text stringlengths 0 100k |
|---|
This is my first BAT ever. Worked a full week on it.. With this set you can beautify your highways, railroad tracks, you name it. This plugin contains overhanging pieces to allow you still plopping highway signs or other stuff along your highway. Don't forget to check back for updated versions (click "follow this file" button). The next version will have diagonal pieces. Have fun! Dependencies NONE! (you happy!?) (you should be!) Installation Extract the zip file to your plugins folder. It doesn't really matter where. You don't need both downloads. Just one. The unpacked version is for people who have trouble with the packed one. Usage: - You can find the pieces most likely all the way down in your 'parks' menu . - Flatten out the terrain before you place them. It absolutely needs a flat terrain to be nice. Sadly enough.. align to slope just didn't work. - No corners (sorry but this was already a tremendous amount of work, maybe in the future) Donate? You don't have to, but it's welcome . I'm a poor disabled sucker.. Motivates me to create more! You decide what to donate. At paypal |
Advertisement Police arrest man accused of snapping puppy's neck, killing it Share Shares Copy Link Copy A man accused of snapping a 12-week-old puppy’s neck over a Wi-Fi dispute was arrested Saturday on animal abuse charges. Des Moines police had been looking for 25-year-old Christopher Vogel since late July after they say he went over to a friend’s apartment at Oakview Terrace, asked neighbors if he could use their Wi-Fi password and then killed their corgi puppy when they denied his request. He then ran off. “The dog had nothing to do with the argument, wasn’t aggressive towards him,” Des Moines police Sgt. Ryan Doty said. “I think that he did it just out of spite.”Vogel allegedly took the dog into the hallway of the building, which is where it was found lying and whimpering on the floor. “It’s sickening that somebody would take their anger about a completely unrelated topic out on a defenseless animal,” Doty said. Animal Control officials said when they arrived at the scene, the animal was gasping for air and bleeding from the nose. “It just boggles my mind that anybody would even be able to do this type of thing,” said Tom Colvin, executive director of the Animal Rescue League of Iowa. Colvin said the animal abuse charge will only be a misdemeanor, which is why the death is another example as to why the state needs tougher animal abuse charges. “We really have to ramp up how society, how Iowans, view these types of senseless acts against animals, and start having felony charges for egregious acts against animals,” Colvin said. |
The firm refused to pay out £250,000 in winnings because club 'were not relegated'. Coral: Albert Kinloch sued the betting firm for £250,000 (file pic). © STV A former bookmaker who sued Coral for refusing to pay out £250,000 after he placed a bet that Rangers would be relegated has lost his legal fight. Albert Kinloch, 72, placed £100 on the Ibrox club being relegated from the SPL in 2011 and was given odds of 2500/1 by Coral. The club went into administration in February 2012 and later into liquidation that year and returned to playing in the bottom tier of the Scottish senior leagues in the SFL Third Division. Mr Kinloch, from Simshill, Glasgow, took Coral to the Court of Session in Edinburgh after it refused to pay out on the bet he placed on September 5, 2011, at its branch on Tollcross Road in Glasgow. His betting slip read: "From SPL - Rangers to be relegated" and he maintained that relegation meant an SPL side started the next season in a lower league. Coral contended that relegation was confined to going down only one division on points, according to league rules. It said Rangers Football Club Plc sold its one share in the SPL to Sevco Scotland following the sale of assets by administrators, which required the approval of at least eight members of the SPL and the application was refused, making it no longer eligible to play in the top tier. It then applied to join the SFL and was permitted to come into the lowest league. Lord Bannatyne said: "The foregoing process cannot be described as being moved by anyone to a lower division, or being moved down or demoted. "I am satisfied that what did not happen was that the SPL moved or demoted Rangers to a lower division. "Rangers ended up in a lower division by the entry into a contract which allowed them to join the SFL in the Third Division." He continued: "I am persuaded that the reasonable man is not only directed but driven to the rules of a particular sport when placing a bet in a sporting context. "The natural and ordinary meaning of a sporting term is the definition of that term within the rules of that sport." 'I am satisfied that what did not happen was that the SPL moved or demoted Rangers to a lower division.' Lord Bannatyne Lord Bannatyne added: "It would be impossible for a betting business to be run and for it to offer bets on sporting events without reference to the rules of the sports. "I am satisfied that the odds of 2500/1 to a reasonable person placing a bet as well as the reasonable bookmaker would clearly indicate that relegation meant what is contended for by the defenders (Coral) that is, the highly unlikely event." The judge said he was persuaded the sound construction of the bet placed was that advanced by the betting firm. He added: "Accordingly, on this construction of the pursuer's bet it is a losing bet." Mr Kinloch told the court he had been following media reports over Rangers' financial troubles before placing the wager. He said in a statement: "I thought it was a good 'throwaway bet' and I didn't expect to win but there was a small possibility that I would win. "Nobody at Coral suggested to me they would only pay out if Rangers went down on sporting prowess or on points, and in fact they didn't try to negotiate with me at all on the bet". Mr Kinloch's position was he had placed the bet as "a punter" but told the court he had been a bookmaker's clerk and bookmaker. He accepted that in the past he has been asked not to lay bets in certain betting shops. He said the average guy in a betting shop was "a complete mug" but described himself as "not a mug punter". He also accepted during the earlier hearing that he knew the SPL and SFL had rules and that he was very good at looking things up on the internet. Want the inside story from John MacKay? Sign up to the 'MacKay Mail' newsletter. Subscribe This field is required. That doesn't look like a valid e-mail format, please check. That e-mail's already in our system. Please try again. Please tick the box below to confirm your subscription Thanks for subscribing to our 'MacKay Mail' newsletter. Subscribed Want the inside story from John MacKay? Sign up to the 'MacKay Mail' newsletter. Thanks for subscribing to our 'MacKay Mail' newsletter. Subscribe Download: The STV News app is Scotland's favourite and is available for iPhone from the App store and for Android from Google Play. Download it today and continue to enjoy STV News wherever you are. |
Cruel and Unusual: Prison Console for Inmates Only Has Mad Catz Controller ALLENTOWN, Penn. — Alleghany County Jail admitted today, in a shocking revelation, that the XBOX it allows prisoners to spend their “positivity” token to play only has Mad Catz controllers for use. “I mean, is there really a big difference? Before I donated this old thing to the prison, my grandkids would play it for hours and seem to have a good time,” said warden Kyle Woodson who is set to appear before court for video game related prison torture by 2018. “Isn’t it neat how they are see-through?” Once word got out to the inmates about the new bittersweet reward on offer, tensions rose. “This is just another example of the inhumane treatment inmates face on a daily basis,” said prisoner Carl Moss who is serving a ten year sentence for identify theft. “I understand I need to pay a debt to a society but not even murderers should have to use these garbage controllers.” Read More From Hard Drive, The Only Ethical Gaming Journalism Site on The Internet: Tensions almost spilled over when convicted arsonist James Fisher attempted to shank the Mad Catz controller after he was playing Halo: Combat Evolved and his A button got stuck resulting in him being unable to jump at all. “The only thing I regret about my crimes is that, instead of burning down that GameStop after they gave me only $12.38 for my childhood memories, I wish I had found out who created these impostor controllers and set their house on fire instead,” said Fisher. The horrible conditions were brought to light due to an exposé on the horrors of prison torture by the New York Times in August. “I have been to prisons all across the country where inmates were forced to starve in solitary confinement in total darkness for months… but no torture compares to watching someone being unable to move sideways in an intense game of TimeSplitters 2 as a result of a Mad Catz analog stick that appeared to be somehow chewed off,” said New York Times reporter Clare Aeuyong. At press time, the New York Times writer set off to the Middle East to write an even more eye opening piece about how ISIS is torturing journalists by forcing them to play Overwatch online with blind teammates. Article by Mike Amory @TheMikeAmory Hard Drive is the most ethical gaming journalism on the internet. Follow us on Facebook to keep up. |
Qubits, or quantum bits, are the key building blocks that lie at the heart of every quantum computer. In order to perform a computation, signals need to be directed to and from qubits. At the same time, these qubits are extremely sensitive to interference from their environment, and need to be shielded from unwanted signals, in particular from magnetic fields. It is thus a serious problem that the devices built to shield qubits from unwanted signals, known as nonreciprocal devices, are themselves producing magnetic fields. Moreover, they are several centimeters in size, which is problematic, given that a large number of such elements is required in each quantum processor. Now, scientists at the Institute of Science and Technology Austria (IST Austria), simultaneously with competing groups in Switzerland and the United States, have decreased the size of nonreciprocal devices by two orders of magnitude. Their device, whose function they compare to that of a traffic roundabout for photons, is only about a tenth of a millimeter in size, and--maybe even more importantly--it is not magnetic. Their study was published in the open access journal Nature Communications. When researchers want to receive a signal, for instance a microwave photon, from a qubit, but also prevent noise and other spurious signals from traveling back the same way towards the qubit, they use nonreciprocal devices, such as isolators or circulators. These devices control the signal traffic, similar to the way traffic is regulated in everyday life. But in the case of a quantum computer, it is not cars that cause the traffic but photons in transmission lines. "Imagine a roundabout in which you can only drive counterclockwise", explains first author Dr. Shabir Barzanjeh, who is a postdoc in Professor Johannes Fink's group at IST Austria. "At exit number one, at the bottom, there is our qubit. Its faint signal can go to exit number two at the top. But a signal coming in from exit number two cannot travel the same path back to the qubit. It is forced to travel in a counterclockwise manner, and before it reaches exit one, it encounters exit three. There, we block it and keep it from harming the qubit." The 'roundabouts' the group has designed consist of aluminum circuits on a silicon chip and they are the first to be based on micromechanical oscillators: Two small silicon beams oscillate on the chip like the strings of a guitar and interact with the electrical circuit. These devices are tiny in size--only about a tenth of a millimeter in diameter--, one of the major advantages the new component has over its traditional predecessors, which were a few centimeters wide. Currently, only a few qubits have been used to test the principles of quantum computers, but in the future, thousands or even millions of qubits will be connected together, and many of these qubits will require their own circulator. "Imagine building a processor that has millions of such centimeter-size components. It would be enormous and impractical," says Shabir Barzanjeh. "Using our nonmagnetic and very compact on-chip circulators instead makes life a lot easier." Yet some hurdles need to be overcome before the devices will be used for this specific application. For example, the available signal bandwidth is currently still quite small, and the required drive powers might harm the qubits. However, the researchers are confident that these problems will turn out to be solvable. Professor Johannes Fink joined IST Austria in the beginning of 2016. He and his group study quantum physics in electrical, mechanical and optical chip-based devices with the main objective of advancing and integrating quantum technology. Earlier this year, he received a prestigious ERC Starting Grant for his project to develop a fiber optic transceiver for superconducting qubits, as well as a research grant from the Swiss NOMIS foundation. Dr. Shabir Barzanjeh was awarded a Marie Sk?odowsa-Curie fellowship to work at IST Austria. His main interests are in circuit quantum electrodynamics and optomechanics. From February 12 to 14, 2018, Johannes Fink und Shabir Barzanjeh will host the international conference „Frontiers of Circuit QED and Optomechanics" (FCQO 2018) in Klosterneuburg with the aim to bring together leading scientists in the field. Registration is already open: https:/ / ist. ac. at/ fcqo18 ### IST Austria |
Dear Reader, As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analysis from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World. A new-born Asian elephant stands with its mother and grandmother at the Ramat Gan Safari on Friday. The zoo said the unnamed calf, who was thought to be female, was less than a day old and weighed about 100 kilos. The good news will be welcomed by the Ramat Gan Safari, which made headlines last April after an elephant grabbed and seriously injured a teenage girl. Yaniv Salama-Scheer contributed to this report. The seventeen year old reportedly approached the elephant cage, where one of the elephants grabbed her with its trunk and stepped on her.In 2007, Yossi, an African elephant and one of the main attractions of the Ramat Gan Safari, attacked and killed Atari, another elephant living in the same pen.The 33-year-old Yossi, who at seven tons is one of the largest zoo elephants in the world, charged Atari, 46, and slammed her into a wall - killing her. The two have lived together since 1974, when Yossi was born. Atari was considered one of the more dominant elephants in the herd, and Yossi grew up with her as the dominant elephant."It is like a domestic murder," said Itzik Franko, head elephant caretaker. While there was no clear motive for Yossi's attack, speculation was that Yossi, the dominant male, became threatened by Atari - the dominant female. Safari veterinarians say that the act might have been caused by the fact that it is currently mating season for elephants, which caused Yossi to act in a more aggressive manner. Yossi's size and power were too formidable for the keepers to stop the attack. "She didn't stand a chance against him," said one elephant keeper."Yossi is a giant, very powerful elephant. Atari weighed two tons less than him," a member of the safari staff said.At the time of the incident, five other elephants - three female and two male - were in the den, but safari keepers managed to gather the elephants in their sleeping area to reduce chances of additional violence. Join Jerusalem Post Premium Plus now for just $5 and upgrade your experience with an ads-free website and exclusive content. Click here>> |
WASHINGTON -- More than 50,000 Americans have been combat-wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan since 2001, a grim measure of the cost of more than a decade of war. According to Defense Department accounting, the number of wounded reached 50,010 on Thursday. The names of the wounded are not released. Unlike those killed in combat, whose names are released and whose remains are brought home in sober, white-glove ceremony, those who are wounded are flown home on medical evacuation aircraft and carried off on stretchers in anonymity. Among the wounded are some 16,000 severely injured, casualties who would have died on the battlefield just a generation ago. But new medical procedures, protective gear such as body armor and faster medical evacuation are saving more than 90 percent of all those who fall in battle. According to the U.S. Army surgeon general's office, military surgeons have performed 1,653 major limb amputations since 2001. The wounded also include the growing number of American troops whose genitals were damaged or destroyed by roadside bomb blasts. Since 2005, almost 1,900 have suffered genital wounds, according to Defense Department data through July 2012. The wounded statistics describe only those with physical wounds. The unseen wounds of war -- including post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury and other forms of combat trauma -- are not included and are harder to track. Since 2002, the Defense Department has recorded 43,299 patients diagnosed with TBI, but many more may have gone undiagnosed. At present, the Department of Veterans Affairs is taking in 4,000 new cases of veterans with PTSD each month. Because most of the wounded are young, they will need decades of help, some of it intensive care by health care professionals. Others will require regular replacement of costly, sophisticated prosthetic limbs. The VA is now training and paying family members of many of the wounded to care for them. Even so, the overall health care costs will be significant. Harvard economist Linda Bilmes has estimated that the health care bill for the wounded could reach half a trillion dollars over the next few decades. Unlike Social Security, there is no money set aside to pay for future veterans' health care costs. Instead, veterans are dependent on annual appropriations approved by Congress. Another grim milestone was marked last summer when the number of Americans killed in Afghanistan passed 2,000. That number now stands at 2,135. Although the rising toll of wounded was reported on the Pentagon website Thursday morning, neither Defense Secretary Leon Panetta nor Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, took note of it during a Thursday afternoon press conference. No mention of the 50,000 casualties has been made on the presidential campaign trail Thursday. This story has been updated to include more statistics on the number of wounded and their health care costs, and to reflect that the Defense Department did not address the subject in a press conference Thursday. |
Bolivia has nationalised two electricity distribution companies owned by Spanish utility Iberdrola, the latest move by leftist President Evo Morales to assert control over the country's resources. Iberdrola will be compensated according to a valuation to be drawn up by an independent arbiter, Morales said on Saturday, adding that the measure was aimed at enhancing rural energy services. "We considered this measure necessary to ensure equitable energy tariffs ... and to see to it that the quality of electricity service is uniform in rural as well as urban areas," Morales said. President Morales has nationalised oil, telecommunications, mining and electrical generation companies. In June, Morales took control of global commodities giant Glencore's tin and zinc mine in Bolivia and more nationalisations of mining companies could be ahead in the Andean country. Iberdrola, whose office in capital city La Paz was being guarded by police on Saturday, has operated in Bolivia since the late 1990s. An Iberdrola spokesman said the company was studying the situation and declined to comment further. A Spanish government spokesman also declined to comment. Redistribution of wealth The Iberdrola units are Electropaz - which supplies around 470,000 customers in the cities of La Paz and El Alto - and Elfeo - which supplies over 80,000 customers in the city of Oruro. The nationalisation also includes two small suppliers owned by Iberdrola which provide services to the distributors. In 2006, Morales announced the takeover of petroleum companies operating in Bolivia. He later nationalised oil and gas reserves to redistribute wealth to the landlocked country's indigenous majority. Iberdrola is not the first Spanish company to have its assets seized in Latin America. Bolivia decided to nationalise a power transmission unit of power grid operator Red Electrica in May - just weeks after Argentinian President Cristina Fernandez seized YPF, the country's biggest energy company, accusing oil major Repsol of underinvesting at the unit. Repsol called the move unlawful, discriminatory and a violation of a bilateral investment treaty between Spain and Argentina. The World Bank's arbitration body has agreed to begin an arbitration process on the Repsol case. Other Spanish companies in Bolivia include bank BBVA and motorway operator Abertis, though exposure for each is less than one percent of revenues. |
Historians in the Service of the “Big Lie”: An Examination of Professor Robert Service’s Biography of Trotsky By David North 15 December 2009 We are publishing here a lecture delivered by David North on December 13 at the Friends Meeting House in London. North is the chairman of the International Editorial Board of the World Socialist Web Site and national chairman of the Socialist Equality Party (US). The lecture develops North’s critique of Service’s falsifications, initially discussed in the review, “In the Service of Historical Falsification: A Review of Robert Service’s Trotsky: A Biography”. It has been reported in the Evening Standard that at the public launching of his new biography of Leon Trotsky at Daunt Books in London’s Holland Park, on October 22, Professor Robert Service declared: “There’s life in the old boy Trotsky yet—but if the ice pick didn’t quite do its job killing him off, I hope I’ve managed it.” One might reasonably wonder what type of historian—indeed, what type of man—would describe his own work, and with evident satisfaction, in such a manner. Is it really the aim of a serious biographer to carry out the literary equivalent of an assassination? Every possible interpretation of this statement speaks against Mr. Service. Leon Trotsky was murdered, and in a particularly gruesome and horrible manner. The blunt side of an alpenstock was driven by the assassin into Trotsky’s cranium. His wife, Natalia, was nearby when it happened. She heard the scream of her companion of 38 years and, when she ran into his study, saw blood streaming down over his forehead and eyes. “Look what they have done to me,” Trotsky cried out to Natalia. Leon Trotsky in Mexico The death of Trotsky was felt by many as an almost unendurable loss. In Mexico City, 300,000 people paid tribute to him as his funeral cortège made its way through the streets of the capital. A private letter written by the American novelist, James T. Farrell, provides a sense of the traumatic impact of Trotsky’s assassination. “The crime is unspeakable. There are no words to describe it. I feel stunned, hurt, bitter, impotently in a rage. He was the greatest living man, and they murdered him, and the government of the United States is even afraid of his ashes. God!” [1] A serious biographer of Trotsky would not joke about the “ice pick.” It is a despicable icon of political reaction. Mr. Service would, perhaps, protest that his biography has “assassinated” Trotsky only in the sense of bringing an end to all interest in and discussion of this particular individual. But is this a legitimate ambition? A genuine scholar hopes that his work contributes to, rather than stifles, the development of the historical discussion. But this was clearly not the intention of Mr. Service. As he told the Evening Standard, he hopes that he will achieve with his biography what Stalin failed to accomplish through murder—that is, to “kill off” Trotsky as a significant historical figure. With this aim in mind, one can only imagine how Service approached the writing of this biography. Service’s remark at his book launch seems to reflect a state of mind that is fairly widespread in the reactionary milieu within which he circulates. A review of the biography written by the right-wing British historian Norman Stone, an admirer of Margaret Thatcher and Augusto Pinochet, is entitled “The Ice Pick Cometh.” Another glowing review, written by the writer Robert Harris and published in the London Sunday Times, congratulates Service for having “effectively, assassinated Trotsky all over again.” This is the language of people who are very troubled—both personally and politically. Seventy years after Trotsky’s death, they are still terrified by the spectre of the great revolutionary. The very thought of the man evokes homicidal images. But do they really believe that Mr. Service’s book can accomplish what was beyond the power of Stalin’s totalitarian police state? That Mr. Service and his admirers can even entertain such a thought exposes how little they understand of Trotsky and the ideas to which he devoted his life. Leon Trotsky—the co-leader of the October Revolution, opponent of Stalinism, and founder of the Fourth International—was assassinated by an agent of the Soviet secret police, the GPU, in August 1940. The last 11 years of his life had been spent in exile. Living on what he called “a planet without a visa,” Trotsky moved from Turkey, to France, to Norway and finally, in 1937, to Mexico. The years between his expulsion from the USSR and his arrival in Mexico had witnessed a ferocious growth of international political reaction: the coming to power of Hitler in Germany, the strangulation of the revolutionary movements of the working class in France and Spain by the Stalinist and social-democratic bureaucracies under the banner of the “Popular Front,” and the orchestration of the Moscow Trials and ensuing Great Terror that physically exterminated virtually all the representatives of Marxist politics and socialist culture in the USSR. Kamenev and Zinoviev The first of the Moscow Trials, whose 16 defendants included historic leaders of the Bolshevik Party such as Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev, was held in August 1936. The defendants were accused of plotting assassinations and various acts of terrorism. Not a single piece of evidence was produced at the trial, other than the confessions of the accused. All were sentenced to death by the tribunal. The defendants’ appeals were denied within a few hours of the trial’s conclusion, and they were executed on August 25, 1936. Though not present, the chief accused were Leon Trotsky and his son, Leon Sedov. From his exile in Norway, Trotsky vehemently denounced the trial as “one of the biggest, clumsiest and most criminal plots of the secret police against world opinion.” [2] Under pressure from the Soviet regime, the social-democratic government of Norway interned Trotsky in order to prevent him from continuing his public exposure of Stalin’s murderous frame-up of the Bolshevik leaders. For nearly four months he was held incommunicado, virtually cut off from any contact with the outside world, while the Stalinist regime broadcast its lying denunciations of him. The Norwegian confinement did not end until December 19, 1936 when Trotsky was placed aboard a freighter bound for Mexico, whose government had granted him asylum. The last message that Trotsky wrote before his departure was to his eldest son, Lev Sedov. Not knowing what awaited him on the voyage to Mexico, Trotsky informed Lev that he and his younger brother, Sergei, were his heirs, entitled to whatever royalties accrued from his writings. Trotsky noted that he had no other possessions. His letter ended with a poignant request to Lev Sedov: “If you ever meet Sergei,” wrote Trotsky, “tell him that we have never forgotten him and never will forget him for a single moment.” [3] But Lev Sedov was never to see or speak with his younger brother again. Sergei was executed, on Stalin’s orders, on October 29, 1937. Nor was Lev ever to be reunited with his father and mother. He died on February 16, 1938, the victim of an assassination carried out by agents of the Soviet secret police. Trotsky and Natalia Sedova arrived in Mexico on January 9, 1937. They lived as guests of Diego Rivera in his famous “Blue House” in Coyoacán, a suburb of Mexico City. Trotsky immediately threw himself into the struggle to expose Stalin’s frame-ups. The second trial of Old Bolsheviks was about to begin. This time there were to be 21 defendants, including Yuri Pyatakov and Karl Radek. In a speech filmed on January 30, 1937, which is easily viewed today on the internet, Trotsky declared: Stalin’s trial against me is built on false confessions, extorted by modern Inquisitorial methods, in the interests of the ruling clique. There are no crimes in history more terrible in intention or execution than the Moscow trials of Zinoviev-Kamenev and of Pyatakov-Radek. These trials develop not from communism, not from socialism, but from Stalinism, that is, from the irresponsible despotism of the bureaucracy over the people! What is now my principal task? To reveal the truth. To show and to demonstrate that the true criminals hide under the cloak of the accusers. [4] Trotsky issued a call for the establishment of an international commission of inquiry to investigate and pass judgment on the charges made by the Soviet regime. He pledged to present to this commission “all my files, thousands of personal and open letters in which the development of my thought and my action is reflected day by day, without any gaps. I have nothing to hide!” Trotsky declared that there was not a stain on his honor, either personal or political. Trotsky consults his lawyer Albert Goldman during the Dewey Commission hearings in Coyoacan, Mexico. His wife Natalia is to his left. Within less than three months, on April 10, 1937, the commission was convened in Coyoacán under the chairmanship of the renowned American philosopher, John Dewey. Immense pressure had been brought to bear by the Stalinists and their legions of liberal friends—including luminaries such as Lillian Hellman, Malcolm Cowley and Corliss Lamont—to prevent the formation of the commission, and, when those efforts failed, to sabotage the proceedings. For one week, Trotsky testified before the commission, answering scores of questions relating to the allegations made by the Stalinist regime. No one who witnessed him testify, hour after hour, ever forgot the experience. James T. Farrell, who observed the proceedings, recalled in later writings the overwhelming moral force of Trotsky’s presence. His final oration, delivered in English and lasting more than four hours, left the commissioners deeply moved. “Anything I can say will be an anti-climax,” Dewey remarked upon the conclusion of Trotsky’s speech. [5] In December 1937, the Dewey Commission issued its findings. Trotsky was declared “Not Guilty” and the proceedings in Moscow were found to be a “frame-up.” Leon Sedov The findings of the Dewey Commission represented a great moral victory for Trotsky. But the powerful momentum of political reaction had not been exhausted. Within the Soviet Union, Stalin’s