In fact I agree that there are differences between the genders, and some of it is based on biology. However, the Peases discard theories of socialization to explain some gender differences and instead insist gender differences are mostly based on men and women evolving differently. And while they claim that they support women's rights to equality and working outside the home for equal compensation, they simultaneously advance the theory that relationships were happier when women got their self-esteem from providing a happy home for their hardworking husband and offspring. Their theory is pretty easy to challenge. After all if women were really so happy historically being homemakers, why would so many of them risked bliss on the homefront to join the workforce, fought for the right to vote, etc. I found this book as pandering to stereotypes and managing to insult both genders. Gender based humor shows up in a lot of entertainment. The reason I find it so angering in this book is that the Peases claim their information is all backed by science. And yet most of their conclusions are not backed by much data. They will do things like cite "a recent study" or throw out a statistic without actually giving any information about who performed the study, was it peer-reviewed, how was the study set up, etc. I also find it comical when they make claims that girls are mainly motivated by cooperation and you can't tell a leader in a group of women. It makes me question whether the Peases ever set foot in a grade school. I certainly recall there being a pecking order with the girls that was at least as clear, if not more defined than that of the boys.