BookWIMB.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

I have seen it compared to Iain Pears' An Instance of the Fingerpost, and whilst I don't believe it's quite up that high mark, it's not far off.

Good Lord, a whole five pounds on kindle! I'm used to paying 99p for a Dickens or Wodehouse.

I shall report back.

[Ash]

Good Lord, a whole five pounds on kindle! I'm used to paying 99p for a Dickens or Wodehouse.

I shall report back.

99p for a Dickens? You've been ripped orf, my son. One used to be able to get the complete (illustrated) works of Dickens for £1.99. Though that was some years ago.

[Burney]

99p for a Dickens? You've been ripped orf, my son. One used to be able to get the complete (illustrated) works of Dickens for £1.99. Though that was some years ago.

Being out of copyright means the Dickster's stuff is dirt cheap everywhere.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

99p for a Dickens? You've been ripped orf, my son. One used to be able to get the complete (illustrated) works of Dickens for £1.99. Though that was some years ago.

Don't be absurd a. How can a Kindle have pictures?

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Being out of copyright means the Dickster's stuff is dirt cheap everywhere.

well 99p must be considered dirt cheap even for a parsimonious tight-wad like you b.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Read that last year. Amazing stuff. Gordievsky had some proper balls on him.

I generally like Macintyre in the Times, but as PE point out, he really should have removed all the errors about Michael Foot from the paperback edition. The fact that he hasn't makes me question how much other bull**** he's told me over the years. I've been reading since him since he was Paris correspondent.

[Burney]

I generally like Macintyre in the Times, but as PE point out, he really should have removed all the errors about Michael Foot from the paperback edition. The fact that he hasn't makes me question how much other bull**** he's told me over the years. I've been reading since him since he was Paris correspondent.

What errors? Foot was listed by the KGB as an agent.

Gordievsky was so effective precisely because his intelligence was so accurate. Why would you think it would be inaccurate in this instance?

Just because he won a libel case doesn't mean he wasn't. Liberace won a libel case over suggestions he was a bummer. Maxwell won umpteen libel cases over suggestions he was a crook. Now of course it could be the case that the KGB's London station were simply making it up to look good, but there's no archive evidence either way.