police were murdering more than 1,000 people every day. In Spain, the victory of Franco was being assured by the counter-revolutionary politics of the Communist Party and the homicidal frenzy of Stalin’s secret police. Paralyzed by the betrayals of the Stalinists, the European working class was unable to stop the spread of fascism and the movement toward war. Trotsky concentrated his energies on the founding of the Fourth International. “The world political situation as a whole,” he wrote in early 1938, “is chiefly characterized by a historical crisis of the leadership of the proletariat.” [6] The Stalinists countered Trotsky’s efforts by escalating their violence against his closest co-thinkers and supporters. In July 1937, Erwin Wolf, one of Trotsky’s political secretaries, was murdered in Spain. Two months later, Ignace Reiss—who had defected from the GPU, publicly denounced Stalin and declared his allegiance to the Fourth International—was assassinated in Switzerland. In February 1938, the GPU killed Sedov. And in July 1938, Rudolf Klement, the secretary of the Fourth International, was kidnapped in Paris and murdered. Despite this reign of Stalinist terror, the Fourth International held its founding conference in September 1938. In a speech recorded one month later, Trotsky declared that the aim of the Fourth International “is the full material and spiritual liberation of the toilers and exploited through the socialist revolution.” He scoffed at the terror of the Soviet bureaucracy. “The hangmen think in their obtuseness and cynicism that it is possible to frighten us. They err! Under blows we become stronger. The bestial politics of Stalin are only the politics of despair.” [7] Less than two years of life remained for Trotsky after the founding of the Fourth International. His intellectual creativity and political far-sightedness were undiminished. Not only did he recognize the inevitability of a second world war, Trotsky predicted that Stalin would attempt to extricate himself from the disastrous consequences of his international policies by seeking an alliance with Hitler. Trotsky’s analysis was confirmed with the signing of the Stalin-Hitler Non-Aggression Pact in August 1939. But Trotsky also warned that Stalin’s treachery would not spare the Soviet Union from the horrors of war. It would be only a matter of time before Hitler hurled his military forces against the USSR. During the final months of his life, with war already raging in Western Europe, Trotsky defended the historical perspective of socialism in the face of widespread skepticism and despair. He did not seek to reassure wavering followers with predictions of imminent revolution. Rather than offering a prediction, Trotsky posed a question: “Will objective historical necessity in the long run cut a path for itself in the consciousness of the vanguard of the working class; that is, in the process of this war and those profound shocks which it must engender, will a genuine revolutionary leadership be formed capable of leading the proletariat to the conquest of power?” He recognized that the many defeats suffered by the working class had created widespread skepticism as to its revolutionary capacities. There were many who shifted blame for these defeats away from the political leaders and onto the shoulders of the working class itself. For those who believed that past defeats “proved” that the working class was incapable of taking and holding state power, the historical condition of mankind could only appear hopeless. But against that perspective of despair and demoralization, Trotsky advanced another: “Altogether differently does the case present itself to him who has clarified in his mind the profound antagonism between the organic, deep-going, insurmountable urge of the masses to tear themselves free from the bloody capitalist chaos, and the conservative, patriotic, utterly bourgeois character of the outlived labor leadership.” [8] Trotsky did not expect to survive the war. He assumed that Stalin would spare no effort to kill him before the Soviet Union was drawn into open conflict with Nazi Germany. In the early morning hours of May 24, 1940, a Stalinist assassination squad, led by the painter David Alfaro Siqueiros, penetrated the villa in which Trotsky and Natalia were living. Sheldon Harte, a Stalinist agent working inside the compound, had unlocked the gates of the villa. The Stalinist hit men made their way into the bedroom of Trotsky and Natalia and unleashed a barrage of machine gun fire. Almost miraculously, the two survived the assault. But Trotsky knew that the May attack would not be the last. He understood better than anyone else the danger that he confronted. “In a reactionary epoch such as ours,” he stated, “a revolutionist is compelled to swim against the stream. I am doing this to the best of my ability. The pressure of world reaction has expressed itself perhaps most implacably in my personal fate and the fate of those close to me. I do not see in this any merit of mine: this is the result of the interlacing of historical circumstances.” [9] On August 20, 1940, Trotsky was assaulted by a GPU agent, and died the next day of the injuries that he had suffered. He was 60 years old. Several months after the assassination, Max Eastman wrote a final tribute to Trotsky. It was published in, of all places, the prestigious bourgeois journal, Foreign Affairs. Eastman had known Trotsky very well for almost 20 years. He had written Trotsky’s biography and translated into English many of his most important works, including The History of the Russian Revolution. Eastman was not an uncritical admirer of Trotsky. Their relationship had been marked by periods of sharp conflict. During the last years of Trotsky’s life, Eastman repudiated his radical inclinations, definitively rejected Marxism and moved ever more sharply to the right. When Trotsky and Eastman met in Mexico for the last time, in February 1940, it was not as comrades but as old friends who had become somewhat estranged. At this point, neither man was interested in attempting to persuade the other of the correctness of his own position. The fact that Eastman was no longer politically connected to Trotsky endows his final tribute with exceptional probative value. His memorial essay, entitled “The Character and Fate of Leon Trotsky,” began as follows: Trotsky stood up gloriously against the blows of fate these last fifteen years—demotion, rejection, exile, systematized slanderous misrepresentation, betrayal by those who had understood him, repeated attempts upon his life by those who had not, the certainty of ultimate assassination. His associates, his secretaries, his relatives, his own children were hounded to death by a sneering and sadistic enemy. He suffered privately beyond description but he never relaxed his monumental discipline. He never lost his grip for one visible second, never permitted any blow to blunt the edge of his wit, his logic or his literary style. Under afflictions that would have sent almost any creative artist to a hospital for neurotics and thence to the grave, Trotsky steadily developed and improved his art. His unfinished life of Lenin, which I had partially translated, would have been his masterpiece. He gave us, in a time when our race is woefully in need of such restoratives, the vision of a man. Of that there is no more doubt than of his great place in history. His name will live, with that of Spartacus and the Gracchi, Robespierre and Marat, as a supreme revolutionist, an audacious captain of the masses in revolt. [10] These words provided a sense of the enduring significance of Trotsky’s life. Eastman was telling his readers that Trotsky would still be remembered, in 2,000 years, as one of the great fighters for human freedom. But here we are, 70 years after Trotsky’s assassination, in the midst of a politically reactionary and intellectually dishonest campaign to deprive him of “his great place in history.” The publication of Robert Service’s biography of Trotsky is a milestone in this campaign of historical distortion and falsification, whose stated aim is the discrediting of the actions and ideas of this key figure in modern history. Before proceeding to a review of Service’s Trotsky, it is necessary to make a few preliminary remarks about the treatment of Trotsky by historians both within and outside the USSR. Of course, within the USSR during Stalin’s dictatorship, Trotsky was totally anathematized. From the early 1920s, the political struggle waged by the rising Soviet bureaucracy against Trotsky proceeded first and foremost on the basis of the falsification of history—of the history of the development of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party, the protracted conflict between its Bolshevik and Menshevik factions, the role of different tendencies and individuals in that generally heated struggle, and, finally, of the October Revolution. Trotsky’s role in the latter event, and in the civil war that followed, was so immense that the campaign to discredit him, which began in earnest in 1923, required the systematic falsification of history. The campaign of lies began in 1923-24 with the charge that Trotsky “underestimated the peasantry.” This absurd allegation, which reflected pre-1917 programmatic differences as well as emerging disputes within the Soviet state over economic and foreign policy, set the stage for a generalized attack on Trotsky’s Theory of Permanent Revolution, which had provided the strategic foundation for the Bolshevik conquest of state power and its goal of world socialist revolution. The fight against Trotsky reflected the repudiation of the internationalist program of the October Revolution by a bureaucracy increasingly focused on the defense of its social privileges within a national framework. Thus, there existed a symbiotic relationship between the ever more vindictive denunciation of Trotsky’s supposed heresies—supported by the misrepresentation of pre-1917 factional conflicts between Trotsky and Lenin—and the promulgation of the program of “socialism in one country.” The lies that began in 1923 led to tragic consequences. As Trotsky wrote in 1937, the judicial frame-ups of the Moscow Trials had their source in supposedly “minor” historical distortions. Even after the exposure of Stalin’s crimes in 1956, the Soviet bureaucracy desperately resisted Trotsky’s historical and political rehabilitation. Even if it no longer claimed, officially, that he had been in league with the Gestapo, the Soviet regime and its allies defended and supported the struggle against “Trotskyism” that had been waged by Stalin in the 1920s. The systematic falsification of Trotsky’s role in the history of Russian socialism, in the leadership of the October Revolution, in the creation of the Red Army and its victory in the Civil War, and, above all, in the fight against the Soviet bureaucracy, continued—even up until the dissolution of the USSR. Mr. Service claims that Gorbachev ordered Trotsky’s posthumous rehabilitation in 1988. [p. 2] This is just one of Professor Service’s innumerable errors. Trotsky was never officially rehabilitated by the Soviet government. Isaac Deutscher Outside the USSR, the treatment of Trotsky was very different. The role played by Isaac Deutscher’s trilogy—The Prophet Armed, Unarmed and Outcast—in reawakening interest in Trotsky is well known. But it must be noted that Deutscher’s recounting of Trotsky’s extraordinary life found a receptive audience within a broad spectrum of scholars who, though usually hostile to Marxism, accepted as an indisputable fact his gigantic role in the history of the 20th century. Thus, even an historian as unfriendly to Trotsky’s ideas as Richard Pipes, could bring himself to admit, in a review of Deutscher’s “magnificent” second volume: “Personal courage and intellectual honesty Trotsky undoubtedly possessed, in sharp contrast to the other contenders for Lenin’s mantle who were cowardly and deceitful to a remarkable degree.” [11] The growing appreciation of Trotsky’s role in Soviet history was not, by any means, attributable solely to Deutscher’s biography. The work of other important historians writing in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s contributed to a significant deepening of the understanding of Russian revolutionary history and Trotsky’s role within it. Of particular significance was the work of scholars such as E. H. Carr, Leopold Haimson, Moshe Lewin, Alexander Rabinowitch, Richard Day, Pierre Broué, Robert V. Daniels, Marcel Liebman and Baruch Knei-Paz. Significantly, a fundamental change in the treatment of Trotsky became apparent in the last years of the USSR and in the aftermath of its dissolution. First, within the USSR, as the crisis of the Stalinist regime mounted, it was inevitable that the old historical falsifications would lose credibility. This process, one might have expected, would work to the advantage of Trotsky’s historical reputation. Certainly, in the aftermath of 1956, dissident elements hungered for whatever information they could find about him. However, from the 1970s on, the movement of the Soviet intelligentsia was to the right. Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, which paid little attention to the left-wing opposition to Stalinism, became the leading text of the dissident movement. This opposition did not reject Stalinism as a perversion of Marxism; rather, it rejected Marxism and the entire revolutionary project. Thus, within the “dissident” literature of the 1970s and early 1980s, the treatment of Trotsky was markedly hostile. Emphasis was generally placed not on his opposition to Stalinism, but rather on the alleged continuity between Trotsky’s policies and those implemented by Stalin after Trotsky had been expelled from the Communist Party and exiled from the USSR. This tendency became particularly pronounced during the era of Gorbachev, when, for the first time, genuine historical documents relating to Trotsky’s role, including some of his books, became available. As if to counter the favorable impression these documents and books would make on a public that was asking whether an alternative had existed to Stalin and Stalinism, the new opposition to Trotsky assumed the form of unfavorable commentaries on his personality. Another increasingly common form taken by anti-Trotskyism in the last years of the USSR, and in the immediate aftermath of its dissolution, was a heavy-handed and overtly anti-Semitic emphasis on Trotsky’s Jewish origins. The reactionary environment of political triumphalism that followed the collapse of the Stalinist regime was reflected no less sharply in the treatment of Trotsky outside the former USSR. A campaign was initiated to undermine and even destroy the historical image of Trotsky as the representative of an historical alternative to Stalinism. In the early 1990s, the University of Glasgow sponsored the publication of the Journal of Trotsky Studies. As soon became clear, the purpose of this journal was to discredit Trotsky by claiming that his historical reputation was undeserved, that it was based on an all-too-uncritical acceptance of a narrative based on Trotsky’s writings. These writings, it was claimed, were self-serving and even false. The chief target of this attack was Trotsky’s autobiography, My Life, which had achieved, over many decades, recognition as a masterpiece of twentieth century literature. Every facet of Trotsky’s career—as it had been presented in his autobiography and in the works of other historians—was challenged. Trotsky led the October insurrection? No, he spent the crucial night of the Bolshevik seizure of power attending to insignificant secretarial functions. Trotsky led the Red Army to victory? No, he was a vainglorious poseur, who liked to strut around in military dress. Trotsky opposed the bureaucracy? No, he was an inveterate factionalist and trouble-maker who simply loved to argue. The principal specialist in this sort of rewriting of history was Ian Thatcher, who served as co-editor of the Journal of Trotsky Studies at the University of Glasgow, before moving on to Leicester University and then to Brunel University in West London. Thatcher’s career has been almost entirely based on creating a new school of anti-Trotskyist falsification. The climax of his efforts in this sphere was his writing of a biography of Trotsky that was published by Routledge in 2003. There is no need for me to spend time on Thatcher’s work today, as I have already written an extensive analysis of this miserable compendium of distortions and lies. He is relevant to today’s discussion only as the precursor and principal inspirer of Robert Service’s biography. Mr. Service pays special tribute to Thatcher in his preface. “Ian,” he writes, “has spent his career writing about Trotsky; I appreciate his generosity of spirit in scrutinizing my draft and making suggestions.” [p. xx] Indeed, Ian Thatcher’s “spirit” pervades Service’s biography. Claiming that his work exposes Trotsky’s “evasive and self-aggrandizing” autobiography, Service’s basic approach is borrowed entirely from Thatcher. In introducing his book, Service describes it as “the first full-length biography of Trotsky written by someone outside of Russia who is not a Trotskyist.” [p. xxi] What is meant by the term “full-length”? Merely that it is long? Generally, the term “full-length biography” implies not merely the length of a book, but, rather, its breadth and depth. Every important biography examines its subject in the context of the epoch in which he or she lived. It not only recounts the actions of the individual, but also examines the origins and development of his or her thought. It strives to uncover and explain the influences, objective and subjective, that shaped the subject’s emotional and intellectual characteristics. The Service biography does none of these things—and not merely because its author is pathologically hostile to his subject (though that is, indeed, a serious handicap). The fact is that Mr. Service simply does not know enough about the life and thoughts of Trotsky. Far too little time and intellectual effort went into the preparation of this book for it to be anything else than a piece of hack-work. The genuine scholar who possesses the necessary knowledge, audacity and even, perhaps, foolhardiness to attempt a “full-length” biography of a major historical figure imposes immense demands upon himself. The biographer must be prepared, to the extent that it is possible, to recreate in his or her own mind the life of the subject. To undertake such a project is, more often than not, extremely taxing on the biographer, often requiring years of study, research and writing. It is both intellectually and emotionally demanding—both for the author and for those with whom he lives and works. That is why so many historians include in their prefaces or forewords expressions of gratitude to their wives or husbands, children, friends and colleagues who provided intellectual, moral and emotional support. One might cite as an example of this process the writing of the biography of G. V. Plekhanov by Professor Samuel Baron. Many years after the publication of this book in 1963, Baron wrote an essay in which he described the ordeal through which he had passed. The project had begun in 1948, when Baron chose to make an aspect of Plekhanov’s work the subject of his doctoral dissertation. Its completion required four years. But Baron decided that this dissertation was too narrowly focused to be worthy of publication; and so with scant appreciation of the implications I resolved to write a full-scale biography. Because the sources were so voluminous, the subject so complex, and my free time so limited, it required eleven years to see the plan through. During these years, although I was burdened with a heavy teaching load and had a home and family to care for, Plekhanov was rarely out of my mind. I spent many an evening during the teaching year, as well as weekends, holidays and vacations, in research and writing… My sleeping as well as my waking hours were often filled with reflections and refractions of my subject. The task I had set myself seemed so interminable that sometimes I wondered out loud whether it would finish me before I finished it. Yet there could be no thought of quitting, for I had too much invested, and so I continued doggedly at my Sisyphean labor. [12] How long did it take Professor Service to research and write his biography of Trotsky? His previous large volume, a rambling and inchoate work entitled Comrades: A History of World Communism, was published in 2007. Before that, Service brought out, in 2004, a biography of Stalin. I will not discuss the quality of either work, other than to state, quite briefly, that both were abysmally bad. But let us leave that problem for some other time. What interests us here is that Service has brought out his “full length” biography of Trotsky only two years after the publication of his History of World Communism. At that point, judging from the content of the earlier volume, Service’s knowledge of Trotsky’s life was very limited. The references to Trotsky are of a desultory character and include a number of glaring factual errors. He gets the date of the first attempt on Trotsky’s life by David Alfaro Siqueiros wrong. It occurred in May 1940; but Service writes that it took place in June. Even more astonishingly, he gets the date of Trotsky’s death wrong. Trotsky leads Red Army troops during the civil war But only two years after the publication of Comrades, Service’s Trotsky has hit the bookstores. Consider what is involved in writing a biography of Trotsky. His political career spanned 43 years. He played a major role, as chairman of the Petrograd Soviet, in the 1905 Revolution. In 1917, after returning to Russia and joining the Bolshevik Party, Trotsky again became the chairman of the Petrograd Soviet. He also became the chairman of the Military Revolutionary Committee, which, under Trotsky’s direction, organized and led the October 1917 insurrection that brought the working class to power. He became, in 1918, the Commissar for Military Affairs, and, in that position, played the leading role in the organization and command of the Red Army. Between 1919 and 1922, Trotsky was, alongside Lenin, the most influential political figure in the Communist International. Beginning in late 1923, with the formation of the Left Opposition, he emerged as the central figure in the struggle against the Stalinist bureaucracy. After his expulsion from the Soviet Union in 1929, Trotsky inspired the formation of the International Left Opposition and, between 1933 and 1938, elaborated the theoretical and programmatic foundations of the Fourth International. In addition to the immense scope of his political and practical activities, Trotsky was among the most prolific writers of the 20th century. It has been estimated that a complete collection of his published writings would run well over 100 volumes. Even today, a substantial portion of his writings, including letters and diaries, has not been published or translated into English. The point is that the writing of a serious, full-length, biography of Trotsky is a task that would require years of rigorous work by a conscientious scholar. Moreover, the biographer would have to be deeply knowledgeable of the historical and social environment within which his subject lived, and with the political and theoretical premises that formed the foundations of his outlook. Professor Service makes a major point of the fact that his biography has not been written by a Trotskyist, and refers disparagingly to the late Pierre Broué, who was politically affiliated to the Trotskyist movement, as an “idolater.” Aside from the fact that Broué was, quite apart from his political commitments, an outstanding historian, there is a very good reason why his personal involvement with socialist politics, like that of Deutscher (who was not a Trotskyist) was a significant advantage in the writing of a biography of Trotsky. Both Broué and Deutscher possessed, even before they set to work, a genuine familiarity with Marxist and socialist culture, acquired over many decades of political involvement. Service possesses none of the qualifications required to write a biography of Trotsky. One must allow that the lack of personal involvement in the Marxist movement need not be an absolute barrier to the writing of such a biography. Indeed, it may allow a degree of scholarly “detachment,” which a politically committed historian might find more difficult to attain. But Professor Service is neither detached nor politically uncommitted. Since he has chosen to describe the late Broué as an “idolater,” Service can be described, with far greater justification, as a “hater.” And hate, particularly of the subjective and vindictive character that so obviously motivates Service, is incompatible with genuine scholarship. Moreover, there is still one more failing that disqualifies Mr. Service as a biographer and historian—and that is an utter lack of intellectual integrity and curiosity. I have already written a lengthy critique of Professor Service’s biography that was circulated widely in November at the annual conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies (AAASS). Several thousand specialists in the field of Russian history were in attendance. A significant number of historians received and read my critique. In subsequent discussions, a few of these historians have expressed some degree of disapproval of its harsh tone. But no one has challenged or contradicted me on a single issue of fact. This published critique, “In the Service of Historical Falsification,” ran well over 10,000 words. One might ask oneself: what more is there to say about Service’s book? The truth is, my initial critique barely scratched the surface of Professor Service’s falsifications, distortions, half-truths and outright lies. I do not intend today to simply repeat the points that I have already raised. But I will resume my enumeration of Professor Service’s distortions by returning to the issue that plays so central a role in his biography of Trotsky—that is, Trotsky’s Jewish origins. As I stated in my earlier review: “There is, to be blunt, something unpleasant and suspect about Service’s preoccupation with this matter. The fact that Trotsky was a Jew occupies a central place in Service’s biography. It is never far from Service’s mind. He is constantly reminding his readers of this fact, as if he were worried that it might slip from their attention.” [13] As I noted, his descriptions of Trotsky are rife with ethnic stereotyping (e.g., Trotsky “was brash in his cleverness, outspoken in his opinions. No one could intimidate him. Trotsky had these characteristics to a higher degree than most other Jews…” “…he was far from being the only Jew who visibly enjoyed the opportunities for public self-advancement…” “his real nose was neither long nor bent” and so on). Trotsky as a boy Among Service’s favorite techniques is to present openly anti-Semitic attitudes without citation, such as, “Jews indeed were widely alleged to dominate the Bolshevik Party.” Alleged by whom? The deliberate use of the passive voice to present a position without a citation that properly identifies the source allows Service to introduce an anti-Semitic slur without assuming any responsibility for it. This is not an innocent mistake. There are definite rules that govern scholarly work. Service, who has worked for decades as a professional historian, violates these rules deliberately and repeatedly. I would like to call attention to another example of Service’s efforts to emphasize Trotsky’s Jewish origins to which I have not previously referred. And that is his persistent reference to the young person as “Leiba Bronstein.” Service writes that “Trotsky was Leiba Bronstein until the age of twenty-three when he adopted his renowned pseudonym.” [p.11] And, so, for the first 40 pages of Service’s biography, he refers to the young man only as “Leiba.” Finally, on page 41, Service announces a major turning point. “Leiba,” already eighteen and increasingly involved in revolutionary activity, has made new acquaintances in the provincial town of Nikolaev: Ilya Sokolovski, Alexandra Sokolvskaya and Grigory Ziv. They were Jews, Service writes, “but they did not talk, read or write in Yiddish. Moreover, they had Russian first names and liked to be called by very Russian diminutives: Ilya as Ilyusha, Alexandra as Sasha, Shura or Suruchka and Grigori as Grisha. Leiba, wanting to be like them, decided that he wanted to be known as Lëva [Lyova]. Semantically it had nothing to do with the Yiddish name Leiba; but it was a common first-name and helpfully it sounded a little the same.” [pp. 41-42] This story of the transformation of Leiba into Lëva reinforces a central theme of Service’s argument: that Trotsky was ashamed of his Jewish origins and even sought to downplay them in his autobiography (one of the examples of its “serious inaccuracies”). So Service would have his readers believe that he has uncovered the real story whereby little “Leiba Bronstein” —the son of the “plucky Jew” David Bronstein—became Lyova Bronstein, and, somewhat later, Lev Trotsky. David Bronstein An interesting story, but is there any truth in it? In his autobiography, Trotsky remembers that he was called, from his earliest childhood, Lyova. In My Life, a footnote written by the translator, Max Eastman, states: “Trotsky’s full and original name was Lev Davydovich Bronstein, his father’s name being Davyd Leontiyevich Bronstein. ‘Lyova’ is one of the many similar diminutives of Lev, which literally means ‘Lion.’ In English and French usage, Trotsky has become known as Leon, in German as Leo.” [14] Service offers no documentary evidence that the young boy was ever called anything other than Lyova, or related diminutives, such as “Lyovochka.” The Bronstein family did not speak Yiddish—the language used at home was a mixture of Russian and Ukrainian—so there is no apparent reason why he would have been called Leiba. Trotsky (right) with Ilya Sokolovsky, Dr Ziv and Alexandra Sokolovskaya, who became his first wife So what about Service’s story of the young “Leiba’s” adoption of the name Lëva so that he could have a Russian-sounding first name like his friends? For this story Service does provide a footnoted reference to two items: 1) a bitterly hostile memoir written by Grigory Ziv, who had been one of the young Trotsky’s earliest associates in the revolutionary movement; and 2) a letter written by the young Trotsky in November 1898 to his love, Alexandra Sokolovskaya. A reader would reasonably assume that these documents provide the factual substantiation of Service’s story. Most readers, however, would have neither the time nor means to access the original documents. Neither document exists in English. Ziv’s book, published in 1921, is available in a few libraries in the original Russian. The letter to Sokolovskaya, which is also in Russian, exists on microfiche in the archives of the Hoover Institute at Stanford University. However, an examination of these documents has yielded the not entirely surprising discovery that they include absolutely no information that corroborates Service’s story. The first chapter of the Ziv memoir, in which his initial contacts with the young Trotsky are recounted, is entitled “Lëva.” It says nothing at all about Trotsky changing his first name from “Leiba” to “Lëva” or Lev. The young man he met was known as Lëva. The name “Leiba” does not appear, even once, in the memoir. Inasmuch as Ziv discusses at length the change in his former comrade’s last name—from Bronstein to Trotsky (which occurred when the young revolutionary escaped from exile and apparently took the name of a former jailer)—there is no reason to believe that Ziv simply forgot the name Leiba. Ziv did not write about it because he had never heard Lëva referred to by that name. What about the second document cited by Service, the letter of November 1898 from Trotsky to Alexandra Sokolovskaya? This is an intensely personal and intimate letter, from a young man to a woman with whom he is deeply in love. This letter is an important document, to which Service refers on several occasions. Does the young Trotsky, in this very personal letter, explain to his love how he came to adopt the name Lëva? The answer is: No! There is nothing at all about such a transformation. The letter, by the way, is signed “Lëva,” the name by which he had been known his entire youth. So until Professor Service is able to produce proper documentation for his story about the transformation of “Leiba” into “Lëva,” we are entitled to assume that he simply, and quite dishonestly, made the whole thing up. The issue of Trotsky’s original name is of both historical and political significance. It is well known that references to Trotsky as Bronstein, a name that he had not used since 1902, became increasingly common in the mid-1920s as the Stalinist bureaucracy intensified its campaign against the Left Opposition. References to Trotsky as Bronstein (and to Zinoviev as Radomyslsky and Kamenev as Rosenfeld) became part of the stock-in-trade of the Stalinists. During the Moscow Trials, Trotsky drew attention to the anti-Semitic sub-text of the proceedings, in which so many Jews were among the defendants. Curiously, many bourgeois liberals of Jewish origin in the United States, including the politically prominent Rabbi Stephen Wise, denounced Trotsky for calling attention to this aspect of the trials. This willingness to maintain a polite silence on the anti-Semitic stench emanating from the Kremlin reflected the indulgent attitude of liberals toward Stalinism during the era of Popular Frontism. Decades later, during glasnost in the 1980s, and continuing after the dissolution of the USSR, Trotsky’s Jewish origins assumed obsessive dimensions among a wide variety of Russian anti-Semites. As the eminent historian Walter Lacqueur has pointed out: “…it would be wrong to underrate the real hatred for Trotsky among sections of the Russian Right and neo-Stalinists. He was the personification of all evil, and he was doubly vulnerable as a Communist and a Jew; his ‘original name,’ Leiba Bronstein, was always stressed with loving care by his enemies, a practice that had once been the monopoly of the Nazis. No one would have dreamed of referring to Lenin as Ulyanov, to Gorky as Peshkov, or to Kirov as Kostrikov.” [15] In a footnote, Lacqueur writes that Trotsky’s childhood name was Lyova. In a number of meetings related to the book launch of the biography, Professor Service has been questioned about his treatment of Trotsky’s Jewish background. Rather than explain his approach in a professional manner, Service has replied aggressively, as if threatening a lawsuit: “Are you calling me an anti-Semite?” Only Service and, perhaps, his closest associates know what his innermost feelings about Jews are. But that is not the issue. An individual who, for whatever reasons, appeals to, arouses, and exploits anti-Jewish prejudice is practicing anti-Semitism. That Service may include Jews among his personal friends is beside the point. It is a well known historical fact that Karl Lüger—the founder of the anti-Semitic Christian Socialist Party and mayor of Vienna in fin-de-siècle Austria—had a number of Jewish friends. For Lüger, anti-Semitism was merely a political device to rally the embittered Viennese petty bourgeoisie to his politically reactionary banner. When asked to explain how he reconciled his anti-Semitic demagogy with his genial dining engagements with Jews, Lüger replied cynically: “In Vienna, I decide who is a Jew.” Professor Service practices similar moral double bookkeeping. One final point on this matter. In his 2004 biography of Stalin, Professor Service made a point of absolving Stalin of the charge of anti-Semitism. He cites a comment that Stalin made at the conclusion of an early congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party. Stalin, noting that a higher percentage of Jews was to be found among the Mensheviks than among the Bolsheviks, remarked that “It would do no harm if we, the Bolsheviks, carried out a small pogrom in the party.” Service, with remarkable indulgence, observes that Stalin’s remarks “were later used against him as proof of anti-Semitism. They were crude and insensitive. But they scarcely betokened hatred of all Jews… For many years into the future he would be a friend, associate and leader of countless Jews.” [p. 77, Emphasis added] What an extraordinarily generous explanation of Stalin’s attitude toward Jews! Inasmuch as he did not hate all Jews, and even included Jews among his friends, Stalin was not an anti-Semite! By the way, it should be noted that Service’s citation of Stalin’s remarks at the RSDLP conference left out the following passage: “Lenin is outraged that God sent him such comrades as the Mensheviks. What kind of people are they, really? Martov, Dan, Axelrod—circumcised Jews… Do Georgian workers really not know that the Jewish people are cowardly and no good for fighting?” [16] The central purpose of Service’s biography—and in this he is continuing where his mentor, Ian Thatcher, left off—is to discredit Trotsky not only as a political figure, but as a man. To some extent, Service’s concentration on Trotsky’s personality is dictated by the fact that the biographer has sufficient sense to realize that he lacks the intellectual equipment to deal with Trotsky’s ideas. It is easier to attack Trotsky personally, to misrepresent his actions and his motives. Service’s portrayal of Trotsky has been welcomed by innumerable right-wing critics. For example, Robert Harris has written in the London Times: “If one can imagine the most obnoxious middle-class student radical one has ever met—bitter, sneering, arrogant, selfish, cocky, callous, callow, blinkered and condescending—and if one freezes that image, applies a pair of pince-nez and transports it back to the beginning of the last century, then one has Trotsky.” I would imagine that most of the adjectives employed by the overheated Mr. Harris would serve very well as a description of his own person. The real purpose of Service’s grotesque portrayal of Trotsky—which reverberates throughout the bourgeois press and will eventually be echoed in subsequent pseudo-historical works that dutifully cite Professor Service’s “authoritative” and “magisterial” volume—is the concoction of an entirely new historical persona. All traces of the real Trotsky—as he was described and remembered by comrades and friends, and, above all, as found expression in his words and his deeds—are to be effaced, obliterated and replaced with something monstrous and grotesque that bears no resemblance to the real human being. The historical persona of the great revolutionary, political genius, military leader and master of the written word is to be replaced with something abominable and contemptible. Trotsky, á la Service, as one of the political monsters of the twentieth century! This is what Service and his friends have in mind when they talk of his book as a second assassination of Trotsky! But because the concoction grossly falsifies reality, the author loses himself in countless contradictions. The book begins, oddly enough, with a fairly honest and objective summary of Trotsky’s role in the Russian Revolution. Service writes, in the opening paragraph: Trotsky moved like a bright comet across the political sky. He was the finest orator of the Russian Revolution. He led the Military-Revolutionary Committee which carried out the overthrow of the Provisional Government in October. He did more than anyone to found the Red Army. He belonged to the Party Politburo and had a deep impact on its political, economic and military strategy. He was a principal figure in the early years of the Communist International. The whole world attributed the impact of the October Revolution to his partnership with Lenin. [p.1] Within little more than a page, however, Service sets to work repudiating his opening paragraph. Trotsky, he tells us, “exaggerated his personal importance. His ideas before 1917 were nowhere near to being as original and wide-ranging as he liked to believe. His contribution to the Bolshevik advance on power was important but not to the degree that he asserted.” The two assessments are not compatible with each other. If Trotsky did all that Service states that he did in the first paragraph of the biography, then how could Trotsky have “exaggerated his personal importance”? After the first paragraph, Service piles insult upon insult, indifferent to the accumulation of obvious absurdities and contradictions. There are times when he even manages to make a declaration in one sentence that he proceeds to contradict in the same paragraph! “Leiba,” he writes, “had no compunction about living at his father’s expense while despising his hopes and values.” The two sentences that follow immediately after read: “The son, furthermore, was as stubborn as his father. He would no longer be told what to do, and rather than submit to the paternal will he fled his comfortable apartment and took up residence in Shvigovski’s house.” [p. 41] Thus, contrary to what Service declared in the first sentence—that “Leiba had no compunction about living at his father’s expense”—the reader learns in the third sentence that the young man gave up the comforts of home in order to pursue his ideals! Service claims repeatedly that Trotsky edited drafts of his autobiography in order to remove material that might prove embarrassing to him. In fact, he does not provide a single example of such an excision. Quite the opposite. Service notes that in an early draft of the autobiography, Trotsky recounts a story in which he displayed exceptional personal and physical courage in defying a cruel and sadistic prison warden. Trotsky told the warden to his face that he would not tolerate his abusive comments. It was the warden who retreated. In the published version of My Life, this story—for which there were witnesses—was not included. Service comments: “As with several such episodes of daring in his life, Trotsky did not include this information in his published memoirs. It had to be dragged out of him by admiring writers. Although he liked to cut a dash in public, he disliked boasting: he preferred others to do the job for him. He was noisy and full of himself. People did not have to wait long before discovering how vain and self-centered he really was.” [p. 56, Emphasis added] Through a rather clumsy sleight of hand, Service finds a way of insulting Trotsky for his modesty and dislike of boasting! Service devotes an enormous amount of space to blackguarding Trotsky as a faithless husband who cruelly abandoned his first wife and their two children. “As a husband,” writes Service, “he [Trotsky] treated his first wife shabbily. He ignored the needs of his children especially when his political interests intervened. This had catastrophic consequences even for those who were inactive in Soviet public life—and his son Lev, who followed him into exile, possibly paid with his life for collaborating with his father.” [p. 4] One would hardly guess, based on Service’s telling of the story, that either the oppressive conditions of Tsarist Russia or, later, the persecutions of Stalin had anything to do with the tragic fate of Trotsky’s family and loved ones. In fact, Service actually criticizes Trotsky for assigning responsibility to the Soviet regime for the death of his daughter Zina in 1933. But the circumstances of the deaths of his children and his first wife are of little interest to Service. What interests him is portraying Trotsky as some sort of irresponsible and callous philanderer, who thoughtlessly and egotistically abandoned his first wife, Alexandra Sokolovskaya. Service treats the relationship between Trotsky and Alexandra Sokolovskaya with a truly offensive crudeness. Repeatedly, he attempts to drag both the young Lyova and Alexandra down to his own level. In this regard, Service’s use of the letter of November 1898—to which I have already referred—is especially significant. This letter was written by the 19-year-old Lyova to Alexandra while they were both imprisoned in Odessa. They could not communicate with each other in person. When Lyova wrote this letter, he was ill and depressed. Nearly a year had passed since they had been arrested. Trotsky had spent several months of imprisonment in solitary confinement. Citing a brief passage from this letter, in which Trotsky admits that he had thought of, and rejected, suicide, Service comments: There was showiness and immaturity in these sentiments. He was a self-centered young man. Unconsciously he was trying to induce Alexandra to do more than love him: he wanted her to understand and look after him and perhaps this could be achieved by admissions of weakness. He was never genuinely suicidal: his comment was designed to make her want to protect him. He saw that he had been haughty and unfeeling towards her. What better, then, than to own up to possessing a stony exterior and to say that he was ‘shedding tears’ about this. [p. 52] This sort of facile psychologizing is, even when offered with the best of intentions, of rather dubious value. But it assumes a maliciously absurd character when the passage upon which the analysis hinges has been falsified. Trotsky, Service tells us, is slyly attempting to appeal to Alexandra’s vulnerability by insincerely confessing that he was “shedding tears” about his “stony exterior.” The problem with this “interpretation” is that Service has misrepresented the text of Lyova’s letter. The exposure of this falsification requires that the relevant passage be fully and correctly quoted. The young revolutionary wrote: Sasha [Alexandra] is so good, and when I feel like kissing and caressing her so much…. And all that is beyond reach: instead, there is loneliness, insomnia, repulsive thoughts about death … brrr .. The hour of redemption will arrive, ‘The people will sing their hymn, They will remember us with tears. They will visit our graves.’ Our graves, Sasha: our g-r-a-v-e-s. – O, with what horror will they speak at some time about today’s social order … beyond my doors right now at this very moment I can hear the familiar clang of so many chains: after all they are on people. Sasha, how much we have become used to this, and yet how terrible it is. Chains on people … And this is all according to the law. Are you surprised by my burst of ‘Weltschmerz’? An unusual sensitivity is developing in me: I have become capable of ‘shedding tears’ while reading the civil poems of P. Ya /in ‘Mir B.’/ or while reading works of fiction … It’s simply that my nerves are extremely strained, that’s all. The Siberian taiga will temper this tender civic sensitivity. On the other hand, how happy we will be there. Like Olympian gods. We will always, always be inseparably together.—How many times I have always repeated this, and yet I feel like repeating it over and over again … You and I have gone through so much together, we have suffered so much that, to be sure, we deserve our hour of happiness. This letter is, in its own right, an extraordinary and deeply moving document. That its author was the future leader of the October Revolution imparts to it immense significance. To interpret this letter as an expression of “showiness” and “immaturity” speaks to Service’s cynicism and insensitivity. However, from a professional standpoint, Service’s treatment of this letter is dishonest and misleading. First of all, Trotsky’s admission to “shedding tears,” which he places in quotation marks, does not refer to his weeping about his efforts to conceal his “stony exterior.” Rather, it refers directly to his response to the poetry of Pyotr Yakubovich. Were Service a serious historian, he would—after having carefully reflected on this matter—explain to his readers the significance of this reference. Yakubovich (1860-1911) was an important poet and revolutionary, active in the populist People’s Will. His poems, which evoked the heroism and tragedy of the doomed struggle of the revolutionary terrorists against tsarism, made a deep moral impact upon the youth of the 1890s. The images employed by Yakubovich in his poetry, particularly those of death and sacrifice, are evoked by Trotsky in his letter to Alexandra. She, of course, would have understood these references very well. A conscientious historian would find in this complex letter—from which I have cited only a small section—valuable material for developing an understanding of his subject and his times. But Service is simply not interested. An odor of indifference and laziness pervades the entire volume. The author shows no curiosity at all about the sources of Trotsky’s intellectual and artistic creativity. Service’s comments on Trotsky’s early literary efforts, written during his first Siberian exile, are generally so banal and perfunctory that it seems that their only purpose is to provide the author with the page count he requires in order to advertise his biography as “full-length.” A typical example of Service’s talent for producing penetrating intellectual commentary is his remark that Trotsky “adored French novels, was an admirer of Ibsen and was impressed by Nietzsche. He treated them all as examples of contemporary world culture.” [p. 207, emphasis added] Did he really? Who would have imagined? But there is something here that does not seem quite right. The reference to Nietzsche raises doubts. The reader may be tempted to wonder: what was it about Nietzsche that impressed Trotsky? If the critical reader is in a position to investigate the issue, he might discover an essay, written by Trotsky shortly after the death of Nietzsche in 1900, entitled “Something about the Philosophy of the ‘Overman.’” Upon reviewing this essay, the reader will quickly learn that “impressed” is hardly the word that describes the young Trotsky’s response to Nietzsche. Trotsky saw in the latter’s philosophy of the “overman” a justification for a new and ever more powerful social type: the financial adventurists, ‘overmen’ of the stock exchange, political and newspaper blackmailers sans scruple, in short, that entire mass of parasitical proletariat which has tightly attached itself to the bourgeois organism and in one way or another lives—and usually lives quite well—at society’s expense without giving back anything in return. … But the entire group (rather numerous and ever growing) still needed a theory which would give the intellectually superior the right to ‘dare.’ It awaited its apostle and found him in Nietzsche. Trotsky concludes his essay with the observation that the social soil from which Nietzscheanism emerged “has turned out to be decayed, malignant and infected…” [17] Does it still appear that Trotsky was “impressed” with Nietzsche? Or is it not more likely that Service did not bother to read Trotsky’s essay, and simply does not know what he is talking about. With Service, as with others of his type, intellectual dishonesty goes hand in hand with ignorance and charlatanry. As I have previously noted, an exhaustive review of all the errors and false statements that appear in this volume would require a “full-length” book at least as long as Service’s biography. It is not an exaggeration to state that there is hardly a page in which an informed reader will not find passages that are objectionable from the standpoint of the basic standards of historical scholarship. It is not even possible to accept, without direct investigation, the author’s references and citations. Again and again it emerges that the source material cited by Service does not support his claims. In bringing this review to a conclusion, it is appropriate to return to Service’s treatment of the relationship between Trotsky and Alexandra Sokolovskaya. The distortion of the circumstances of their separation plays a major role in Service’s effort to discredit Trotsky—as a husband, a father, and as a man. All the reviewers in the right-wing British press have picked up the theme with enthusiasm. In discussing the circumstances of his first escape from Siberian exile in 1902, Trotsky wrote in My Life: At that time we already had two daughters. The younger was four months old. Life under conditions in Siberia was not easy, and my escape would place a double burden on the shoulders of Alexandra Lvovna. But she met this objection with the two words: “You must.” Duty to the revolution overshadowed everything else for her, personal considerations especially. She was the first to broach the idea of my escape when we realized the great new tasks. She brushed away my doubts. For several days after I had escaped, she concealed my absence from the police. From abroad, I could hardly keep up a correspondence with her. Then she was exiled for a second time; after this we met only occasionally. Life separated us, but nothing could destroy our friendship and our intellectual kinship. [18] Service, who does not actually quote Trotsky’s statement, writes: He [Trotsky] later made the claim that Alexandra had wholeheartedly blessed his departure. This is hard to take at face value. [p. 67] On what basis is this statement made? Service does not produce a single piece of evidence—documents, letters, personal testimony—that contradicts Trotsky’s account, which, it should be stressed, was written in 1929 when Alexandra was still alive. She did not contradict it, even though—given the fact that Trotsky had been exiled from the Soviet Union and was publicly reviled as the greatest enemy of the Soviet people—the Stalinist regime would have welcomed her personal denunciation of her former husband. Service employs a series of loaded phrases to cast Trotsky’s actions in the worst possible light: “Bronstein was planning to abandon her in the wilds of Siberia… No sooner had he fathered a couple of children than he decided to run off.” [p. 67] Service, however, proceeds to discredit his own unsubstantiated claims by acknowledging that Trotsky “was acting within the revolutionary code of behavior. The ‘cause’ was everything for the revolutionaries. Marital and parental responsibilities had an importance but never to the point of preventing young militants from doing what their political conscience bade them to do.” [p. 67] If that were the case, as Service acknowledges explicitly, then on what grounds can he claim that Trotsky’s statement that Alexandra supported, and even proposed, his escape from exile “is hard to take at face value”? The fact is that Service’s condemnation of Trotsky’s action is not based on an honest appraisal of the historical context within which the two young revolutionaries lived. One must add that Service’s reference to Alexandra being “abandoned” is maliciously motivated conjecture. As a matter of historical fact, there is good reason to believe that efforts were made to provide assistance for Alexandra and the children. Indeed, in a later chapter, Service includes material that indicates that the Bronstein family played a significant role in providing support for Trotsky’s children. During a trip to Western Europe to visit Trotsky in 1907, Trotsky’s parents brought his daughter Zina with them. Service notes that Trotsky’s family “lived a complicated existence. Zina at that time lived with his [Trotsky’s] sister Elizaveta and her husband in their family home on Gryaznaya Street in Kherson. Alexandra wrote regularly to them.” [p. 108] So it seems that Trotsky did not “abandon” his family. As revolutionaries, both Lev Davidovitch and Alexandra Lvovna coped as best as they could in exceedingly difficult circumstances. At some point in the future, as more documents are discovered, it may be possible to reconstruct accurately the details of their complicated personal arrangements. But Robert Service will not be the man who undertakes that assignment. Finally, with regard to the personal relation between Trotsky and Alexandra, there is a document that testifies to their deep and enduring bond of comradeship and friendship. It is a letter written by Alexandra to Trotsky on August 8, 1935. The final act of the terrible human tragedy is about to begin. Alexandra addresses the letter to “Dear Lyova.” She tells Trotsky of the difficult conditions that confront different members of their family. Alexandra includes, in a reference to efforts by Trotsky to provide material support for her, “I am very touched, as always, by your thoughtful attitude toward me.” And she closes the letter, “Love and Embraces, Yours, Alexandra.” [19] Lev Davidovitch Trotsky and Alexandra Lvovna Sokolovskaya were extraordinary human beings, the representatives of a revolutionary generation whose capacity for self-sacrifice, in the interest of the betterment of mankind, seemed to know no limits. How pathetic it is for Professor Service and his ilk to believe that he will succeed, with insults, falsifications and slanders, in dragging these titans down to his miserable level. Footnotes 1. Quoted in James T. Farrell: The Revolutionary Socialist Years, by Alan M. Wald (New York University Press, 1978), p. 87. [return] 2. Ibid, p. 413. [return] 3. Ibid, p. 502. [return] 4. Writings of Leon Trotsky 1936-37 (New York, Pathfinder, 1978), p. 179. [return] 5. The Case of Leon Trotsky, Report of Hearings on the Charges Made Against Him in the Moscow Trials, by the Preliminary Commission of Inquiry (Merit Publishers, New York, 1968) p. 585. [return] 6. The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution, (New York, Pathfinder, 1977) p. 137. [return] 7. Writings of Leon Trotsky 1938-39, (New York, Pathfinder, 1974) pp. 93-94. [return] 8. In Defense of Marxism, (London, New Park, 1971) p. 15. [return] 9. Writings of Leon Trotsky 1939-40, (New York, Pathfinder, 1973) p. 299. [return] 10. Foreign Affairs, Volume 19, No. 2 (January 1941, p. 332). [return] 11. The American Historical Review, Vol. 54, No. 4 (July 1960), p. 904. [return] 12. My Life With G.V. Plekhanov, p. 188. [return] 13. “In the Service of Historical Falsification: A Review of Robert Service’s Trotsky: A Biography,” Mehring Books (Oak Park, 2009), p. 15. [return] 14. My Life, (New York, Pathfinder, 1970) p. 3. [return] 15. Stalin: The Glasnost Revelations (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1990), pp. 59-60. [return] 16. Cited in Stalin, by Hiroaki Kuromiya (London: Longman, 2005), p. 12. [return] 17. L. Trotskii, Works, Series 6, Volume 20, Culture of the Old World, M.-L., State Publishing House, 1926. 147-162. (New translation from the original Russian text) [return] 18. My Life, p. 132-133. [return] 19. Trotsky’s Diary in Exile 1935, (New York, Atheneum, 1963) pp. 159-160. [return] |
If François Hollande treats his women the way he treats his press conferences, I feel rather sorry for them. He starts slowly. Excitement builds and builds. Steadily, he keeps going. And going. And going. For what feels like ages. Until … hang on a minute. All of a sudden it seems to be over. And as far as you can see, he is the only one who got anything out of it. You, in fact, nodded off several minutes ago. Over the weekend it emerged that the French president has allegedly been cheating on his girlfriend – Valérie Trierweiler, France’s “First Lady” – with a glamorous actress called Julie Gayet. I say “allegedly” because he still hasn’t either confirmed or denied it. Indeed by Tuesday, rumours were circulating in Paris that Mademoiselle Gayet is four months pregnant, although their truth or otherwise could not be established. Julie Gayet (left), President Hollande and Valeire Treieweiler Other important details yet to be confirmed or denied include that he owns only one pair of shoes, and had to sneak into the actress’s flat disguised in a motorcycle helmet. On Tuesday afternoon, in the Elysée Palace in Paris, Monsieur le Président held a press conference. Not, of course, because he was desperate to unburden his soul about his clandestine passion; the event had been planned long before the scandal broke. It was intended to be about the president’s plans to revive France’s sagging economy. Surely now, though, the interrogation would be dominated by another matter. Five minutes late, the president entered, walking in a purposeful little trot, as if he were a small dog carrying an important message from its master. Then, in that long-suffering pair of shoes, he stood behind the lectern and began. Conventionally what happens at a political press conference, at any rate in Britain, is that the politician says a few words of welcome and then invites questions. Not, it would seem, in France. Monsieur Hollande started by talking about his plans for the economy. A minute passed. Then a second. Soon five had gone, then 10, then 20, then half an hour. On and on he talked, without possibility of interruption, about his plans for the economy. Throughout this lecture, the French journalists remained politely silent. They didn’t so much as raise a hand. How odd it all felt. Of course the economy was important. Monsieur Hollande’s top priority was to tackle it. All the same, it was hard to help feeling that – comment dit-on en Français? – il y avait un éléphant dans la salle. Thirty-five minutes. Forty. Surely to goodness he couldn’t put it off for much — Aha! At last! Monsieur le Président was drawing his grand oration to a close. Time, finally, for questions. Come on, French press. Give him all you’ve got. The French Government did their best to look interested (PHILLIPPE WOJAZER/REUTERS) The first journalist opened his mouth – and then did something that, in the same circumstances, no Fleet Street hack would have done. He told the president it was an honour to ask him a question. He thanked him for his speech. He wished him a happy and successful 2014, and sent his best wishes to “all those close to you”. I started to wonder whether this man was the president’s valet. The question, or vote of thanks, had been going on for almost two minutes before it got to the point. An article, the president may have noticed, had recently been published concerning his private life. Would he be so kind as to clarify whether Mademoiselle Trierweiler remained the republic’s “First Lady”? President Hollande peered at his inquisitor with an air of faint contempt, as if he couldn’t quite believe that so trifling a subject had been broached. “I’m sure you’ll understand my answer,” he said patiently. “Every one of us can go through difficult periods in our personal life and that is our case. They are painful moments, but I have one principle, which is that private matters are dealt with privately, within a respectful intimacy. Therefore it is neither the time nor the place to do so.” Surely the cream of the French press wasn’t going to be fobbed off like that. In her role as “First Lady”, Mademoiselle Trierweiler has a personal staff of five, at a cost to French taxpayers of €20,000 (£16,400) a month. And yet apparently they were subsidising a woman their president was no longer interested in. The follow-up question was bound to winkle a better answer out of him than that. “Monsieur le Président,” began the next journalist, boldly. “The responsibility pact you’ve just announced for French businesses will no doubt …” Well, we British were being taught an important lesson. For centuries we had mockingly stereotyped the French as sex-mad. When, in reality, these spotlessly abstemious souls have so little interest in sex that when their own head of state is caught up in the juiciest scandal to hit politics since Clinton-Lewinsky, they only want to ask about social security. The latest polling of the French public, incidentally, shows that, since the Gayet story broke, President Hollande’s approval rating has marginally improved. Which shows either that they like this improbable new side of him, or that they don’t really care. After another 10 minutes or so of questions about banking and taxation, a journalist hesitantly returned the president to the matter of the affair – or rather, not the affair, but the manner in which it was reported. “My indignation is total,” replied Monsieur Hollande. The story was “a violation that touches personal liberty”. France must “maintain the principle of respect”. A journalist reminded him that next month he was due to visit Washington DC. Would he be accompanied by his “First Lady”? And if so … which one was she? As soberly as before – and thus, somehow, all the more amusingly – the president replied that he could not comment at this stage, but pledged to clarify in due course which woman would have the honour of performing this key role. Oh, the French. Are they mad? Or are we? |
Tishaura Jones, the city's treasurer, is criticizing police participation in a reality TV show. The tragedy inflicted upon this wrongfully accused man, however, is only the latest injustice in this show's history. In Detroit, city police shot a 7-year-old girl in the head in a bungled attempt to catch a suspect on The First 48. In Houston, another man was locked up for three years after cops wrongfully accused him of murder within the first 48 hours. And in Miami, according to a New Times examination of court records, at least 15 men have walked free of murder charges spawned under the program's glare. On May 16, 2010, after First 48 videographers expressed a desire to achieve a "good show" and capture "great video footage," police stormed a duplex in an impoverished neighborhood, according to a federal lawsuit. It was past midnight. All the streetlights had suddenly gone black. The cops were hunting for a murder suspect. As cameras rolled and dogs bayed madly, city police fired a flash-bang grenade through a front window. "Police!" one officer cried. The grenade exploded next to a living-room couch where a 7-year-old girl, Aiyana Jones, slept. From the patio, a cop lowered a submachine gun and fired into the house, striking the girl in the head. Upon entry, however, the cops realized they'd raided the wrong house. Their suspect lived next door. The officer who fired the gun, Joseph Weekley, was indicted for manslaughter and awaits trial. First 48 producer Allison Howard pleaded guilty last year to obstruction of justice after she lied about "copying, showing, or giving video footage she shot of the raid to third parties," Detroit prosecutors said. The episode was never aired. This month, the reality TV showbegins shooting in St. Louis, following homicide detectives in real time as they attempt to solve the city's most serious cases.But at least one mayoral candidate isn't happy with the city's upcoming moment in the spotlight. City Treasurer Tishaura Jones, who is vying to replace outgoing mayor Francis Slay in February's election, says she has serious concerns about the show's presence in St. Louis."In light of what's going on nationwide with relationships between police and the community, I don't think this is a good look for us at this time," she says. "I would like to see them pull the plug."But Police Chief Sam Dotson defended his department's participation, saying that the show's willingness to follow detectives as they work over weeks and even months on a single case will highlight the important work his officers do.The city's crime problem, which includes a murder rate among the highest in the nation per capita, is common knowledge, he says. The show will present the flip side. "This will show we have some of the most qualified, skilled detectives working anywhere in the country," he vows.He also notes the potential for greater transparency. "Having a third party watching over your shoulder as you work a case from start to finish can only be a good thing," he says.Dotson says he's gotten numerous offers in his tenure as chief to have the department participate in reality TV programming. He accepted this offer only because the show has a longstanding track record — and because numerous detectives told him they are fans. "They said it's the best show they've seen that captures what it's like to be a homicide detective," he says.The show has filmed everywhere from Miami to Detroit, but not without some controversy. A lengthy story in the's former sister paper, the, charged in its headline " The First 48 makes millions off imprisoning innocents ."In the story, writer Terrence McCoy details a case where Miami Police got the wrong man — leaving him to languish in jail for twenty months before charges were finally dropped. The real killers meanwhile walked free.Writes McCoy,The story later goes deeper on the Detroit case:Shenanigans like that concern Jones. She also fears that witnesses will be only more intimidated by the presence of TV cameras — and that the show will only air the city's "dirty laundry."As treasurer, she says, she was contacted by producers hoping to film a show following parking enforcement officers. "I didn't think it would be a good idea for us to be featured that way," she says. "I said no." |
Holy cow. While I’m not as hard on Reince Priebus as a lot of other folks are inclined to be, this is a major, major unforced error on his part. Time Magazine online had an interview with Priebus yesterday and completely buried the lede, which was that Priebus refused to unequivocally declare that one of the Party’s leading candidates was eligible to run for President: A topic in the news today: Ted Cruz was born in Canada. Is he constitutionally eligible to be President? Listen, I don’t get involved. I’m not going to get in the middle of all these candidate issues. It’s a bad place for me to be. I’ll let all these folks argue about this stuff, and I’m going to stay out of it. This is absolutely inexcusable. I get that Priebus does not want to get in the middle of a discussion over whose tax plan is best, or over whether one candidate is being truthful about another candidate or not. These are all battles that Reince is absolutely right to stay out of. But there is absolutely no excuse not to say, unequivocally and forcefully, that the guy who is in second place right now in the polls is eligible to take the office if elected. Especially for such an open and shut constitutional case like this. This is not about who is right and who is wrong. Even Donald Trump lacks the balls to come right out and say Cruz is ineligible (because he knows that’s not true), he’s just saying the Democrats are going to make this an issue. Trump is right about that – the only sense in which this is an issue is that the Democrats will try to make it a frivolous one. Defending the right of one of the most prominent Republicans in the race to be on the ballot should be an absolute no brainer. Major unforced error by Priebus, and he should clarify and apologize immediately. UPDATE: For good measure, Iowa’s ultra-Establishment King Corn toady of a governor Terry Branstad has jumped on the bandwagon, saying that it is a “legitimate issue” for the voters to decide. This is rank cowardly conspiracy theorizing at its worst. |
In a ruling handed down Tuesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals barred the federal government from spending money to prosecute medical marijuana defendants who follow state laws. The opinion — a win for the cannabis industry — comes less than a week after the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency’s controversial decision to keep cannabis on its list of most dangerous drugs, underscoring the clash between states that have chosen to regulate medical marijuana and a federal government that refuses to acknowledge it exists. Until now, cannabis businesses operating in states that allow medical marijuana have relied primarily on a nonbinding promise from the Justice Department that it won’t go after state-legal medical marijuana programs. But although federal prosecutors have yet to challenge state laws themselves, they continue to pursue criminal charges and forfeiture actions against individuals operating in those states. In doing so, the feds often manage to prevent defendants from even mentioning state medical marijuana laws in court. Tuesday’s opinion should change all that — at least in the nine states where it’s now binding precedent. The ruling hinges on the interpretation of a 2014 congressional budget rule that restricts the Department of Justice from spending money to prevent states “from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.” Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain acknowledged that the provision “is not a model of clarity.” But the court interpreted it to mean that the Justice Department cannot spend money “for the prosecution of individuals who engaged in conduct permitted by the State Medical Marijuana Laws and who fully complied with such laws.” The court’s opinion sends 10 pending cases in California and Washington back to trial court. Under the ruling, the cases may go forward only if the defendants violated state law. “If DOJ wishes to continue these prosecutions, Appellants are entitled to evidentiary hearings to determine whether their conduct was completely authorized by state law,” O’Scannlain wrote, “by which we mean that they complied with all the relevant conditions imposed by state law on the use, distribution, possession, and cultivation of medical marijuana.” Twenty-five U.S. states now have medical cannabis laws on the books. “This is the beginning of the end of federal prosecutions of state medical marijuana dispensary operators, growers, and patients,” Marc Zilversmit, an attorney representing five people who operate four dispensaries in Los Angeles and nine indoor growing sites in L.A. and San Francisco, told the Associated Press. It’s still unclear how the ruling will affect individuals already convicted under federal law. Defendants in a case against a Washington state family known as the Kettle Falls Five, for example, received prison sentences last year for cultivating cannabis they claimed was for personal use. Lead defense attorney Phil Telfeyan of Equal Justice Under Law called Tuesday’s ruling “directly applicable” to the Kettle Falls Five case — nearly all of which unfolded after the congressional budget rule took effect. “They never should have been prosecuted,” Telfeyan told Leafly, noting that each member of the family held a state medical authorization to grow up to 15 plants. “Had this ruling been in place a year and a half ago, the one charge they were convicted of never would have been part of the case.” An appeal in the Kettle Falls Five case is pending. Telfeyan, whose 9th Circuit brief is due in December, said the court asked him to hold off on filing the brief until today’s decision came down. “We think it’s an extremely positive development,” he said. Lawyers for the Justice Department argued in Tuesday’s case that by prosecuting private individuals rather than taking legal action against the state, the federal agency didn’t prevent state medical marijuana programs from functioning — a crucial provision of the congressional budget rule. The court’s reply: “We are not persuaded.” O’Scannlain gently reminded the Justice Department of basic civics, explaining that Congress has the authority to decide how taxpayer funds may be spent. When Congress adopted the 2014 budget rule, the court wrote, it expressly cut off funding for cases against state-legal cannabis entities and their operators. Continuing the cases would be unconstitutional. On the other hand, the court warned that its ruling doesn’t give carte blanche to cannabis businesses. Some defendants who appealed the Justice Department cases argued that federal prosecutors should be prohibited from filing charges against any state-licensed actors, regardless of whether or not they comply with state law. The court said that would go too far. That decision could set up a difficult hurdle for some cannabis businesses, said attorney Rebecca Stamey-White, a San Francisco-based partner at Hinman & Carmichael who advises medical cannabis clients. “I think they’re going to have a really hard time in the state of California demonstrating they complied with state law, just because there’s not a lot of it,” she said. While the state has adopted a comprehensive regulatory package that takes effect in 2018, currently there’s not even a law on the books that says storefront dispensaries are legal. All those issues have had to be hammered out in court over the years. “It essentially makes it harder for the DOJ to bring these cases,” Stamey-White said of Tuesday’s opinion, but “I certainly don’t think this ruling means anyone is safe.” Even O’Scannlain warned the cannabis industry that the new protections may not last forever. After all, the halt in prosecutions is the result of only a temporary budget rule — one that could end at any time. “Congress could restore funding tomorrow, a year from now, or four years from now, and the government could then prosecute individuals who committed offenses while the government lacked funding,” the judge wrote. “Moreover, a new president will be elected soon, and a new administration could shift enforcement priorities to place greater emphasis on prosecuting marijuana cases.” Here’s the complete 9th Circuit ruling in United States v. McIntosh: U.S. v. McIntosh — 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 15-10117 (Aug. 16, 2016) |
Expecting a left hook, only to get hit with an uppercut -Sagar Follow @Sagar_m10 It was setup for Bilbao actually. After an embarrassing outing just 3 days back, Bilbao were ready to exact revenge, and were in the perfect position to do so, since Barca were without Messi, Suarez, and Alba. Enrique had a little dilemma on his hands. Without three of his most important pieces, he had to make this Barca tick, and enable them to win against Bilbao at San mames, which was no easy feat. Barca struggled to get a result against them whilst having MSN on the pitch. And so, the lineup game began. Lucho went with ‘Stegen- Alves Pique Mascherano Roberto- Rakitic Busquets Iniesta- Arda Munir Neymar’. Sergi Roberto was once more subjected to a new position, and he took up that challenge and exceeded expectations. Once again. There was skepticism before the match, because although he has played as a RB, it’s easier for him to do so, as right is his preferred foot, but, playing at LB would provide him with some difficult challenges. But, he didn’t let it faze him, as he shut down the left side with his pace and positioning. Enrique keeps putting faith in him, and he keeps rewarding that faith with splendid performances, and not just him. The midfield, and especially Arda, was in an inspired form in the first half. Him and Rakitic combined really well on the right side and were the two most instrumental players in controlling the game, and setting up the first goal. The first goal caught everyone by surprise. Including Barca. Bilbao had asserted their domination on the match till then, and had not let Barca have any kind of a clear-cut chance, but, like a counter from a curled up opponent, it hit them, and hit them hard. Arda drew three defenders to him, and launched the ball to Rakitic in acres of space. Rakitic in turn, did not waste time as he curled in an early-cross. Munir sprung, with a new vigor that was not seen this season, and slotted the ball home. 1-0. That brought the Bilbao team out into the open and they tried to pressure Barca even more. And then they self-destructed. A ‘slip’ from the entire team. As a failed interception, led to a mix-up between the goalie and another defender, and Neymar was left staring at an open goal. Just like that, Bilbao found themselves 2-0 down at home. Bilbao then harried and scurried. They went in for challenges, played hard, and showed their ferocity and intent. They had to get something out of this match. The second half saw Bilbao and Barca play less football, and instead went about gambling with the referee. It was Gonzales Gonzales, who has been heavily criticized recently for some of his highly questionable decisions. Bilbao pressed high, and pressed hard. They pressured Alves and Mascherano. They targeted them, and always looked to be on top of them. They kept at it, and yet, Barca were surviving the siege on this side. Finally, it paid off in the dying moments, as Bilbao capitalized on an Alves pass and scored. 2-1. Stegen then called upon his inner Kahn, as he made 2 amazing saves, to keep Barca’s lead intact. FT. ________________________________________________________________________________________ The Midfield: Iniesta was booed, kicked, pulled, pushed, and brought down. He still had the ball at the end of it all. Nuff said! Rakitic and Arda are striking up an amazing understanding, and linked up really well. Rakitic has shown tremendous improvement recently, and it coincides perfectly with Arda being available. Competition eh? Busquets ofcourse, cut a composed figure in the midst of it all. He almost exuded a Xavi aura, as he calmed things down, and let Barca breathe. The midfield, this season, has grown in confidence, and is once again becoming relevant to Barcelona. Iniesta was booed, kicked, pulled, pushed, and brought down. He still had the ball at the end of it all. Nuff said! Rakitic and Arda are striking up an amazing understanding, and linked up really well. Rakitic has shown tremendous improvement recently, and it coincides perfectly with Arda being available. Competition eh? Busquets ofcourse, cut a composed figure in the midst of it all. He almost exuded a Xavi aura, as he calmed things down, and let Barca breathe. The midfield, this season, has grown in confidence, and is once again becoming relevant to Barcelona. Plan B? There were many instances when Arda was more of a wide midfielder than a RW. Barca almost played a 4-4-2 with a slightly wide forward on the left, which was Neymar. It worked to an extent, as they played out fast paced build-up in the first half. They could not however, keep that up in the second half as Bilbao turned up a gear, and went the way of physicality, rather than technique. It did work for them in the end, but not before shooting themselves in the foot by giving Barca so many stoppages and freekicks. There were many instances when Arda was more of a wide midfielder than a RW. Barca almost played a 4-4-2 with a slightly wide forward on the left, which was Neymar. It worked to an extent, as they played out fast paced build-up in the first half. They could not however, keep that up in the second half as Bilbao turned up a gear, and went the way of physicality, rather than technique. It did work for them in the end, but not before shooting themselves in the foot by giving Barca so many stoppages and freekicks. Bilbao’s downfall? Did not having Messi, and Suarez help Barca in the end? Probably. Bilbao identified their threat. Neymar on the left, and they marked him down. They cut down all the passing routes for him, and locked up tight. And then they let Arda and Rakitic have their way on the right. It was also pretty evident, seeing as Alves was among the players to have the most touches in the game. It all went through him from the back, in the MF, and in attack. Through Alves, on the right. For better or for worse, he used everything he had in his arsenal to bypass Bilbao. It payed off at times, and it didn’t in others. He is a ‘high risk-high reward’ kinda guy afterall. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Stegen kept Barca in the front seat. Some might say he went down easily for the Aduriz goal, but if it wasn’t for him, the tie would be a different affair altogether. Complimenting him in his solid performance was Pique. He got to every ball that was up in the air, and headed it clear. When he turns up, there is no stopping him. Rather, he stops everything. Mascerano was suspect of some bad positioning, but used his pace well to cover at the back. The midfield? Told a lot about them already. Not a foot wrong. Neymar was not offered any kind of breathing space. Bilbao players really have it against him. From subtle jabs to blatant challenges to studs scraping his head. Bilbao players hate him, and he was at the receiving end of some cruel punishment of his own. The ref missed them all. Obviously. He still got a goal though. Munir once again turned up at Copa. It looks like he loves this tournament. He pressed, got his body between ball and players, won free-kicks, and even tried an audacious long-range chip. He seems to be gaining in confidence. His way of telling Barca to give up on Nolito? _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Overall, this was a match that Barca were going to struggle with. They did too, but not before throwing in a sucker punch (two of them), and denting Bilbao’s chances at redemption. This was their best chance, and they squandered it. Messi, Suarez, and Alba are vital to Barca, and it’s very obvious recently as to how important Alba is to that left side. Missing him for 10 days was a huge blow for Barca. Lucho rose to the challenge, threw in Roberto, Arda, Munir, and Vidal, and then asked them to go play. The results are out. Barca took all the punches, waited for their chance, and struck. They were efficient with their chances, and came out on top. Bilbao are never easy and you never know when they will throw a wrench in a smoothly running machine. So, even if Barca have MSN on their team-sheet next week, they better watch out. Maybe third time’s the charm for Bilbao? _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Bilbao Questionable display: Iago (C-): Horrible blunder in the build up to the second goal. Although, he couldn’t have done much to stop the first goal. Had that mistake been avoided, maybe Bilbao would have faired a better chance in the second leg. Best: Aduriz (B): Naughty Aduriz, stepped up when the football part of the game came calling. He made some sharp movements, and slick passes in many of the build-ups. He was always looking to open up spaces with his post play and one-touch passing. He was finally rewarded with a goal to keep Bilbao’s hopes alive. Barca: Questionable display: Alves (B-): Honestly, he didn’t put a foot wrong, bar a few instances which were few and far in between, but sadly, one of them led to a goal. All the attacks, and possession went through him, and he was instrumental, but again, his gamble this time around didn’t pay off. Best: Iniesta (A-): Someone, stop this man. Anyone? Get the damn ball off his feet! …..Nope. He turned in that performance again, the kind that makes you think if there is any friction between his feet and the grass. How is he gliding over it? Why is the ball stuck to his feet? Yeah. It’ll forever be a mystery. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Advertisements |
In1960, eight-year-old Ramshubhag Shukla was first displaced by Rihand Dam from Renukat to Shaktinagar village. In 1975, The National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) installed its Shaktinagar power plant, which drove him out of there and NTPC resettled him in Chilika Daad in 1977. Chilika Daad consists of around 800 families who have been displaced twice because of developmental activities in the Singrauli region, spread across Singrauli district in Madhya Pradesh and Sonbhadra district in Uttar Pradesh. The dumpers transporting coal on the haul road appear to be passionate and disciplined. “They do not even take a break on government holidays and Sundays,” said Shukla. “We bear the noise of blasting that happens twice a day. The constant traffic of dumpers moving with coal causes unbearable coal pollution. We desperately need rehabilitation”. The Ministry of Environment and Forest deems it mandatory that the mine site be 500 meters away from the village, thus the mine site of Northern Coalfields Limited (NCL) is accordingly situated considering the location of Chilika Daad. However, the residents don't get the opportuntity to feel this distance. The haul road used for the transportation of coal dumpers is precariously constructed within 50 meters north of Chilika Daad. The coal handling plant is situated where the village ends, in the east. And the coal-dumping yard covers the west. Further, a narrow underpass is the only accessible road to the village, which is overrun by a railway line that transports coal. Heaps of coal overburden, which we mistook for a mountain range in the fading light of 7 PM, is one of the first views one encounters on entering the village. Under normal circumstances, someone who has endured the trauma of displacement twice would shudder to think of another such prospect. Not if you are a resident of Chilika Daad village in the Sonbhadra district of Uttar Pradesh. “We breathe coal particles, not air,” said 62-year-old Ramshubhag Shukla as he sat in the verandah of his house in Chilika Daad. A mountain of coal overburden - its height above the acceptable height - was the immediate spectacle. “When we first came here, the place was surrounded by forested mountains. The pleasant environment, fresh air and cheerful nature made our mornings blissful,” said Shukla. About four years later, NCL began its Khadia mining project amidst protests from locals. Eventually, the protests succumbed to government plans. “Initially it was alright. The pollution increased considerably in the last 10 years but the last four years have been unbearable”, said Shukla. “Now all that we encounter is coal”. Exactly how bad is the pollution? “Keep a mirror out in the open. You would not be able to see your face in it after 20 minutes. It is so dusty,” he responded promptly, putting an end to our skepticism, if any. The consequences of the devastation of environment have been severe, drastically increasing the airborne and waterborne diseases. “My four-year-old grandson has breathing problems,” explained Shukla. “Frequency of cancer, bronchial ailments, mental illnesses, tuberculosis, lung infections, skin disorders has gone up. Recently a three-year-old was diagnosed with diabetes." ”Since the stack of coal overburden overlooks the village, residents dread the monsoons. “Heavy rain carries the coal waste along. The contaminated water flows through the village, forcing water infections," said Shukla’s neighbor, Ram Pratap Mishra, 47, adding the issue of temperament. “Seldom did we witness any bickering among villagers”, he said. “But in the last three-four years, people have become short tempered. Sometimes, even non-issues lead to serious altercations”. About 30 per cent of the villagers in Chilika Daad depend on milk products. Unfortunately, the environmental pollution believes in equality. Cows and buffaloes, just like human beings, have not escaped its ramifications. 61-year-old Panna Lal, who has been in this business for nearly half-a-century, said, “Untimely births and miscarriages have magnified, rupturing the natural cycle.” These have hampered the quality of milk products. Presence of developmental projects in Singrauli has resulted in the farmers surrendering their land, thereby reducing agricultural activities. Consequentially, cattle-food has become scarce. “Earlier, we would get it in abundance at no cost from the nearby farmlands. Now we have to shell out money for that,” Panna Lal added. Locals who rely on milk products to satisfy their needs have started thinking about other sources to generate income. “We had 35 cows and 12 buffaloes when I was a kid. Now all I have is one cow and one buffalo. The monetary losses have become unsustainable,” he said. Moreover, health care in an area as vulnerable as Chilika Daad is virtually nonexistent. “Health facilities should be optimum in an ailment prone area like this,” opined Mishra. “Sadly, it is zero. We have to run around for any kind of treatment.” The Singrauli region has a deluge of thermal power plants and mine reserves. As a result, the region has witnessed a cascade of displacement. Those who forfeited their land for the ‘development projects’ have suffered the most, having lost their traditional livelihoods for little in return. Since it is a powerhub, one would imagine Singrauli to be prosperous. Ironically, the region is poor and the rehabilitation of displaced has been shoddy, lacking in basic facilities like health, education, clean water and electricity. A Greenpeace fact-finding report on Singrauli is titled, ‘Singrauli: The Coal Curse’. “In the 50 kilometers air range of Singrauli region, 20,000 megawatts of power is created,” said Girish Dwivedi, a member of the BJP state working committee. “One cannot underestimate the importance of these projects. However, there is no doubt that the rehabilitation could have been better.” The companies in the region have provided jobs to some of the project affected families. But most of the other youngsters in the village work as bonded laborers with contractors, said Shukla, whose son works in extracting the overburden. Avadhesh Kumar, a much-revered activist of Singrauli, said, “Those are all temporary jobs. They can be jobless anytime.” Singrauli region is promoted as India’s energy capital that lights up cities and provides power to industries. In this context, the paradox is striking. Chilika Daad gave an impression of midnight at 8 PM. We used the light of mobile phones while scribbling in the notepad. However, that did not stop Shukla’s wife from offering us refreshing tea and snacks. Her movements indicated that it was just another day in Chilika Daad. “Not more than eight hours,” Shukla said when asked about the amount of electricity they get per day. “It has been like that for years." In 2011, The Centre for Science and Environment conducted a study by collecting samples of water, soil, cereals and fish from Sonbhadra, and blood, hair and nails of people living there, which found that the mercury levels in the environment of the district to be dangerously high. But now, Shukla seems to have had enough of it. “The administration must do something. At least my grandson's generation should live peacefully,” he said. |
As I recently wrote in another beer review, the session IPA is “the new IPA.” Just as IPA is the standard-bearer for craft beer in general, session IPAs are quickly becoming the standard-bearer for the “session revolution” happening within the craft industry. It’s an easily understandable cycle—first you push things as extreme as they can go, and then you redevelop an appreciation for the little things. And in the case of session beer, the little things are an acknowledgement that sometimes it’s nice to be able to drink a few beers without ending up stumblebum. I’m certainly not surprised Stone wanted to get in on that session IPA game. They’ve always been known for hop-forward beers such as Stone IPA, Ruination and Arrogant Bastard. They helped define the conception of “West Coast IPA.” What I am surprised by, is how good their new beer, Go-To IPA, truly is. In short, it’s one of the most hop-forward 4.5% ABV ales you’re ever going to drink. Perhaps it’s because my bottles were super fresh, but the huge tropical aromas just explode out of the glass. It’s not just one-note either, with lots of grapefruit, passionfruit and tangerine. There’s no malt to be found. It’s like a big, mixed fruit salad. In terms of taste it’s not quite as strongly flavored, but this is supposed to be a session beer. Bitterness is moderate, in good balance with the fruit flavors, which mostly come through as orange citrus and unsweetened grapefruit juice with a hint of some red berries. The grapefruit is pretty dominant, which led me to a strange realization—that I perceive this as more grapefruity than I did the Stochasticity Project Grapefruit Slam IPA by Stone, which used actual grapefruit rind in its creation. No idea what to think about that one. The impression one takes away from this beer is hops, and in terms of the volume of its hop character, it’s genuinely IPA-like. It serves as an encapsulation of several currently popular trends: Session IPA itself and hop-forward beers featuring tropical fruity hops such as Citra. It’s thoroughly beer of the moment, meant to be consumed fresh and in bulk. Enjoy it with an eye toward freshness dates. Brewery: Stone Brewing Co. City: Escondido, CA Style: “Session IPA” ABV: 4.5% IBU: 65 Availability: Year-round, 12 ounce bottles |
Gen. Augusto Pinochet's military dictatorship was responsible for the deaths of as many as 3,200 people in Chile in the 1970s, but the Vatican dismissed reports of bloodshed at the time as "communist propaganda," according to diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks on Monday. Pinochet came to power in 1973 as the head of a military coup against democratically elected socialist President Salvador Allende. The right-wing junta that subsequently ruled the country from 1973 to 1990 was responsible for the murders of as many as 3,200 people, as well as the arrest of tens of thousands more, many of whom were tortured. In a 1973 diplomatic cable addressed to Henry Kissinger, then serving as the United States' Secretary of State, high-ranking Vatican official Giovanni Benelli was quoted as relaying "his and the pope's grave concern over successful international leftisf campaign to misconstrue completely realities of Chilean situation." Benelli dismissed reports of massacre as "unfounded" and "possibly [the] greatest success of Communist propaganda," while explaining away whatever violence had occurred as "unfortunately natural following coup d'etat." The cable was written five weeks after the coup, during the reign of Pope Paul VI, with reports already surfacing that political opponents of the regime were being arrested and killed. "The cables also showed the Vatican later realized the full extent of the abuses being carried out," according to AFP, "but refused to criticize Pinochet's regime openly and continued with normal diplomatic relations." The Catholic Church's activities in South America has been the subject of some scrutiny in the past. Opus Dei, made most famous by Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code," but a real and influential order in the Church, has been dogged for years by allegations that it supported Pinochet's 1973 coup, and that its members were later active in the Pinochet regime. Pinochet, who was ousted as president of Chile when the country returned to democracy in 1990, was arrested in London in 1998, though he never stood trial, and eventually returned to Chile. He died in 2006. |
Game Summary: The Flyers saved some face with a strong third period and stole a point they didn't deserve. Toronto outright dominated at even strength, more than doubling the Flyers in scoring chances. From the get go this was a track meet and Toronto had a clear advantage with speed in transition. JvR in particular was all over his old team and simply blowing right by hapless Flyers defenders. Forwards(Even Strength): Head to Head Match Ups: Everyone got murdered defensively. Giroux's line was at least respectable in generating some even strength offense. But the bottom half of the line-up was simply not competitive. Our 4th line swiftly went from hero to zero with the addition of Jay Rosehill #LEADERSHIP. Listening to the CSN broadcast crew praise his scheduled bout with Fraiser McClaren as a "turning point" was comical. The damage to Brayden Schenn's line came almost exclusively from Kadri and company. That's a match-up Berube may want to avoid in the future. Defense(Even Strength): Kimmo Timonen had a spectacular game in point production, chances, and shot differential. The rest of the defense was pure dreck. MacD and Schenn went from respectably average to full blown tire fire in the span just a few days. Grossmann was up to his usual tricks. Overall this painfully slow defense performed about as well as you would expect in a track meet game. Special Teams: Special teams play was limited with not much PP time for either team. Overall Team Performance: D If not for Giroux's line and an amazing individual performance by Kimmo Timonen, this game would have been an outright fail. Toronto is not a great 5v5 team yet they dominated the Flyers at even strength. Its bit disheartening to see our Flyers nearly get slaughtered by the 29th ranked possession team in the league. Chance by Chance Summary Team Period Time Note Home Away State Home 1 17:46 Bodie 11 15 38 40 45 51 18 22 35 36 37 47 5v5 Home 1 17:41 Gardiner Goal 11 15 38 40 45 51 18 22 35 36 37 47 5v5 Home 1 16:24 Kadri Goal 8 19 41 43 44 45 8 10 17 32 35 40 5v5 Away 1 11:35 Set Up Timonen, Chance Giroux, Result Shot 4 12 24 40 45 51 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Home 1 10:19 Van Riemsdyk 15 21 42 44 45 81 10 17 22 24 35 47 5v5 Home 1 8:30 Van Riemsdyk 3 21 42 45 51 81 5 8 12 14 24 35 5v5 Home 1 7:04 Rielly 8 19 41 43 44 45 5 10 17 35 40 44 5v5 Home 1 7:00 Kadri 8 19 41 43 44 45 5 10 17 35 40 44 5v5 Home 1 4:21 Van Riemsdyk 3 21 36 42 45 81 8 12 19 28 32 35 5v5 Home 1 4:15 Van Riemsdyk 3 21 36 42 45 81 8 12 19 28 32 35 5v5 Away 1 4:07 Set Up Streit, Chance Raffl, Result Miss 3 21 36 42 45 81 12 19 28 32 35 44 5v5 Away 1 3:13 Set Up Timonen, Chance Voracek, Result Shot 3 11 36 41 45 17 19 28 35 44 93 4v5 Home 2 18:57 Kessel 3 21 24 36 45 81 5 24 28 35 44 93 5v5 Home 2 17:31 McClement 8 11 15 38 40 45 18 22 35 36 37 47 5v5 Home 2 17:30 McClaren 8 11 15 38 40 45 18 22 35 36 37 47 5v5 Home 2 17:25 McClement 8 11 15 38 40 45 18 22 35 36 37 47 5v5 Away 2 15:33 Set Up Timonen, Chance Simmonds, Result Shot 3 21 36 41 45 17 19 28 35 44 93 4v5 Away 2 15:13 Set Up Timonen, Chance Hartnell, Result Miss 3 21 36 41 45 17 19 28 35 44 93 4v5 Away 2 15:07 Set Up Giroux, Chance Simmonds, Result Shot 3 21 36 41 45 17 19 28 35 44 93 4v5 Home 2 13:45 Raymond 4 12 19 43 44 45 5 8 12 14 24 35 5v5 Home 2 11:55 Kulemin 8 19 41 43 44 45 10 17 22 35 40 47 5v5 Away 2 11:29 Set Up Couturier, Chance Read, Result Miss 15 21 42 45 51 81 5 14 17 24 35 44 5v5 Home 2 3:12 Gardiner 12 24 40 44 45 51 14 17 22 24 35 47 5v5 Away 2 2:00 Set Up Voracek, Chance Timonen, Result Goal 3 21 36 42 45 81 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Home 3 15:42 Kessel 3 21 36 42 45 81 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Away 3 13:56 Set Up Voracek, Chance Streit, Result Shot 3 21 36 42 45 81 19 28 32 35 44 93 5v5 Away 3 12:42 Set Up Voracek, Chance Timonen, Result Goal 3 8 19 41 42 45 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Away 3 12:27 Set Up Grossmann, Chance Read, Result Shot 4 12 24 40 45 51 8 12 14 24 32 35 5v5 Home 3 11:31 Kadri 15 19 41 43 44 45 10 17 22 35 40 47 5v5 Away 3 10:28 Set Up Giroux, Chance Hartnell, Result Miss 3 21 36 42 45 81 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Home 3 9:14 Lupul 12 19 43 44 45 51 12 18 22 35 47 5v4 Home 3 6:30 Raymond Goal 4 11 12 40 45 51 8 24 28 32 35 93 5v5 Away 3 3:39 Chance Timonen, Result Miss 3 21 36 42 45 81 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Home 3 3:25 Van Riemsdyk 8 21 43 44 45 81 5 19 28 35 44 93 5v5 Home 4 2:40 Lupul Goal 3 19 36 43 45 8 17 32 35 40 4v4 Shot Attempts Courtesy of Extra Skater Link to Full Extra Skater Report |
While Europe’s scientists were watching Rosetta, President Juncker quietly scrapped the role of his top scientific adviser. What does this mean for the future of evidence-based policy in Europe? Yesterday was a moment of celebration for European science. Although the precise fate of the Philae probe remains unclear, the remarkable achievements of the Rosetta mission reflect the noblest ideals of pan-European research: 2000 scientists and engineers from across the member states of the European Space Agency (ESA) pooling their resources and expertise in pursuit of new knowledge. Jean-Jacques Dordain, ESA’s director-general, described it as “a great great day, not only for ESA, but...I think for the world.” But while the eyes of Europe’s scientific community were fixed firmly upwards, back on earth, in the corridors of Brussels, a less edifying plan began to unfold. Borrowing a trick from the Jo Moore school of media management, the European Commission chose the evening before the Rosetta landing to confirm quietly that its most senior scientific role, that of chief scientific adviser (CSA) to its president, is being scrapped. Professor Anne Glover, who has occupied the CSA role since 2012, broke the news in an email last night to Sir Paul Nurse, president of the Royal Society, and his counterparts in national academies across Europe. The email says simply: The European Commission confirmed to me yesterday that all decisions on the Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) were repealed and so the function of Chief Scientific Adviser has ceased to exist. The new European Political Strategy Centre (EPSC) which “replaces” BEPA does not comprise a function “Chief Scientific Adviser”. It is not up to me to comment on this decision, but I would like to express that I am proud of what this office has achieved in less than 3 years with very few resources. This has only been possible thanks to your continued support throughout this time and the hard work of the fantastic members of my team who will now seek new opportunities. I am going to leave the Commission at the end of January and look forward to meet you again in the future. With all best wishes Anne This decision comes after months of uncertainty surrounding the future of the CSA role, which was created in 2012, in response to calls to strengthen scientific advice and evidence-based policy in Europe. In recent months, a war of letters has raged between critics and supporters of the role. In July 2014, a coalition of environmental groups, including Greenpeace, wrote to the incoming president of the Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, calling for the CSA role to be scrapped. Their letter argued that: “The post of CSA is fundamentally problematic as it concentrates too much influence in one person…”. Soon afterwards, a response letter in support of the CSA role was sent to Juncker, signed by forty scientific organisations and 773 individuals, which said “we cannot stress strongly enough our objection to any attempt to undermine the integrity and independence of scientific advice received at the highest level of the European Commission.” (Full disclosure: I was a signatory to this second letter, in my capacity as chair of the Campaign for Social Science). Further letters of support for Glover were sent to Juncker by several scientific, business and civil society organisations, while Greenpeace also elaborated its position in a piece by Doug Parr on this blog. It initially appeared that President Juncker would renew the post of CSA. Quizzed on the topic in July by British MEP Julie Girling, he indicated as much. And in his mission letter to Carlos Moedas, the incoming Commissioner for Science, Research and Innovation, Juncker emphasized as one of his priorities the need to “make sure that Commission proposals and activities are based on sound scientific evidence”. But when the Barroso Commission left office at the end of October, Anne Glover’s formal mandate ended, and her role was placed in limbo. Glover will now continue in an informal capacity and remain a member of Commission staff until the end of January. But she is no longer able to speak publicly as CSA, and may not even be able to attend the second meeting of the European science advisers’ forum, which she created, when it meets in Amsterdam in early December. Speaking this week to Science magazine, Mina Andreeva, a Commission spokesperson, said that “President Juncker believes in independent scientific advice”, but has not yet decided how to “institutionalize” the function. Previously, the CSA was based within the Bureau of European Policy Advisers, which has now been scrapped. Its successor body, the European Political Strategy Centre (EPSC), will not include a scientific adviser, as Glover’s email last night confirmed. Beneath headline disagreements over the renewal of the CSA role, there are legitimate debates to be had about the most effective arrangements for scientific advice in the Commission. Together with Rob Doubleday at the Cambridge Centre for Science and Policy, I am currently finalising a book of essays on Future Directions for Scientific Advice in Europe, to be published in early February 2015, which will include detailed recommendations and contributions by leading scientists, social scientists and policymakers from across Europe. Anne Glover herself was very open about the challenges she faced in the role, the need for more resources, and the potential for closer integration with other functions, such as the Joint Research Centre, which describes itself as the Commission’s “in-house science service”. I would urge those who have criticised her for a lack of transparency to watch this remarkably frank speech she gave at the Auckland summit on ‘Science Advice to Governments’ at the end of August. As my colleague Roger Pielke Jr. has argued, CSAs are not superheroes: they can’t singlehandedly cut through the messiness that so often erupts when science, politics and policy collide. But with proper support, sufficient resources, and appropriate protocols for independence and accountability, CSAs can make a positive difference, as we see in a growing number of advisory systems around the world. More than anything else, CSAs act as a magnifying device, able to draw on a wider and more distributed ecosystem of expertise, and focus its contribution in a way that is timely and relevant to the policy process. It is hard not to interpret this week’s decision as a serious downgrading of the status of scientific advice at the top of the Commission. I fully expect Europe’s research community - and all those who want a stronger role for evidence in EU policy - to be up in arms over this outcome. Juncker now needs to clarify with urgency what precise structures for scientific advice he plans to put in place. Of course, Juncker is a busy man in a new job, but this issue seems to be disturbingly low on his to-do list. I am reliably informed that, despite repeated overtures from Anne Glover, Juncker has refused to meet with her to discuss the future of EU scientific advice. This attitude needs to change, and fast, if the new Commission is to maintain the confidence of the scientific community. If the European CSA is now dead, snuffed out by bureaucratic indifference before its third birthday, the wider agenda of improving the evidence base for European policy must yet prevail. And the scientific community owes a huge debt of gratitude to Anne Glover for all that she’s done, against the odds, to advance this cause since 2012. Yesterday, in a poignant tweet about Rosetta, sent only minutes before she revealed to colleagues that her role was being axed, Glover observed that “Today is such a special day and typifies the Europe I love – big ideas, big minds, big hearts, big ambition, big future…”. Quite what place scientific advice will occupy in that future remains to be seen. James Wilsdon (@jameswilsdon) is professor of science and democracy at the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex, and chair of the Campaign for Social Science. |
TALLAHASSEE – Angry over the Senate’s insistence of tying Medicaid expansion to the state budget, House Speaker Steve Crisafulli took the dramatic step of adjourning his chamber for the legislative session Tuesday, three days before its scheduled end. “The Senate continues to assert their demand that we agree to expand Medicaid,” said Crisafulli, a Merritt Island Republican. “I don’t call that negotiating where I come from.” The move, unprecedented in recent memory, means lawmakers will leave town without the one bill they are constitutionally required to pass: a balanced budget. And nearly every facet of Florida’s budget – including school and university spending, funding for conservation projects, Gov. Rick Scott’s top priority of tax cuts and local projects such as the UCF downtown campus and stadium funding – faces an uncertain future. There’s no precise timetable for a special session that is now a certainty, but lawmakers need to have a budget in place before the next fiscal year begins July 1, or a state government shutdown would ensue. Health-care funding is the main point of contention. Senate President Andy Gardiner has continued to push for a plan to expand Medicaid for 800,000 low-income Floridians, but House leaders have not budged in their resistance to it. Gardiner chided the House for leaving bills undone, including his top priority of setting up higher education programs for disabled students. “Nobody won today; taxpayers lost,” said Gardiner, R-Orlando. “I’ve never been in a situation where I said, ‘Well let’s just take our ball and go home.’ I think you stay here and do your job.” The Senate will still convene Wednesday to pass remaining bills, some of which are already dead because the House won’t be in session to hear them. Gardiner said there’s no definite plan on when the Senate will adjourn. Crisafulli said the House sent two budget compromises to the Senate last week, offering to use state funds to replace federal dollars for a separate $2.2 billion Medicaid program that pays hospitals for care for the poor. The Low Income Pool program is set to expire June 30, and federal officials have said they will not extend it in its current form. Crisafulli accused Gardiner of blindsiding him on health-care funding. “Keep in mind that they did not say that this would hold the budget hostage before we started this session,” Crisafulli said. “[Gardiner] never told me it was going to be a prerequisite to our budget negotiations.” Gardiner, however, said he warned Crisafulli about the need to address LIP in January. He said he offered to send senators over to the House on Tuesday to discuss when to come back for a special session, but the reply he received from Crisafulli was a voicemail letting him know they were packing it in. The Senate Medicaid expansion plan relies on nearly $50 billion in federal funds over 10 years but would use a state-run exchange and require recipients to pay co-pays and premiums and be employed or looking for work. House leaders have said they don’t want to expand what they call a broken program, rely on federal funds or crowd out other state needs, since Florida would eventually be required to pay for 10 percent of the cost. Democrats were pleased to see many Republican bills die but were disappointed at the House’s continued resistance to Medicaid expansion. “The biggest issue is the uninsured,” said Sen. Maria Sachs, D-Delray Beach. “If they could fire some of the people up here for not doing their jobs, I’m sure they would.” Federal officials extended LIP last year, but insisted upon changes in the program. In a letter to state officials earlier this month, federal officials connected LIP funds to Medicaid expansion, since the programs would cover some of the same people, but Medicaid would offer cheaper preventative care instead of more expensive emergency care often paid for by LIP. Scott, who has sided with the House, on Tuesday made good on his vow to sue the federal government in U.S. District court. He said saying tying LIP funds to Medicaid expansion is undue “coercion.” “President Obama’s sudden end to the Low Income Pool [LIP] health-care program to leverage us for Obamacare is illegal and a blatant overreach of executive power,’’ Scott said in a released statement. Amid the finger pointing over the budget deadlock, scores of bills died – which led to more finger pointing. Crisafulli was miffed the Senate did not take up about 150 bills passed by the House, including his top priority of overhauling state water policy. Since budget talks weren’t progressing and substantive bills weren’t moving either, he said he decided it was best to come back for a special session after a recess with a “clean slate” to resolve the budget. “Having accomplished all that we can do, it’s time for us to go home,” Crisafulli said, announcing the adjournment. Senators, however, were aghast the House would leave early, leaving remaining bills unfinished, including more oversight of prisons and Gardiner’s disability bills. Senate budget chief Tom Lee, R-Brandon, insisted the chambers will be able to come to a compromise before a government shutdown happens, despite the current dysfunction among Republicans in the House and Senate. “I think we’ll resolve our differences before then, that’s about all I’ll say,” Lee said. “I just wouldn’t want to speculate about what happens if we don’t.” Staff writer Dan Sweeney contributed to this report. grohrer@orlandosentinel.com or (850) 222-5564. |
Waves of shock are rolling through the United States today, as many can’t reconcile the reality of President-Elect Donald Trump’s victory with poll-driven expectations. And the surprise is not exclusive to the political left; many conservatives and even Trump insiders have been publicly dumbstruck. As pundits and political analysts scramble to devise out-of-the-box and radical new approaches to predicting future elections, Chuck Klosterman’s recent book But What If We’re Wrong?: Thinking About the Present as Though It Were the Past is sidling toward the front of book shops. His counterintuitive future-prediction theories seem to contain an emergent truth: the issues don’t matter. In his book Chuck Klosterman introduced “Klosterman’s Razor,” an intellectual concept that dictates that “the best hypothesis is the one that reflexively accepts its potential wrongness to begin with.” What this means is that your glass-half empty or full thinking isn’t relevant. The issue is the nature of the glass itself. “In my view, this outcome illustrates two significant things,” Klosterman explained via email Wednesday morning. “The first is that technology has made accurate polling impossible, which was also the case with Brexit. No one will ever believe polls again. And the second thing is that people evidently hate the media more than than they hate anything else. When major media institutions started openly attacking Trump — which they justifiably believed was their civic responsibility — it had the opposite impact. It pushed people toward Trump, because consumers became convinced that the media was actively telling them what to think and feel. It validated the sense of paranoia.” For some voters, it didn’t matter what Trump’s stand on the “issues” really was, but instead, an almost impossible task of locating authenticity in political discourse. In this way, if you expected Hillary to win, then imaging a Trump voter is akin to a fan of the Michael Bay Transformers movies. Not one self-respecting critic says anything positive about these films, and yet, they are hugely popular and financially widely successful. Fans of the Transformers movies exist, and the ridiculous sequels continue to be greenlit. The popularity of the band Nickelback is another example. The fans/supporters seem to be invisible, but that’s because there’s no such thing as universal understanding of a zeitgeist; in entertainment or politics. “There are just these emerging psychological gaps within society that make predicting national elections borderline impossible,” Klosterman explained. “As it turns out, a huge swath of the country including, apparently, — 42 percent of female voters — did not particularly care that Trump said offensive, problematic things about women. That played zero role in who they voted for. Yet, to another sector of the country, it was assumed that those same statements were critical, and that they would ultimately destroy him, and that someone who talked like that could never possibly be elected president.” Donald Trump convinced enough people that he had done enough in his life to be elected president, and the medium by which he got that message out, probably relied more on a game of telephone than it did on “established” media promotion. We could think of this as a bizzaro grassroots campaign, but, as the premise of Kloterman’s book asserts: We live in an age of casual “certitude.” And rejecting that casual certitude is critical to making more accurate predictions. In other words, we don’t know what is and is not grassroots anymore. INVERSE LOOT DEALS Meet the Pod The first bed that learns the perfect temperature for your sleep, and dynamically warms or cools according to your needs. Buy Now “What appears to be happening is that it’s no longer two candidates disagreeing over different ways to solve the economy or exhibiting different postures about foreign policy,” Klosterman explains. “It’s that the issues one side views as essential are completely irrelevant to the opposition. There’s no connecting fluid at all. There is virtually no monoculture. Everything is niche politics now, and the size and intensity of those fragmented niches will dictate who wins elections.” There isn’t just one medium-full glass; there are many. And they’re all custom made for different drinkers. At the moment, there doesn’t seem to be a pattern to this, but in an age of upended assumptions uncertain has become a lone constant. The issues you think matter likely don’t. The potential wrongness you see in the world is a source of truth. Klosterman’s Razor cuts both ways. |
JPMorgan Chase acknowledged this week that it overcharged some 4,000 military families for their mortgages and wrongfully foreclosed on at least 14. It's not clear how much the mistakes have cost these families, but the bank told NBC News that it’s collectively refunding about $2 million to those affected. It has also promised to restore the homes that were lost. According to NBC, the bank violated a law called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which grants active-duty troops some protection from foreclosure and caps their mortgage interest rates at 6 percent. The mistakes came to light after a Marine captain and his wife were overcharged, fought debt collection attempts for years, and finally filed suit. From NBC: The Rowles' records show that while they kept making payments on their mortgage at 6 percent, the bank wrongly had been charging them at rates above 9 or 10 percent. They kept calling the bank to explain there had been a huge mistake but say no one would listen. They say they kept being harassed for money they did not owe. A Chase spokeswoman said the bank is “deeply appreciative of those who fight to protect our country” and feels “particularly badly about the mistakes we made here.” (Read the bank’s full statement.) The Rowles family is hardly the first military family to have to fight against the banks and their handling of mortgages. Other lenders and servicers, including Aurora Loan Services and OneWest Bank, have also made headlines in the past by foreclosing on military families or revoking offers of loan modifications. Bloomberg noted in 2008 that in military towns, foreclosures were increasing at a rate almost four times the national average, despite the special protections given to military families. |
Donald Trump has settled a $10 million legal dispute with a former political consultant who he accused of airing dirty laundry about other campaign staffers, the Associated Press reported Friday. The conflict was first made public in July, when fired campaign advisor Sam Nunberg tried to block arbitration proceedings that Trump had initiated against him for allegedly violating a nondisclosure agreement. Nunberg, who was fired from the campaign last August over a series of racially charged Facebook posts, said that Trump believed he had leaked information about a tawdry spat between two senior campaign staffers to the media. He responded to Trump’s effort to secure $10 million in damages with a lawsuit in New York state court that accused Trump of retaliating against him for supporting Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) in the primaries. The AP reported that the conflict was settled under confidential terms and that attorneys for both parties declined to provide details. “All I can say it that it was amicably resolved, the whole dispute,” Alan Garten, general counsel for the Trump Organization, told the AP. In a court filing responding to the initial arbitration proceedings, Nunberg accused Trump of trying to silence him in order “to cover up media coverage of an apparent affair between senior campaign staffers.” The document referred to a May New York Post story about a public fight between press secretary Hope Hicks and former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. Lewandowski’s dismissal from the campaign in June came after Trump had started the arbitration proceedings against Nunberg. At the time, Garten told the AP that the allegations about Hope and Lewandowski’s relationship were “categorically untrue.” |
Considering how the United States embraced the belief of Manifest Destiny, perhaps it’s no surprise that growth in Major League Soccer has been pedal-to-the-medal stuff for a decade now. The 20-team league recently revealed that Atlanta, Minnesota and a second team in Los Angeles will be coming soon. You can count on Miami, too, depending on your degree of faith that David Beckham and his dazzling smile can finally bullseye that elusive downtown stadium. Just 10 years ago, 12 clubs competed for MLS Cup. At that point, a 16-team operation seemed like a worthy target, if a bit ambitious. By 2010, that number had been achieved, so the new target was set at 20 teams. Boom! Done. So the new goal became 24, where we are if we count Miami. Except that MLS commissioner Don Garber dropped a whopper in March when he said, paraphrasing here, “We ain’t stopping at 24!” “We will expand this league beyond 24 teams,” Garber said in the spring. “It’s not an ‘if”, it’s a ‘when.’ ” Expansion seems to have become a bit addictive, driven by escalating expansion fees, the success of the recent comers – NYCFC and Orlando are hardly struggling to sell tickets – the economics of TV contracts and establishment of a larger national footprint. Those are the obvious influencers of an increasingly aggressive growth strategy. MLS spokesman Dan Courtemanche noted a couple of less obvious drivers at work, too. First is persistent and abundant interest from high level (read: uber rich and influential) perspective owners. Unlike the early 2000s, when MLS was essentially recruiting potential owners, the league can now afford to play hard-to-get. Also, Courtemanche said league officials and owners are happy with the way quality of play continues to improve, even while the league expands briskly. Such expansion talk is like catnip for MLS fans. But before we spin that wheel (“Who is next? Sacramento? St. Louis? Indy? Austin or San Antonio, anyone?”), maybe there is a better question to ask. When is enough enough? Put a different way, “How big is too big for Major League Soccer?” Getty Images League officials aren’t ready to talk about further expansion parameters, which they say are just now being mapped out. The subject will run around the table at the next board of governors meeting (this summer’s All-Star game) and a more concrete framework could be hardening by this winter. Best guess: we’ll hear about it around the start of the 2016 season. For now, league officials are talking only generally about the “whens” and “how manys.” “The United States and Canada are two extremely large geographic areas, with more than 350 million people, and where independent market research tells us there are more than 80 million soccer fans between the U.S. and Canada,” Courtemanche said, right after returning to New York from St. Louis. “Clearly that is enough to support a large Division I league.” A larger MLS seems like a reasonable idea, but there are a few potential monkeys in this wrench. First, there is a dark cloud hovering perpetually near all this sunny warmth of expansion goodness: it’s the legacy of the failed North American Soccer League, which closed shop in 1985. Clearly, the world is a different place today, as Garber has frequently pointed out when the scarred history of domestic soccer comes up. The roster of rock-solid MLS ownership bears little resemblance to the disparate collective of NASL owners, a rickety wooden bridge by comparison. The stadium situation is night and day; 15 MLS clubs play inside soccer specific facilities whereas that number in NASL was … exactly zero. A trio of national TV deals that pay MLS a combined $90 million annually will not make NFL owners jealous, but such a sum would have floored the old NASL ownership crowd. Still, that fatally breakneck pace of NASL expansion did help create the conditions that led to collapse. So for anyone who knows their domestic soccer history, warning bells will necessarily sound at the hurried pace of MLS expansion. Aside from the drag of history, there are also competitive issues to sort through, because fan interest could fade when teams enter each season with a mathematically puny chance at winning something significant. Consider other leagues around the world. The heavies of Europe (England, Germany, Italy, France, Spain) all operate their top divisions with 18-20 teams. Same for Mexico’s Liga MX. Mathematically speaking, it’s easier to win La Liga (or any of those others) than MLS. We all know that’s apples to oranges in actual quality – no disrespect to Kei Kamara, the league’s current co-scoring leader, but he’s no Leo Messi – but you get the point. The English Championship operates with 24 teams, or same as MLS will reach before pushing that expansion envelope past some theoretical breaking point. But that league (England’s second tier) has two critical advantages in terms of fueling what we might call “mathematical hope.” First, while the Championship obviously crowns a title taker, there are effectively three winners. The top trio of finishers all gain promotion to the ballyhooed Premier League. That trophy is nice and all, but promotion to the “bigs” is the bigger target. And at the other end, three sad sacks will drop a division. That makes 21 “winners” in the Championship, including three of those promoted “super winners.” So the scale of 24 teams makes more sense when you take in the bigger picture. In a 24-team MLS, playoff qualification would be every club’s initial target – but in American sports culture, that’s just the lowest hanging fruit. Twelve teams already make the playoffs and, based on MLS history, that percentage is likely to go up. In other words, as incentive, post-season qualification isn’t much. People want winners, and winners mean “championships,” not first- or second-round playoff exits. Yes, there are CONCACAF Champions League spots to be gained. And there is a Supporters Shield. But CONCACAF Champions League as a brand remains small potatoes, and Supporters Shield might jingle some keys in Seattle or a few other markets, but it’s still just an honorable mention medal in the American sports psyche. Think about this: are hockey fans in most markets really so invested in the President’s Trophy chase? Because that’s the NHL’s equivalent to Supporters Shield. In terms of scale, there is precedent for a larger league in the U.S. sports scene. The NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball operate with 30 teams each. The NFL has 32. Generally speaking, it’s working out well for them, especially in the wildly successful NFL. Surely, none of that is lost on current MLS owners, most of whom still operate in the red. Franchise fees that have settled in around $75 million or more must look utterly irresistible, even when considering that adding more MLS owners will dilute the escalating TV revenue. There is also the issue of sufficient talent. ESPN analyst Steve Nicol, who coached the New England Revolution for 10 seasons until 2011, is among those who have wondered aloud whether the current tributaries of development can keep up. Academies are changing that conversation, but some are clearly further ahead than others when it comes to producing truly professional talent. On this one, there seems to be some wiggle room. There is, after all, literally a world of talent out there. If the NBA or NFL was to increase by 6-8 teams, we could all rightly wonder if the American crop yield could keep pace. In soccer? Well, there’s Central America, South America and Asia, and that’s before we get into the (admittedly more pricey) markets of Europe. It all deserves thinking through. MLS is in a good place, after all. It’s on the rise in so many areas, and this week’s news of a shiny new stadium in L.A.’s urban core is the latest sign of progress. And as long as the league steps back and actually considers the flip-side of rapid expansion, MLS’ll remain in a good place. The debate over how-big-is-too-big will just be another reason for us to keep talking about expansion, rather than a real worry about whether the league will survive. |
Camberwell-based entrepreneur Jem Stein, founder of The Bike Project, has been announced as the winner of the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneur of the Year Award 2015. Stein was named the winner of a public vote from a shortlist of five finalists, who came from a broad range of entrepreneurial backgrounds – from a sustainable food enterprise to a project helping those released from prison. All five are from the 2014/15 cohort of the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneurs Programme, which is run in partnership with the School for Social Entrepreneurs with support from the Big Lottery Fund. Having mentored a refugee whilst at university, Jem Stein was inspired to create The Bike Project in 2013 to provide second-hand bikes to refugees in and around London, providing essential access to free transport in the city. By providing refugees with bikes they have improved accessibility to healthcare, education and social activities and The Bike Project offers an inclusive and supportive community for refugees to learn new skills through active workshops. Stein's involvement with the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneurs Programme began when he joined the Start Up programme to get his project up and running. After graduating he joined Scale Up which provides training, £15,000 in funding and a mentor to help develop existing enterprises. Stein has also been named as an official supplier for bike maintenance to Lloyds Bank. Having mentored a refugee whilst at university, Jem Stein was inspired to create The Bike Project in 2013 to provide second-hand bikes to refugees in and around London, providing essential access to free transport in the city. By providing refugees with bikes they have improved accessibility to healthcare, education and social activities and The Bike Project offers an inclusive and supportive community for refugees to learn new skills through active workshops. In being named the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneur of the Year, Jem Stein received the grand prize award of £10,000 to help develop The Bike Project. Nick Green, owner of Incredible Farm, took home £6,000 after finishing second in the public vote and Michelle King from Little Miracles took home £4,000 after being named third. The Bike Project founder said: "I am thrilled to win the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneur of the Year Award. I am incredibly fortunate to have learned from the fantastic team as part of the Social Entrepreneurs Programme and working with other entrepreneurs has been so valuable to both my own development and to The Bike Project. The £10,000 prize will do a huge amount to help the project continue to expand and support refugees across London.” Paula Rogers, Head of the Social Entrepreneurs Enterprise Programme at Lloyds Banking Group said: “I offer my personal congratulations to Jem on being named the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneur of the Year 2015. All five finalists for the award this year demonstrated their dedication to making a difference and being sustainable enterprises. Our commitment to the Social Entrepreneurs programme sits at the heart of our helping Britain Prosper Plan and we look forward to seeing these enterprises flourish and continue to bring long-lasting benefit to communities, individuals and the environment.” Alastair Wilson, CEO of the School for Social Entrepreneurs, said: “I am thrilled that Jem has been named the Lloyds Bank Social Entrepreneur of the Year 2015. Since meeting Jem in 2012 we have seen his idea grow from a concept into this amazing organisation that has given bikes to over 1000 refugees. I’m excited to see how winning this Award will help the project grow further. I would also like to congratulate our other finalists Caroline, Michelle, Nick, Simon who are doing incredible things and are a huge inspiration to everyone at SSE and their communities.” thebikeproject.co.uk |
You know what that whining sound means: Either your computer is overheating or it's time for another edition of the Highsec Miner Grab Bag!Someone claiming to beleft the following comment on an earlier post: "Mine Teck here. By recording TS whit out asking me. I think is is against the law, and then publish it. Again whit out asking." It sounds like Mine Teck has fallen in with a bad crowd. Could the resistance be creating its own space law firm?I can't understand whatis going on about. Mining in highsec costs 10 million isk and it has been that way for a long time.I may not be fluent in Russian yet, but I am getting a working knowledge of badly-translated Russian. The inclusion of the word "creature" is a dead giveaway.I don't know ifmeant to give off such mixed signals. Did she tell Agentthat she could continue supporting herself?One can only guess at the number of conversations that take place about me each day. All good "crap", I hope.As we all know, I am a rock star.attempted to play one of's bonus games and wasn't very happy about the result. But at least she got to meet a celebrity.Father. Supreme Protector. Saviour. Life-Breather.Some people say that dreams are merely the byproduct of randomly-firing neurons. Butmakes so much sense here that it couldn't possibly be the case.People have crafted elaborate explanations for why I do what I do. Conspiracy theories and psychoanalyses abound. It's simple, really: Helping others makes a good man feel good.What Agentaccomplished here is called a "clean gank".I don't know Agent's policy, but I'll pay just about any spam fee to reach out to the people I have bumped. It's like planting a seed; in the long run, it's worth it.I offer this challenge to any married man who mines in highsec. Explain to your wife what the New Order charges for a mining fee, and what the consequences of not paying are. I'm confident that many of you will get some good sense talked into you.In two days,lost two exhumers and two pods to the New Order. To save time, he CC'ed his tears to all of the responsible Agents in a single EVEmail. Now that's efficient! |
Mila Kunis has waded into the Harvey Weinstein sex scandal, saying she's 'proud' that women can speak out against assault without being 'stoned, hung or berated'. The actress, 34, also claimed the abuse of women is prevalent in all industries but she feels that women's voices are the 'loudest' they've ever been right now. The Black Swan star, who has been vocal about sexism in Hollywood in the past, added that she hopes everything 'fixes itself' as she discussed the dozens of women who have accused Weinstein of sexual harassment. Scroll down for video Speaking out: Mila Kunis has waded into the Harvey Weinstein sex scandal, saying she's 'proud' that women can speak out without being 'stoned, hung or berated' 'The abuse of women exists in all industries, it's just the way the world works,' she told iweekend. 'We just happen to have a platform and our voice is the loudest right now. Mila added: 'I'm proud of everybody who's standing up and I'm also proud of the fact that we're living in a country where women are able to speak up and not get stoned or hung or berated on the streets. 'I love this about this country. There are many faults that are currently happening in the world and this is not one of them. So I'm really proud of that.' Kunis reflected on how past practices of accepted sexism have been quashed as she expressed hope that present abuse of women can be stopped. Defiant: The Black Swan star, who has been vocal about sexism in Hollywood in the past, said she hopes everything 'fixes itself' as she discussed the dozens of women who have accused Weinstein of sexual harassment Hopeful: The actress, 34, also claimed the abuse of women is prevalent in all industries but she feels that women's voices are the 'loudest' they've ever been right now They spoke up: Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and Cara Delevingne are among more than 80 women who have come forward to accuse Weinstein of sexual harassment and assault 'Hopefully it fixes itself out. If you remember, back in the day it was, socially-speaking, OK to hit your wife a little bit,' she said. 'It was OK to slap your wife and say: 'She was out of line', give her a backhander. So we found a way to deal with that and we'll find a way to deal with this.' Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and Cara Delevingne are among more than 80 women who have come forward to accuse Weinstein of sexual harassment and assault. Weinstein is now said to be in rehab and his spokeswoman says he 'unequivocally denies any allegations of non-consensual sex.' Mila's comments come after her co-star Melissa Sagemiller claimed she warned her and Kirsten Dunst about Weinstein while they were filming Get Over It for Miramax in 2000. Strong-minded: 'The abuse of women exists in all industries, it's just the way the world works,' she told iweekend. 'We just happen to have a platform and our voice is the loudest right now' Being vocal: Mila added: 'I'm proud of everybody who's standing up and I'm also proud of the fact that we're living in a country where women are able to speak up and not get stoned or hung or berated on the streets' Melissa said Weinstein made sexual advances on her three times, and on one occasion trapped her in his Toronto hotel room and told her she could not leave unless she kissed him on the lips. Those lips were 'peeling' at the the time from the Accutane he was taking Sagemeiller told HuffPost, describing her alleged attacker as a 'lizard' and 'Jabba the Hutt.' The actress was 24 at the time and Weinstein - whose first wife Eve Chilton and three young daughters were back home in New York City - was three decades her senior. 'I was definitely talking about it when we would go out with the cast because I was trying to warn the other girls, and I was trying to be tough about it and make a joke about it,' said Sagemiller, who starred alongside Kirsten Dunst and Mila Kunis in the picture. Mila previously penned an open letter to a producer who she claimed told her to pose half-naked on the cover of a men's magazine to promote a film. Claims: Mila's comments come after her co-star Melissa Sagemiller (pictured) said Weinstein made sexual advances on her three times, and on one occasion trapped her in his Toronto hotel room and told her she could not leave unless she kissed him on the lips Protective: Melissa claimed she warned Mila and Kirsten Dunst about Weinstein while they were filming Get Over It for Miramax in 2000 (pictured) When she refused, the producer reportedly threatened her by saying, 'You'll never work in this town again.' She has since launched an attack on sexism in Hollywood in an open letter published on A Plus, a media site co-founded by husband Ashton Kutcher. 'It's what we are conditioned to believe — that if we speak up, our livelihoods will be threatened; that standing our ground will lead to our demise,' she wrote. 'We don't want to be kicked out of the sandbox for being a 'b***h.' So we compromise our integrity for the sake of maintaining the status quo and hope that change is coming.' She explained that after paid less and insulted based on her gender, she launched her own production company, Orchard Farm Productions, with three other women. Not impressed: Mila previously penned an open letter to a producer who she claimed told her to pose half-naked on the cover of a men's magazine to promote a film Kunis went on to say she's standing up against the 'microaggressions that devalue the contributions and worth of hard-working women'. She added that sh hopes to use her voice to allow women in the workplace to 'feel a little less alone and more able to push back for themselves'. Mila married her That '70s show co-star Ashton in 2015 and has two children with him - three-year-old Wyatt and one-year-old Dmitri. She revealed the pair are tough on parenting and are keen to give their children just one Christmas present each. 'I didn't realise how much crap your kid gets, until I had my own. My first Christmas as a mother, I realised this: Grandparents give kids too much s**t,' she said. Happy: Mila married her That '70s show co-star Ashton in 2015 and has two children with him - three-year-old Wyatt and one-year-old Dmitri Crackdown: She revealed the pair are tough on parenting and are keen to give their children just one Christmas present each 'My kids don't need Toys'r'Us delivered to our house, they just don't. And it's not what the holidays are about, which is also what Bad Moms Christmas demonstrates; the unnecessary consumption that happens during the holiday season.' Discussing her struggles to balance a busy career and two young kids in a celebrity marriage, the Bad Moms star admitted she sometimes feels like a 'failure'. 'My husband and I both love what we do. We're a little bit workaholic, and we don't say this proudly, but I do think there's a balance,' Mila said. 'For a long time, I felt so much guilt about working because I was like: I shouldn't love working so much. But that's OK. I love what I do and I'm teaching my kid a good work ethic. 'Like everybody, I sometimes feel like I'm a failure as a mom. Today I won't see my kids for 10 hours. Do you think that makes me feel good? No.' The full interview appears in iweekend, out this Saturday 4th and Sunday 5th November. Parenting struggles: Discussing her struggles to balance a busy career and two young kids in a celebrity marriage, the Bad Moms star admitted she sometimes feels like a 'failure' |
Newly released Snowden documents reportedly reveal that Britain's intelligence agencies spied on Octave Klaba, the CEO of one of Europe's largest internet hosting firms OVH. "Oles" as Klaba is fondly nicknamed in France, appeared in a list of GCHQ targets, according to reports. Klaba's email address was listed among others considered as targets by the Five Eyes intelligence agencies. According to a report by Le Monde, in 2009, the GCHQ in a test aimed at uncovering whether it was possible to intercept a satellite liaison between Sierra Leone and Belgium, British intelligence agencies intercepted a list of email addresses, which were obtained as part of the intercepted data. The list contained email addresses belonging to politicians and ambassadors as well as Klaba. Although the intercepted data did not disclose the content of Klaba's sent and received emails, it reveals that the OVH founder was regarded as a target and his communication metadata was collected by the GCHQ. The GCHQ's interest in Klaba Previously disclosed Snowden documents have indicated that the NSA had expressed interest in French firms such as Alcatel, a smartphone manufacturing firm and Wanadoo, an internet service provider (ISP). In 2009, OVH, which is also among the few firms that own the most servers across the globe, was also considered among Europe's major firms. The company was then expanding exponentially, with considerable phone services, domain name purchases and more notably, internet hosting. Reports speculate that these aspects would have likely made OVH and attractive target for intelligence agencies. US intelligence agencies were also allegedly interested in OVH over its lax internet hosting policies. The firm temporarily hosted the official website of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, which was suspected of war crimes and resulted in the UN slamming OVH. Moreover, in 2010, Klaba decided to host a mirror website for WikiLeaks, after the original site was taken down by the US government. OVH was the victim of a massive data breach in 2013, which resulted in hacker/hackers compromising company servers via internal emails. The investigation into the attack is still ongoing. According to an internal memo, the attack may likely have been corporate espionage. Following the cyberattack, Klaba said, "In a word, we've not been paranoid enough. We're now in superior paranoid mode." Whether the British intelligence agencies were motivated politically, economically or technically still remains unclear. Klaba is yet to comment on the matter. |
Thursday, April 6, 2017, marks 100 years since the United States entered World War I. World War I does not occupy the same space in America’s cultural memory as the American Revolution, the Civil War, World War II or the Vietnam War. The men and women who fought “the Great War” would likely be shocked at this relegation. For them, “the war to end all wars” was the most consequential war ever fought: a struggle between good and evil. As an author of two books, “Faith in the Fight” and “G.I. Messiahs,” I have spent a good part of the last 15 years thinking about the place of religion in America’s experience of the Great War. From the beginning of American involvement in the war to the construction of cemeteries in Europe for America’s war dead, Christian imagery framed and simplified a complex, violent world and encouraged soldiers and their loved ones to think of the war as a sacred endeavor. America as a Christian nation Writings by and for American soldiers used religious imagery and language, to contrast “progressive,” Christian America and “barbaric,” anti-Christian Germany. The June 14, 1918 issue of Stars and Stripes, a weekly newspaper written by and for American soldiers in France, featured an editorial cartoon that drew this stark division. In it, the crown prince of Germany and the Kaiser stroll casually past Christ as he hangs on the cross. The prince, dressed in black with a skull and crossbones on his hat, smiles at his father and says, “Oh, look, Papa! Another of those allies!” The cartoon affirms that America’s cause is Christ’s cause at the same time that it argues that Germans are so morally perverse that they would recrucify Jesus if given the chance. American pilot Kenneth MacLeish was just as blunt in a letter to his parents. (His mother collected his wartime correspondence and published a memorial collection after his death in combat.) He defended his decision to go to war with a very different image of Jesus, but conveyed a similar lesson about the German foe. He wrote, “Do you think for a minute that if Christ had been alone on the Mount with Mary, and a desperate man had entered with criminal intent, He would have turned away when a crime against Mary was perpetrated? Never! He would have fought with all the God-given strength He had!” MacLeish left no room for doubt as to which side should be imagined as Mary’s rapist, and which should be seen as her Christ-like defender. He was equally clear that waging war was morally acceptable. Writing in the same letter, he stated, “Religion embraces the sword as well as the dove of peace.” The Christian imagery that filled the pages of Stars and Stripes and the letters and diaries of American soldiers erased Germany’s Christian history and made a religiously diverse and conflicted America into a virtuous, Christian nation. In fact, Germany, like the U.S., had large numbers of Protestants, Catholics and Jews, and had given rise to many religious movements and denominations that were thriving on American soil. Yet in the eyes of many American soldiers, the war confirmed that Germany was profoundly vicious. In a letter home, Charles Biddle, another American pilot, reacted angrily to an aerial attack on a field hospital. In response, he cited a French postcard that inverted Jesus’ words from the Gospel of Luke: “Do not forgive them, for they know what they do!” Christian imagery for the war dead World War I came to an end on Nov. 11, 1918. American losses were small by comparison to other combatant nations, but still exceeded 100,000, including 53,000 who were killed in combat. (A large percentage of the other 57,000 died as a result of the global influenza pandemic.) By contrast, France lost 1.2 million soldiers, Great Britain lost 959,000, and Germany lost over two million. As individual American soldiers and the nation thought about how best to memorialize the fallen, they turned again to Christian imagery. In May of 1919, Stars and Stripes published an image of Joan of Arc and an accompanying poem. Saint Joan hovers over a temporary burial ground, keeping watch over graves marked by crosses. Sergeant Hal Burrows of the Marine Corps signed the drawing. Second Lieutenant John Palmer Cumming wrote the poem. “The kiss the wind may bear will stir the tranquil leaf. And lay it softly on the mounds we made. And we shall labor in the mart or bind the sheaf. The while her spirit guards their quiet glade.” The poem and the image confirmed that America’s war dead would not be alone. They would have a saint to watch over them. In dying for the nation, they had proven themselves worthy of such attention. When the United States government set to work designing and constructing cemeteries in France, England and Belgium, they created environments that look very much like the “quiet glade” picture above, though on a much grander scale: The largest American cemetery, Meuse-Argonne American Cemetery near the French town of Romagne, contains 14,246 graves. White marble crosses dominate these cemeteries, creating a much more explicitly Christian space than the veterans’ cemeteries located in the United States, where headstones are small, rounded rectangles. Remembering the diversity The crosses at Meuse-Argonne and America’s other overseas cemeteries do not call American soldiers to fight, as the Stars and Stripes imagery did. They call Americans to remember. But the crosses work in ways similar to the Stars and Stripes images. As my research has shown, American men and women who died in the course of World War I came from many walks of life. They differed in terms of religious identity, ethnicity, race and class. Some were brave and morally upright. Others, likely, were not. America’s Great War cemeteries make this diversity difficult, if not impossible, to discern. The cemeteries that the United States built overseas after World War II use even more pervasive Christian imagery, leaving no room for non-Christian soldiers among the unknowns. As the crosses rise ramrod straight from tightly manicured lawns, they project American virtue and America’s alignment with Christ. They admit little, if any, moral complexity. The crosses bear the names of the individuals who lie beneath them, but that individuality and the complexities that went along with it are subsumed by a collective identity defined by near uniform Christianity and by nearness to Christ. The truth is, World War I was not a war of religion. Men from different religious backgrounds fought alongside each other and killed men with whom they may have, in another circumstances, shared a Christian hymn. But in the United States, and in Europe as well, Christianity shaped the experience of the war and memories of it. As Americans look back across the hundred years since the nation entered the war and try to remember and honor those who fought, they would do well both to note the role of Christian imagery in creating a world of violence and to reach for the diverse voices and experiences that those images all too often obscure. |
Lars von Trier Responds to Iranian Culture Minister's Criticism of Cannes Lars von Trier has released a response to a letter the Iranian Deputy Culture Minister for Cinematic Affairs Javad Shamaqdari released to Persian media outlets Monday that criticized the Cannes Film Festival’s decision to declare the director “persona non grata”, after his controversial press conference comments. “Surely you remember that the Cannes festival was established with the aim of struggling against fascists,” Shamaqdari wrote in the letter. “After 64 years, it is sad to see the traces of fascist behavior in the Cannes organizers’ decision to expel one of the acclaimed European filmmakers… Perhaps it is necessary to provide a new definition of freedom of speech for encyclopedias. Otherwise, the behavior Cannes exhibited toward Von Trier by forcing him to apologize several times causes everybody to recall the churches’ medieval treatment of Galileo.” Shamaqdari continued by noting that the Cannes Film Festival has “left a dark stain on its history.” After issuing a brief apology during the festival, Shamaqdari’s letter has resulted in a more extensive statement from von Trier, which was released to the media Tuesday: In connection with the Iranian Vice Minister of Culture Javad Shamaqdari’s letter to the Cannes Film Festival regarding the “Persona non grata” stamping of my personality, I feel called to make the following comment: In my opinion, freedom of speech, in all its shapes, is part of the basic human rights. However, my comments during the festival’s press conference were unintelligent, ambiguous and needlessly hurtful. My intended point was that the potential for extreme cruelty, or the opposite, lies within every human being, whatever nationality, ethnicity, rank or religion. If we only explain historical disasters with the cruelty of individuals we destroy the possibility of understanding the human mechanisms, which in turn are necessary in order to avoid any future crimes against humanity. Lars von Trier Sign Up: Stay on top of the latest breaking film and TV news! Sign up for our Email Newsletters here. |
Teenagers and alcohol have provided some interesting headlines recently. Whether it’s some variation of “Soaking gummy bears in alcohol is newest trend for teens” or this headline from the Huffington Post: “Vodka Tampons? Reported Alcohol Abuse Among Teens Also Includes ‘Butt Chugging,’” we have more than enough embarrassing stories. Not to be outdone, adults decided to top us. Lindsay Lohan, Mel Gibson, Paris Hilton and millions of others have been cited for DWIs and have had plenty of embarrassing moments caught on tape while under the influence. And of course, it’s not just celebrities. Alcohol, among other things, was involved in the scandal that recently shamed the Secret Service — the group that is supposed to protect the leader of the free world. America’s alcohol industry contributed nearly $388 billion a year to the economy in 2008, according to the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States. America is a culture of alcohol. Television is dominated by beer-soaked shows like Jersey Shore, and almost all sporting events are accompanied by beer advertisements. Music, from Toby Keith’s “Red Solo Cup” to Jamie Foxx’s “Blame It (On the Alcohol)”, centers on alcohol. Most of our movies couldn’t even exist without alcohol. Just imagine The Hangover without, well, the hangover. Countless literary greats, like two of my favorites, Charles Bukowski and Christopher Hitchens, were nothing short of alcoholics. The very act of drinking is a social event in itself. Alcohol isn’t the world’s worst problem, that’s true. But it’s still a very serious, and often overlooked, problem. According to the World Health Organization, 2.5 million deaths a year worldwide are alcohol-related, more than those from AIDS, tuberculosis and violence. In the U.S. alone, an estimated 80,000 deaths annually are alcohol-related. Roughly 18 million people currently suffer from alcoholism in the U.S. Binge drinking among teens is on the rise. In fact, the CDC claims that about 90 percent of the alcohol consumed by those under the age of 21 in the United States is in the form of binge drinking. But can you blame teens for drinking? We live in a world that revolves around alcohol. Even about 75 percent of the alcohol that adults consume is considered binge drinking. I’m by no means advocating a Carrie Nation approach — grabbing hatchets and destroying bars. I’m not even advocating prohibiting alcohol use. If it was up to me, we’d lower the drinking age to 18 and expose the problem for what it is — a social issue, not a criminal one. Why can’t we simply and deliberately choose to limit, if not eliminate, our alcohol use? Would life be any less rich without drinking? As Henry David Thoreau wrote, “A man may acquire a taste for wine or brandy, and so lose his love for water, but should we not pity him?” Maybe a drink or two never hurt anyone, but does it really help? Philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote, “Drunkenness is temporary suicide: the happiness that it brings is merely negative, a momentary cessation of unhappiness.” What is alcohol but an escape, a weakness? You don’t need to crusade against liquor stores. Just have one less than usual. Set an example. For me, for my generation, for future generations. America, let’s raise our glasses to sobriety. Cheers to teetotalism. I’ll drink to that — with water, of course. Mac McCann is a senior at Lake Highlands High School and a Student Voices volunteer columnist. To respond to this column, send an email to voices@dallasnews.com. |
Three first-grade girls planned to harm their classmate with silica gel packets; police say the plot emerged from an ongoing feud Three first-grade girls in Alaska’s largest city plotted to kill a fellow student and have been disciplined but not charged with any crime, authorities said on Wednesday. Parents of the 32 first-graders attending Winterberry charter school in Anchorage got word of the plot in a 22 March email from the principal. The three female students acknowledged that they planned to poison a female classmate, school district officials said. A school resource officer interviewed the girls, and charges will not be filed, police said. The girls had planned to use silica gel packets, which soak up moisture and are not poisonous. “I’m not sure what we could criminally charge first-graders with,” police spokeswoman Jennifer Castro said, noting that no parents or other adults were involved. “What ended up happening was the officer took each one of them individually, [and] had a very a serious talk with all of them.” Administrators and school district psychologists talked to the girls to see if they understood what they were trying to do, whether it was a prank gone wrong or if they actually meant to hurt their classmate, school district spokeswoman Heidi Embley said. “All of these things are being discussed, especially since it’s such a young age,” she said. The school resource officer determined that the trio intended to harm the other girl, Castro said. Police say the plot emerged from an ongoing feud but did not release any other details. Two other first-graders told school officials about the plan, and the officer also spoke with them. The two students reported to administrators that the plan involved using the packets from the girls’ lunch “to poison and kill another student,” principal Shanna Mall wrote in the email. Police left discipline up to the school district. The email said it entailed “significant consequences.” Embley said she couldn’t release further details about how the students were punished. But Mall told Anchorage television station KTUU that the students were suspended. Mall couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on Wednesday by the Associated Press. |
This post is part of our practical cartography and data science series. The problem: you want to split up a few million U.S. address records into equally-sized chunks that retain spatial hierarchy. You want to do this without anything other than a street address (geocoding is expensive!). Maybe you want to do this as part of a map/reduce process (we certainly do), maybe you want to do some sampling, who knows? The solution: Muthaflippin' Geochunk Anyone who's ever used U.S. ZIP codes as a way to subdivide datasets can tell you: 60608 (pop 79,607) is a totally different beast than 05851 (pop 525). They're not census tracts; it's not really appropriate to compare them statistically or thematically. Our solution - largely the work of platform wizard and Rust enthusiast Eric Kidd - is to bake census data into a tool that does the splitting for you at a level that allows for easy comparison. More specifically: It provides a deterministic mapping from zip codes to "geochunks" that you can count on remaining stable. Check out the Jupyter notebook that explains the algorithm in detail, but it works like so: Install Install rust first if you don't have it: curl https://sh.rustup.rs -sSf | sh . . . then geochunk, using the rust package manager: cargo install geochunk . . . or install from one of the prepackaged binaries. Use 1: Indexing Build a table that assigns every U.S. zipcode to a geochunk that contains 250,000 people: geochunk export zip2010 250000 > chunks_of_250k_people.csv Use 2: List processing Alternately, let's try a pipeline example that uses geochunk csv : say you want to parallel-process every address in the state of Colorado, and you need equal-size but contiguous slices to do it. Get and unpack sample data from the openaddresses project: wget -c https://s3.amazonaws.com/data.openaddresses.io/runs/283082/us/co/statewide.zip && unzip statewide.zip Pipe the full file through geochunk, into slices of about 250,000 people each: cat us/co/statewide.csv | geochunk csv zip2010 250000 POSTCODE > statewide_chunks_150k.csv . . . and now you have 2 million addresses, chopped into ~8 equally-sized slices with rough contiguity: Geochunk works on this scale in 1.38s (Have you heard us evangelizing about Rust yet?), leaving you plenty of time for the real processing. This tool is serious dogfood for us; it's baked into our ETL system, and we use it to try making a tiny dent in the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. We hope you'll find it useful too. |
New Zealand's persistent high rate of child poverty has been highlighted in Amnesty International's latest look at the state of human rights around the world. "Nearly one in three New Zealand children live below the poverty line," the group's 2016/2017 report reads. Paediatrician Innes Asher, former head of the University of Auckland's paediatrics department, says the Government has done nothing to fix it - despite former Prime Minister John Key's promises. "Key said after the last election reducing rates of poverty and hardship were his priority for this term - we haven't seen any significant changes," Dr Asher told The AM Show on Thursday. "We have, every year in New Zealand, about 40,000 children... admitted to hospital for diseases that are potentially preventable by solving poverty, housing and great access to healthcare. There's a lot we could do." The 2015 Budget gave low-income families about $25 extra a week, touted by the Government as the biggest increase in 30 years. But Dr Asher says that amounts to "almost nothing" - and certainly doesn't make up for the $72.50 in tax credits three-child families without parents in paid work are missing out on. "By not adjusting Working for Families properly... the country's been saving billions of dollars over the last several years," says Dr Asher. "Families and children have been specifically disadvantaged by the Government's policies." Reversing the 2010 tax cuts would be a start, she says, since low-income families saw little benefit from those. And while superannuation - available to Kiwis aged 65 and over, regardless of their wealth - has been pegged to the median income, benefits for low-income families have lagged way behind. "People on benefits, their incomes are proportionally way, way, way below the average income compared to 20 years ago. We haven't done this to the elderly." Poverty in youth can have a severe impact throughout a child's life, says Dr Asher. "I see children whose bodies are harmed now, and some that are harmed forever, with diseases that are completely preventable if we didn't have poverty and if we didn't have unhealthy housing arrangements, and if we had good access to healthcare at all times, basic healthcare." Oxfam earlier this year released a study showing the gap between New Zealand's rich and poor has never been wider - the two richest people now owning more wealth than 30 percent of the adult population combined. A third of Kiwis worth more than $50 million didn't even pay the top tax rate. Mr Key blamed the growing disparity on rising house prices. More problems Other problems New Zealand is facing, according to Amnesty International's report, include: high levels of sexual violence against women and girls a "significant number of children suffering physical and psychological abuse and neglect" a lack of progress on improving the Bill of Rights Act disproportionate numbers of Maori in the criminal justice system consideration of a formal extradition treaty with China, which practises capital punishment. Newshub. |
Share Tweet reddit Email Call it the Big Uneasy. A local man has voiced his concerns to the City Council over bathroom rights stemming from an influx of crossdressers expected to arrive downtown on Saturday. “I heard someone talking the other day about how all these transgenders are coming to town to do Lord knows what,” Allen McCrory, a transplant from North Carolina and pastor at Bourbon Street’s First Church of Girls Girls Girls and Bail Bonds said. “What I do know is they are going to have to use the facilities at some point and I’m not comfortable with that. Not at all.” Saturday is the Red Dress Run, an annual crossdressing race in which thousands of participants overtake the French Quarter and surrounding areas in debauchery. “What if one of my girls is popping a squat in between her performances and a drunk guy dressed like a woman happens to wander into the women’s bathroom and chooses to take a dump? That puts her, me, and my business in a very dangerous situation.” McCrory said he believes the city needs to protect business owners who feel their bathroom rights are threatened. “Number one, the whole situation pisses me off. Number two, beer shits are not funny. I’m not cleaning that up. Are you?” John Dikeman, a spokesperson for the Alliance of French Quarter Businesses, said Mr. McCrory speaks only for himself and is not a reflection of New Orleans. “New Orleans is one of the most accepting cities in the nation and we welcome the Red Dress Run and their people,” Dikeman said. “Whether it’s taking a whiz or pinching a loaf, we believe it is every person’s right to choose how they use a bathroom and no one else should ever be allowed to interfere with that. Do you know what that smell on Bourbon Street is? Freedom.” |
Multi-line power kites first made an appearance way back in the 1970s, when the Flexifoil stunt kite became available for anyone to buy. This kite had a single flexible spar running the full length of its leading edge. The front edge, if you're not quite up with the terminology. This was a fast kite with plenty of power, and people still fly this design today. Anyway, a small number of people soon started experimenting with the Flexifoil as a traction kite. They found several ways to drag themselves along, for example over sand in a small wheeled buggy. A Power-Sled! A Power-Sled! In fact, these days, kite power is used over water sand / dirt and snow Parafoils are the type most commonly used over dry surfaces, while down at the beach, Leading Edge Inflatables are the most practical. The kite in the photo is something different again - a single-line power-sled. So called because large kites of this type have ample lifting strength. All manner of inflatable wind art can be hung off the flying line! Like to see a video clip? Just scroll down to near the end... Types Of Power Kites Over the years, kite designers have made large kites for specific sports, so there's a lot of different types. I'll avoid getting you bogged down or bored to death by just mentioning 2 broad categories... power kites traction kites Some people use this name for all 2, 3, 4 or 5 line flexible kites. Many other people, including me, divide these into 2 or 3 line 'power kites' and 4 or 5 line 'traction kites'. There is a big range of sizes available, and cost depends a lot on size. Now, are you totally confused about exactly what is a power and what is a traction kite? What's the real difference? I'll try and sum it up for you. Power kites are at the smaller and cheaper end, and are used mainly for stunt flying or just having fun. Yes, they are just another kind of stunt kite. A small power kite is pretty fast through the air, which is part of the thrill of flying it! There's one in the photo over there. However, if they are 3 square meters (about 30 square feet) or bigger in area, they pull quite a bit. Naturally, people then think about using them to pull along small land buggies, for example. Depending on wind conditions, there's nothing to stop you flying a 4-line traction kite as a rather expensive and impressive stunt kite! The extra brake lines let you turn the kite with less arm movement than the 2-line variety. Also, the brake lines are handy for bringing the kite down onto the ground with a bit more control. The beach picture shows a kite surfer in action. With 4 or more lines dragging through the air, and other aerodynamic reasons, traction kites are a bit slower than the smaller muli-line kites. Most surfing kites are not parafoils. Can see the leading edge spar and a few other shorter spars helping the kite keep its shape? Some kite surfers these days are into kite racing around a course, much like a boat race. Although it's possible to be self-taught, many people these days sign up for kite surfing lessons. This way, progress is quicker and important safety lessons are learned the easy way. I might just mention here that some traction kites are built purely for speed, compared to other kites of the same size. These are 'racing kites', and if you get one, don't expect it to be as easy to fly as other traction kites! Power Kites in Action OK, how do people fly this kind of kite these days? What a big topic! This type being so popular, the manufacturers have managed to cater for just about everyone. Young children can fly the smallest 2-line power kites under supervision while down at the beach. At the other end, top-notch athletes push the limits doing freestyle tricks over snow or in the surf with other kite boarders, using very expensive Leading Edge Inflatables. The top-end traction kites are more like aircraft than toys. That's not at all surprising when you consider that some parafoil kites used for traction are made by paraglider manufacturers! The cost of these flying wonders can exceed 1000 US dollars. Mind you, if you are a very patient person, you could save a bundle by making power kites from scratch. Heaps of sewing involved, believe me. It's wise to have a chat with the experts about what kind of power kiting you'd like to do, before actually laying down your cash for a kite! E-Book Testimonials more testimonials browse catalog "Love the easy to understand step by step instructions, made from next to nothing materials and above all so much fun to fly... cheers Tim for sharing your well thought out pdf kite designs with the whole world. Very satisfying making your own and watching them get air-born for the first time." "I decided to run kite making as an elective again on this camp in the past week - so I bought all your e-books, a bunch of materials, and then took a group of 10 high school students through making the kites over 4 days. We built a diamond, a Barn Door, a Delta, and two skew delta kites. Again - every single kite flew." Time for a Big List. I love lists, I'm one of those list-driven types of people. :-) Even if you're not like that, a list is a great way of summarizing information. It struck me that power or traction kites are used in a huge number of ways, so here is the biggest list of power kiting activities you will find on the Internet. pure fun, just aimlessly flying a multi-line Parafoil kite as far as possible in all directions learning some stunts and practicing them for fun, or competing in kite flying contests in a controlled way, letting yourself get dragged across dirt, sand, ice or grass breaking silly records, such as in September 1988 when a 43 square meter (460 square feet) parafoil broke the record for the Worlds Largest Stunt Kite breaking sports records, such as the C-class unlimited speed sailing record, with a set of catamaran hulls powered by a winch controlled stack of Flexifoils! Cool. kite surfing, or getting dragged along while riding a surfboard kite surfing while riding a windsurfing board kite surfing on a kiteboard body surfing powered by a traction kite snowkiting, or getting dragged along while riding a snowboard kite boarding on an all-terrain board kite boarding on a mountainboard kite boarding on a landboard kite sailing a boat on water kite sailing a sled on ice getting dragged along while riding ice skates, rollerskates or rollerblades kite skiing over snow kite skiing uphill is now a part of Scottish skiing history! riding a kite-powered land kite buggy getting dragged along while on water skis dangerous: kite jumping, where you let yourself leave the ground for as long as you dare kite jumping, where you let yourself leave the ground for as long as you dare even more dangerous: man lifting, where a large tethered traction kite lifts someone high off the ground 'Freestyle' kite-skiing and kite-boarding have both seen big increases in popularity, as well as kitesurfing. Kite landboarding gear has many similarities to the gear used over water and snow. If you have a think about it, it's not hard to make up a few kiting sports of your own. Here's my little effort, but don't try these at home ;-) kitebagging, across wet grass while wearing a large plastic garbage bag (very do-able I'm sure) kiteduning, over and around sand dunes on your bare feet, 'getting some air' once in a while (mmm how practical is this..) kite-vertising, using your kite as a billboard at public events (not as silly as it sounds) kitebiking, using your feet to steer and your hands for the kite (you'd be stupid to try this) wet stunting, flying your kite underwater in tidal currents while scuba-diving (I wasn't serious, but then I saw some pics of people actually doing this!) Think I'll stop before it gets too silly. As you can see, just about any way of moving across the earth's surface might be tried by a keen traction kiter! Now here's an interesting application for power kites that doesn't involve any movement across land or sea... Clean energy generation, believe it or not! Here's a few notes on kite safety which might prove handy, particularly for beginners. The history of power kites extends back to the 70s. Using big kites to pull you along isn't a new idea! Check out the big purple kite weaving around in the video below - pulling it's skillful pilot across the sand in a buggy... |
STEPANAKERT, Artsakh (A.W.)—On June 21, the Artsakh Defense Ministry dismissed the news of a captured Armenian serviceman that was reported by the Azerbaijani Defense Ministry. Earlier in the day, the Azerbaijani Defense Ministry published a video of what they claimed to be an Armenian soldier who was captured following an attack on Azerbaijani positions. Azerbaijani media were quick to share and spread the news. The video shows an interrogation of a disheveled man, speaking broken Armenian. The man in the video claimed that his name was Zaven Karapetyan, born on Nov. 16, 1974, in the village of Dovegh in Armenia’s Noyemberyan district. He added that he currently resides in Dovegh. The man in the video also “confessed” that he was a serviceman, who allegedly participated in the diversionary attack the day before. “The Defense Ministry of the Artsakh Republic announces that the defense army did not participate in any said actions,” read part of the Defense Ministry’s statement. “By disseminating such information, the Azerbaijani forces attempt to create the allusion of another ‘victory’ in their alternate reality,” it continued. According to Armenian news outlets, Armenian Army spokesperson Artsrun Hovhannisyan also refuted the Azerbaijani claim and said that it was just a part of typical false Azerbaijani propaganda. Hovhannisyan stated that the person in the video was clearly a civilian, since his appearance does not resemble those who serve in the Artsakh Armed Forces. Armenpress reported that according to the official voters’ registry in Armenia, the address of a Zaven Karapetyan is noted in Vanadzor, Lori and not Dovegh. Dovegh Mayor Samvel Gorginyan also assured Armenian news outlets that an individual named Zaven Karapetyan does not reside in the village. Meanwhile, Vanadzor’s Mayor Mamikon Aslanyan confirmed that Zaven Karapetyan is an Armenian citizen who has been previously convicted and suffers from a mental ilness. According to the mayor, he was registered at an elderly home to receive a passport, but did not have a specific place of residence. Aslanyan was certain that Karapetyan was not a military man. Contrary to the Azerbaijani Defense Ministry’s statement, it was also reported that an Azerbaijani social media user Khasim Masimov posted on Facebook that a 50-year-old Armenian civilian had crossed the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. According to Masimov, the Armenian civilian, who crossed the border near the village of Kerimli, was discovered by locals, who then notified the military. Masimov said that the Armenian civilian was then taken away by authorities to be presented as an Armenian saboteur. Armenpress later reported that other Azerbaijani social media users responded to Masimov’s post and mocked it, saying that the Azerbaijani government would not have done such a thing to the Armenian civilian and would have instead glorified him as a part of a peace platform. Masimov deleted the Facebook post shortly after. |
MIAMI (AP) — In the wake of the Miami Dolphins' late-season collapse, owner Stephen Ross immediately began contemplating a possible organizational shake-up. Ross has been meeting with his top advisers before deciding whether to fire anyone, two people familiar with the situation said. One of the people said the meetings began Sunday night and will resume Thursday, and a decision could come then. That person said that during the Dolphins' loss Sunday to the New York Jets, Ross became so upset he turned away at one point because he could no longer watch. Both people spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because discussions regarding a possible organizational shake-up have been private. Second-year offensive coordinator Mike Sherman is considered the most likely to be fired, and sixth-year general manager Jeff Ireland's job is also in serious jeopardy. Coach Joe Philbin is likely to return for a third season, the two people familiar with the situation said, but that's not a certainty. The Dolphins, who finished 8-8, were on the verge of earning the final AFC wild-card berth before being outscored 39-7 while losing their last two games to the Buffalo Bills and Jets, two non-playoff teams. If the Dolphins had won either game, they would have made the postseason for the first time since 2008. Miami had four victories over teams that made the playoffs, but also lost three games to last-place teams. In addition to inconsistency on the field, Miami had its season nearly derailed by a locker-room bullying scandal that drew national scrutiny and remains under NFL investigation. Ross is concerned about the impact of the late collapse on attendance, which has sagged during the playoff drought. On Monday, Philbin said his team is close to contending for titles. The Dolphins have improved from 6-10 in 2011 and 7-9 in 2012, but Ross expected a playoff berth after spending more than $100 million in guaranteed money last offseason to upgrade the roster. Ireland, a protege of Bill Parcells, was hired as general manager in 2008, and the Dolphins won the AFC East in his first season. But they haven't been above .500 since, the longest such stretch in franchise history, and fans have vented about him for several seasons. Sherman's unit ranked 27th in the NFL in yards, allowed a franchise-record 58 sacks and scored once in its final 24 possessions. ___ AP NFL website: www.pro32.ap.org and http://twitter.com/AP_NFL ___ Follow Steven Wine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Steve_Wine |
Image copyright AFP Image caption The army celebrates in Bor - a town that has changed hands several times South Sudan's military says it has recaptured the strategic town of Bor from rebel forces. The Ugandan army said it had helped in the operation, while a spokesman for the rebel forces said its troops had made a tactical withdrawal. Bor, the capital of Jonglei state, has changed hands several times in a month-long conflict that is believed to have left thousands dead. Meanwhile, talks to try to find a ceasefire are continuing in Ethiopia. The conflict between rebel and government forces broke out on 15 December. President Salva Kiir has accused his former deputy Riek Machar of plotting a coup - an accusation he denies. The dispute has seen killings along ethnic lines - Mr Kiir is a member of the Dinka community, the country's largest, while Mr Machar is from the Nuer ethnic group. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Mark Lowen: The town of Bor has been "reduced to a pile of rubble" Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced by the fighting. 'Ghost town' On Thursday, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni confirmed his country's troops were now fighting alongside South Sudanese government forces against the rebels. A spokesman for the Ugandan People's Defence Force said its troops had helped retake Bor. "There was a lot of resistance but our force was overwhelming," the spokesman, Paddy Ankunda, told Reuters news agency. South Sudanese army spokesman Philip Aguer said the fight for Bor had left "many dead", without giving figures. Brig-Gen Lul Ruai Koang, a military spokesperson for the opposition in South Sudan, said its troops had withdrawn to reorganise. He said Bor was a "ghost town" and no longer important. Image copyright Reuters Image caption Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced by the fighting But Col Aguer said the victory had eliminated the psychological pressure of a rebel attack on the capital, Juba, 200km (130 miles) south of Bor. Col Aguer also said the focus would now fall on the town of Malakal, still party controlled by the rebels, with the government forces planning an imminent attack. But Col Aguer admitted maintaining communication with government forces there was "difficult". The BBC's Mark Lowen, in Juba, says Bor has changed hands a number of times already - and it is not inconceivable that Riek Machar could mobilise his forces for another assault. Talks to try to agree a ceasefire are continuing in a hotel in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa. Image copyright Reuters Image caption Some refugees have moved to the Ugandan town of Adjumani, 470km north of the capital Kampala There have been conflicting reports about progress in the discussions, but no breakthrough has yet been signalled. Our correspondent says it is widely believed that the talks have stalled because both sides are aiming for an upper hand in the fighting before real negotiations begin. The release of political detainees continues to be a key issue that must be resolved. On Friday, UN Human Rights fact finder Ivan Simonovic said both government soldiers and rebels had committed atrocities. He told the BBC there had been reports of "mass killings, extra-judicial killings, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, sexual violence, widespread destruction and looting of property and use of the children in conflict". |
Roy Nelson‘s frustration over what he deemed a late stoppage in his recent fight with Antonio “Bigfoot” Silva has landed him in hot water. The UFC heavyweight is now facing a lengthy suspension and significant fines. Nelson landed a right uppercut that dropped Silva late in the second round of their UFC Fight Night Brasilia main card bout on Sept. 24. Silva crashed to the canvas and Nelson reluctantly delivered a few more shots before referee “Big” John McCarthy stepped in to stop the action. Nelson felt it was a late stoppage. Nelson and Silva have a close relationship. After the fight, Nelson kicked or pushed McCarthy in the buttocks out of frustration. He then flipped McCarthy off, while hurling obscenities at the veteran referee. Scroll to continue with content Ad “I didn’t want to hurt Bigfoot more than what I had to. I got taken from the moment. I apologized to Big John, but I wouldn’t take it back,” Nelson said after the fight. “It just hurt me that I’ve got to keep on hitting a guy that doesn’t need to be hit. The referee just did a late stoppage.” While Nelson apologized, UFC president Dana White blasted him for his actions during an episode of the UFC Unfiltered podcast. “You can’t apologize for that. You don’t ever, ever put your (expletive) hands on a referee or your feet for any reason what-so-(expletive)-ever,” said White. “You don’t do it. He needs to be buried.” TRENDING > BJ Penn Forced Out of UFC Manila Headliner Addressing the issue, the Brazilian Athletic Commission on MMA (CABMMA) turned adjudication of the incident over to the Superior Justice Court of Sport, the governing body of sports in Brazil. Story continues Now in the hands of the Superior Justice Court of MMA (STJDMMA), according to a Thursday report by MMAFighting.com's Guilherme Cruz, Nelson has been issued a 90-day temporary suspension, pending the adjudication of his case. According to STJDMMA documents sent to MMAFighting, Nelson could be charged with assaulting McCarthy, which is accompanied by a fine of up to $30,000 and a six-month to two-year suspension. He could also be charged with unethical behavior, which comes with a fine of up to $10,000 and a 30-day to six-month suspension. The document indicated that the Superior Justice Court attorney who filed the complaint suggested a 14-month suspension and $18,500 fine. Nelson has seven business days to respond and present a defense. It is apparently up to the president of the STJDMMA to evaluate and rule on the case. Follow MMAWeekly.com on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram |
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., has been leading the charge against campus sexual assault, but her solutions would eviscerate due process rights and skew campus hearings in favor of accusers. During a Washington Post symposium on campus sexual assault Wednesday (which included no speakers advocating for due process), Gillibrand was asked if the bill she has introduced — the Campus Accountability and Safety Act — takes into account the rights of accused students. Gillibrand responded with an emphatic "absolutely" before claiming that she and her Senate colleagues worked with accused students while crafting the bill. "[We] made sure that they had the same rights of representation as someone who was alleging the crime," Gillibrand said. "And so, all notice requirements are for both, all representational requirements — that you can have someone by your side representing you — are for both." This is not accurate. Gillibrand's bill does not specifically lay out what rights accusers (the bill calls them "victims" throughout, except for once, illustrating a clear bias) and the accused have. It states only that schools must provide each student with written notice of the process to provide them "with the opportunity to meaningfully exercise the due process rights afforded to them under institutional policy." Due process rights are mentioned elsewhere in the bill as being provided by a certain section in the Higher Education Act of 1965. That section calls for a supposedly "fair and impartial investigation" conducted by minimally trained campus administrators (more on that later). It also calls for both students to be notified of the process and outcome of the investigation and allows them to have "others" present at the disciplinary hearing. The idea that Gillibrand's bill advances the rights of accused students was challenged by Joe Cohn, the legislative and policy director for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, an organization that has been working hard to ensure that students are provided their due process rights. "While CASA avoids some of the provisions most hostile to the rights of the accused found in other bills, it still provides resources to complainants in the form of confidential advisors that are not provided to the accused," Cohn wrote the Washington Examiner in an email. "Disappointingly, it does not require institutions to allow both the complainant and the accused to have lawyers actively participate in the campus proceedings. Preserving the status quo, where students must speak on their own behalf about accusations of felony misconduct, is deeply troubling, especially when one considers that statements made during these hearings will likely be admissible against them in subsequent criminal proceedings." The deck is stacked against the accused student even before the hearing. Once a sexual assault accusation is made, the accuser has the entire Title IX office behind him or her. Gillibrand's bill requires training for each individual who implements the policies and those who are responsible "for resolving complaints." That training is to be "victim-centered," meaning whoever is conducting the investigation may be predisposed to assume the accused is guilty. The training includes how to question "persons subjected to sexual violence," "information on consent and the effect that drugs or alcohol may have on an individual's ability to consent" and "the effects of trauma, including neurobiology of trauma." We know how the definition of "consent" has been narrowed and the definition of "sexual assault" has been expanded to include everything from a stolen kiss to rape. We know that in policies being pushed across the country, known as "yes means yes," the presence of alcohol, no matter how slight, can negate consent if an accuser so chooses. Meanwhile, being drunk is no excuse for an accused student, even if that means they also couldn't consent. We also know what training in the "effects of trauma" will look like. Activists like to claim that a constantly changing story from an accuser is just evidence of trauma. When presented with evidence that the accuser did not believe the incident was sexual assault until months or years after it took place, the accuser is allowed to claim that she made such statements under duress. In practice, Gillibrand's bill will continue the culture of "guilty until proven innocent" ( and even then still guilty), but she doesn't seem concerned. She seemed to suggest that due process is an impediment to justice, and that to be thorough — as police investigators should — just takes too long. "Well, the reality is that I would prefer many more cases to be going to the criminal justice system, but you need a way, as a campus administration, to get a serial rapist off your campus, and if you have to wait for a full trial and a full adjudication – that could be two years," Gillibrand said. "You have to have a tool where you can have a fair process, hear both sides and then make a decision." Of course, she's not advocating for a fair process, as evidenced by her support of a woman whose story has been seriously called into question. Also, not every accused student has multiple accusations against them. Most are from a single accuser. When she was being asked why evidentiary standards should be different for campus hearings than criminal proceedings, Gillibrand interrupted as if she were tired of being asked that question: "Because you're not throwing someone in jail." She received applause from the audience. She then bemoaned the protections afforded to accused persons in the criminal justice system. "So, all of our criminal justice system — you're innocent until proven guilty, you are entitled to a defense — is entirely placed to protect defendants because the consequence is your liberty is taken from you," she said. "It is such a serious consequence that our whole criminal justice system is designed to protect the accused." What Gillibrand ignores is that being expelled from campus and having your name splashed across local and national papers can have serious consequences for accused students — especially the innocent. An accused student might not be locked up in a cell, but the damage an accusation can potentially cause surely calls for due process to be taken seriously. Being expelled from college could greatly reduce a student's lifetime potential earnings, as putting off a career for years while trying to finish school means lost years of salaries and promotions. We're seeing this with millennials who couldn't get hired after college during the Great Recession. Plus, an accused student's college transcript may reflect the fact that he was accused and expelled. The stigma will follow him throughout his attempts to finish his education. And any job that runs a background check will be able to discover that information. The accused might not go to jail, but the consequences are effectively the same, and Gillibrand needs to recognize that. And by the way, the evidence from the hearing can be turned over to the police for a criminal investigation, meaning a skewed process could eventually result in jail time. She added: "This is not a criminal proceeding. You are not going to jail. Schools need tools to either expel you or create accommodation for a survivor who has experienced trauma. They need those tools, and Title IX requires them to maintain safe campuses." Get that? Someone is either found guilty or they get away with it, leaving behind a "survivor who has experienced trauma." Nowhere is there any mention that an accuser might not be a survivor. One of the more baffling statements Gillibrand made was her supposedly hypothetical situation about a college professor dealing with a serial rapist. "Just imagine you're a college president, and you have four accusations against one student by four other students, and you have no way to get him off campus until there's a conviction," Gillibrand said. "That would make your head explode." Hmm, that sounds familiar — where do you think Gillibrand came up with the number four? That is not a random hypothetical. She was clearly alluding to her friend, Columbia University student Emma Sulkowicz, and her friends' accusations against fellow student Paul Nungesser. Sulkowicz accused Nungesser of raping her (though Facebook messages call that assertion into question), and then three of her friends each accused Nungesser of various offenses — from a forced kiss to a bad relationship — in order to bolster her claim. Nungesser was found not responsible in each case except one, which he won on appeal. The fourth accuser's story was even less plausible than Sulkowicz's. Gilliband has called Nungesser a "rapist" in print, so it is no coincidence that she would come up with a hypothetical situation that perfectly mirrored her perception of the case. Gillibrand concluded by making the case for mandatory expulsion for those found responsible for sexual assault — which will be nearly every accused student if her bill passes. "We kick kids out all the time for cheating, we kick them out for not paying their tuition — we should be able to kick them out if they are found responsible for sexual assault," Gillibrand said. If she weren't advocating for such a biased process, that would be an appropriate request. Students who have truly sexually assaulted another student should be kicked off campus — and into jail. Gillibrand's insistence that campuses adjudicate sexual assault and expel alleged offenders — expulsion which, she claims, isn't that bad — rather than put those who are guilty in jail shows an odd lack of concern for victims. |
Image copyright Reuters A Chinese plane passenger who was told she could not carry a $190 (£120) bottle of cognac on board downed it all rather than let it go to waste - and was then deemed unfit to fly. The woman had bought the Remy Martin XO Excellence in the US and then tried to take it on board an internal flight from Beijing to Wenzhou. But the 700ml bottle was far above the 100ml that security laws allow. She became hugely drunk and was forced to sleep it off at Beijing airport. The incident occurred at Beijing Capital International Airport last Friday. The passenger, identified only by her surname Zhou, downed the bottle at about midday after being informed she could not take it on board. She began to shout incoherently, then fell over and started rolling around the floor. Security intervened. One airport officer told the South China Morning Post: "She was so drunk… she couldn't even stand up. We took her to a room in a wheelchair so she could rest." She was denied entry on to the plane and was given medical care. The woman then slept and reportedly did not sober up until about 19:00. She was released by police to family members who came to pick her up. One report said she thanked police for helping her. |
Not all disgruntled employees www.thedailysheeple.com/this-video-of-a-man-peeing-on-a-kell But at a Kellogg’s plant in Memphis, Tennessee, one man did. He decidedto add a little extra liquid to the rice that would soon become thosefamous Rice Krispies Treats, Rice Krispies Treats Cereal and/or PuffedRice Cake Products. But really, don’t the ingredients in these productsalready have enough sugar and carbohydrates? And it getsworse. According to Live Science, a individual’s urine can contain up to3000 www.chemicals.news/ “In the study, which took seven years to complete, the researchersfound that at least 3,079 compounds can be detected in urine.Seventy-two of these compounds are made by bacteria, while 1,453 comefrom the body itself. Another 2,282 come from diet, drugs, cosmetics or science.naturalnews.com/Index-Harmful-Toxins.html (some compounds belong to more than one group).”Kellogg’s company officials say that the video was shot in 2014, sothe food made with this added ingredient has most likely already beeningested. Yuck. Makes you wonder how often this sort of thing happens. Ididn’t have a box of Rice Krispies Treats of my own to see what otherchemicals are in the box. And it did take a bit of sleuthing even tofind it listed on their web site, but I did. Here’s what’s beingmarketed to your children as a fun and delicious snack, courtesy ofKelloggs:After looking at this toxic list, one wonders if adding urineis really that big of a deal. It is imperative to sound an alarm to allwho are looking for the foodforensics.com/ , especially those children who are being born into the most chemically toxic times on the planet.What really goes on at these mega huge food manufacturing facilities?There are surely better ways of protesting one’s working conditions.It’s one thing to do such a disgusting act, but simultaneouslyvideotaping oneself peeing? Hmm, it makes you think. We know that oursociety has created a class of narcissistic elites, but this is beyondbelief. Is he marking his territory? Is he proud of his range? Onedoesn’t need science.naturalnews.com/psychology.html to ponder his mother and diaper issues. But I digress.The Kellog’s company’s response was what one would expect:“Kellogg takes this situation very seriously and we were shocked anddeeply disappointed by this video that we just learned of today. Weimmediately alerted law enforcement authorities and regulators. Acriminal investigation is underway as well as a thorough internalinvestigation…Food quality is of the utmost importance to Kellogg Company. We areoutraged by this completely unacceptable situation, and we will workclosely with authorities to prosecute to the full extent of the law.”Hmm, the Kellogg Company is making some efforts in their Kashi brand. But if food quality were really the issue, they wouldn’t refer their customer base to the blatant https://factsaboutgmos.org/from the https://factsaboutgmos.org/ would they? |
Illustration by Supertotto for TIME So who would you like to hack today? A bank, a website, a corporation or perhaps a government agency that's rubbing you the wrong way? The hacktivist group LulzSec is taking requests. Or maybe you'd like to get your hands on some stolen credit-card accounts to boost your personal spending level or purchase some malware that will divert a business's payments from its vendors to you. A malware seller called Zeus not only can do that but also provides customer support. Hacking has become a service and entertainment business and in a quantity and at a quality never before reached. Hacktivists, pranktivists, idealists and malware coders are oozing past the circa-2000 network-security gates of corporations and governments with ease. Among the biggest hacks was the one that brought down Sony's PlayStation Network. Some fingered the politically motivated group Anonymous, and authorities in Spain have arrested several purported members. But Anonymous has said, Not us. When Sony announced that it had finally restored service, the gang of merry hacksters called LulzSec began to trample through its websites, including Sony Pictures. LulzSec, which makes a point of pointing out holes in Web security, used a hack called an SQL injection, then tweeted about it: "We accessed EVERYTHING. Why do you put such faith in a company that allows itself to become open to these simple attacks?" It has since broken into gaming companies such as Bethesda Softworks and Minecraft. It used a hack called a distributed-denial-of-service attack to lock up the CIA's website; it accessed account information from Citibank. (See if hackers are getting smarter.) LulzSec may be the headline hacker, but it's not the most malevolent. The black-hat, criminal side of the practice is booming by adopting a similar approach. Cyberthieves have shifted their focus to social networks. Instead of attacking corporate firewalls head-on, they are breaching corporate sites using social engineering, convincing someone within a company that an e-mail is from a friend or colleague. It's a technique called spear phishing: the idea is to identify vulnerable targets say, someone in human resources or finance and, through them, burrow into corporate networks. They are feasting on small and mediumsize businesses like wolves on lambs. There is also a real cyberwar being waged by nations. Reports of cybersecurity incidents from federal agencies have increased 660% over the past five years, to 41,776 in 2010, according to the Government Accountability Office's information-security-issues director. The networks of the Department of Defense (DOD) are probed millions of times every day. More than 100 foreign intelligence agencies have attempted to penetrate DOD networks or those of military contractors attacks characterized as APTs, or advanced persistent threats. At least one got into the Pentagon via Lockheed Martin by cracking the RSA security token, the random-number-generating device that many companies use for secure access to computer networks. To experts, this is just another sign that the older technology that protected IT is passé. "User-named passwords are breakable now. They weren't when they first started," says Bill Conner, CEO of Entrust, an IT-security firm. "Tokens have been around a long time. One lockmaker has now been breached. Even tokens aren't good against some of the new-age cybercrimes." (See whose emails were exposed in a LulzSec hack.) The New Threat Matrix It adds up to an entirely different threat matrix bubbling up on the Web. The hacker community that once operated in its dark recesses has broken the surface, embracing social networks and exploiting them to expand in all directions, legal and otherwise. "What we are seeing is beyond a technical improvement," says Dave Jevans, chairman of the Web-security firm IronKey. "They have a social element to bring people together [via the network] to create more sophisticated attacks than we've ever seen. That's what makes it accelerate." And it's not just Nigerian spammers and post-Soviet computer jocks anymore. In the past quarter, the IT-security company AVG traced hack attacks tied to about 700 command-and-control servers servers that take over computers infected by botnets used by various hackers around the world. "About 30% of the hackers were in the U.S.," says CEO J.R. Smith. "This is a shocking experience to see the data being stolen medical data, business data. The volume of data being stolen is constantly increasing." So is his business, since the thieves are also expanding into cell phones. Smith says his company blocks 10,000 malicious mobile-app downloads every day. |
Meet Beaudine BEAUDINE, another suspected shiba inu/chi mix who is just a baby himself....and can you stand that adorable grin?? UPDATE FROM BEAUDINE"S FOSTER: Beaudine is an 8 month old sweetheart. Shiba Inu mix, he is playful, likes to collect and then feast on shoes, is tiny, just 10 pounds, and is like the wind when outside. He loves other dogs and just wants to be a puppy. Now accepting applications at thepixelfund.org Spread the word - Like us on Facebook! If you are interested in adopting this pet, please visit our website before contacting us. www.thepixelfund.org. Most of your questions can be answered there and you will find an adoption application. If you see this animal still posted on Petfinder, it is still available for adoption. We are volunteers rescuing in our spare time, so emails and questions accompanied by a completed application will be answered promptly. Emails without an application are answered only as we have time. Thank you for considering adoption! |
Giedo van der Garde sounds very confident he will be on the formula one grid next March. The Dutchman has emerged as a strong player at the tail-end of the 2014 'silly season', with his wealthy backer Marcel Boekhoorn last week insisting things "will work out" for the 28-year-old. Van der Garde made his F1 debut for Caterham this year, but he has also been linked with Force India, where the Dutch businessman Michiel Mol is a shareholder. And Dutch television RTL7 now reports that Sauber is also an option. Asked about the Swiss team, van der Garde answered: "We are working on three teams: them (Sauber), Force India and Caterham. "I hope we have good news within the next two or three weeks," he added. Asked about the progress of the negotiations, van der Garde answered: "Good. Very good." |
The political world is understandably paying enormous attention to Senator Elizabeth Warren’s agreement with the proposition that the 2016 Democratic presidential nominating process was “rigged” against Bernie Sanders. It represents an assertion of malfeasance by a major party leader who endorsed Hillary Clinton in the primaries last year, an assertion that even Sanders himself has not made. And so Clinton enemies from bitter Sanders supporters to Donald J. Trump have joyfully cheered Warren’s statement. But in the same interview Warren also said something that is not drawing much attention, and it’s not about the retroactive argument over what happened in 2015 and 2016: “This is a test for Tom Perez,” Warren continued. “And either he’s going to succeed by bringing Bernie Sanders and Bernie Sanders’s representatives into the process, and they’re going to say it’s fair, it works, we all believe it, or he’s going to fail. And I very much hope he succeeds. I hope for Democrats everywhere. I hope for Bernie and all of Bernie’s supporters that he’s going to succeed. Warren is pretty clearly saying that Bernie Sanders and his supporters will be the arbiters of the party’s nominating process looking forward to 2020. That’s remarkable. It gives the Sanders “movement” a unique status in the party, more or less as compensation for the terrible wrong done to them in 2016. And Warren is also suggesting the unhappy afterlife of the Sanders/Clinton competition not only can but should continue until the People of the Bern are satisfied. It’s more than a little unclear how that’s supposed to happen. The fundraising and staffing arrangement that Donna Brazile has injected into the simmering discussion of the 2016 primaries, which is the proximate cause of the current controversy, obviously isn’t going to recur in 2020; whoever runs for president, no one is likely to be in the dominant position Hillary Clinton occupied in 2015. And a lot of the state party primary rules that were originally the basis for (frankly not very compelling) claims that Clinton stole the nomination from Sanders are set by state legislatures (a majority of which are controlled by Republicans), not Tom Perez or the DNC. So exactly what is it Perez is supposed to fix, and Sanders and “all of Bernie’s supporters” are supposed to bless? I can’t answer this question, or the related question: What is Elizabeth Warren thinking? Perhaps she misspoke or simple wanted to convey her anger at what Brazile had disclosed. But it sure looks like she’s designating Bernie Sanders as the leader of the Democratic Party for the time being, with the DNC functioning at his sufferance. It’s always possible she wants to run for president in 2020 and believes Sanders will not run; her new solidarity with the Sanders movement might be useful in that circumstance. But Warren really owes it to her party to be a peacemaker instead of an instigator when it comes to the chronic Democratic temptation to fight the last war. |
BREAKING: FBI and JTTF Raid Multiple Homes, Grand Jury Subpoenas in Portland, Olympia, Seattle As I’ve been reporting on Twitter, there have been multiple homes raided and grand jury subpoenas issued in Portland, Olympia, and Seattle. Three homes were raided in Portland, by approximately 60-80 police including FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force. Individuals at the homes say police used flash grenades during the raid. Grand jury subpoenas have been served to individuals in all three cities: 2 in Olympia, 1 in Seattle, and 2 in Portland. The grand jury is scheduled to convene on August 2nd at the federal courthouse in Seattle. No arrests have been made. Electronics were confiscated along with additional personal items. All legal documents related to the searches and grand jury are sealed, and the FBI will only say it is related to an “ongoing violent crime” investigation. But based on interviews with residents, and what police told them at the scene, this is clearly related to the ongoing demonization of anarchists and the Occupy movement. I’ll continue updating as this develops; please follow me on Twitter (@will_potter) for the latest. UPDATE: Here’s local press from the Oregonian. UPDATE: Reports of FBI and police lingering around after the raids, trying to get people to voluntarily talk. Know your rights, never talk to police without an attorney. @will_potter lawyer like person just came to my house with papers in hand. My house was not raided. They are still out front. — Ari P (@kvltcake) July 25, 2012 UPDATE: KGW news has photos of a raid. FBI agents dressed paramilitary. More photos on KGW. |
Thought identification refers to the empirically verified use of technology to, in some sense, read people's minds. Advances in research have made this possible by using human neuroimaging to decode a person's conscious experience based on non-invasive measurements of an individual's brain activity.[1] Professor of neuropsychology Barbara Sahakian qualifies, "A lot of neuroscientists in the field are very cautious and say we can't talk about reading individuals' minds, and right now that is very true, but we're moving ahead so rapidly, it's not going to be that long before we will be able to tell whether someone's making up a story, or whether someone intended to do a crime with a certain degree of certainty."[2] History [ edit ] MRI scanner that could be used for Thought Identification Psychologist John-Dylan Haynes experienced breakthroughs in brain imaging research in 2006 by using fMRI. This research included new findings on visual object recognition, tracking dynamic mental processes, lie detecting, and decoding unconscious processing. The combination of these four discoveries revealed such a significant amount of information about an individual's thoughts that Haynes termed it "brain reading".[1] The fMRI has allowed research to expand by significant amounts because it can track the activity in an individual's brain by measuring the brain's blood flow. It is currently thought to be the best method for measuring brain activity, which is why it has been used in multiple research experiments in order to improve the understanding of how doctors and psychologists can identify thoughts.[3] The term "thought identification" started being used in 2009 after neuroscientist Marcel Just coined it in a 60 Minutes interview. His reasoning for this term pertains to his overall goal of his research "to see if they could identify exactly what happens in the brain when people think specific thoughts".[4] Examples [ edit ] Identifying thoughts [ edit ] When humans think of an object, such as a screwdriver, many different areas of the brain activate When humans think of an object, such as a screwdriver, many different areas of the brain activate. Marcel Just and his colleague, Tom Mitchell, have used fMRI brain scans to teach a computer to identify the various parts of the brain associated with specific thoughts.[5] This technology also yielded a discovery: similar thoughts in different human brains are surprisingly similar neurologically. To illustrate this, Just and Mitchell used their computer to predict, based on nothing but fMRI data, which of several images a volunteer was thinking about. The computer was 100% accurate, but so far the machine is only distinguishing between 10 images.[5] John-Dylan Haynes states that fMRI can also be used to identify recognition in the brain. He provides the example of a criminal being interrogated about whether he recognizes the scene of the crime or murder weapons.[5] Just and Mitchell also claim they are beginning to be able to identify kindness, hypocrisy, and love in the brain.[5] In 2008 IBM applied for a patent on how to extract mental images of human faces from the human brain. It uses a feedback loop based on brain measurements of the fusiform gyrus area in the brain which activates proportionate with degree of facial recognition.[6] In 2011, a team led by Shinji Nishimoto used only brain recordings to partially reconstruct what volunteers were seeing. The researchers applied a new model, about how moving object information is processed in human brains, while volunteers watched clips from several videos. An algorithm searched through thousands of hours of external YouTube video footage (none of the videos were the same as the ones the volunteers watched) to select the clips that were most similar.[7][8] The authors have uploaded demos comparing the watched and the computer-estimated videos.[9] Predicting intentions [ edit ] Some researchers in 2008 were able to predict, with 60% accuracy, whether a subject was going to push a button with their left or right hand. This is notable, not just because the accuracy is better than chance, but also because the scientists were able to make these predictions up to 10 seconds before the subject acted – well before the subject felt they had decided.[10] This data is even more striking in light of other research suggesting that the decision to move, and possibly the ability to cancel that movement at the last second,[11] may be the results of unconscious processing.[12] John Dylan-Haynes has also demonstrated that fMRI can be used to identify whether a volunteer is about to add or subtract two numbers in their head.[5] Reading thoughts before they are voiced [ edit ] December 16, 2015, a study conducted by Toshimasa Yamazaki at Kyushu Institute of Technology found that during a rock-paper-scissors game a computer was able to determine the choice made by the subjects before they moved their hand. An EEG was used to measure activity in the Broca's area to see the words two seconds before the words were uttered.[13][14][15] Brain as input device [ edit ] The Emotiv Epoc is one way that users can give commands to devices using only thoughts Emotiv Systems, an Australian electronics company, has demonstrated a headset that can be trained to recognize a user's thought patterns for different commands. Tan Le demonstrated the headset's ability to manipulate virtual objects on screen, and discussed various future applications for such brain-computer interface devices, from powering wheel chairs to replacing the mouse and keyboard.[16] Decoding brain activity to reconstruct words [ edit ] On 31 January 2012 Brian Pasley and colleagues of University of California Berkeley published their paper in PLoS Biology wherein subjects' internal neural processing of auditory information was decoded and reconstructed as sound on computer by gathering and analyzing electrical signals directly from subjects' brains.[17] The research team conducted their studies on the superior temporal gyrus, a region of the brain that is involved in higher order neural processing to make semantic sense from auditory information.[18] The research team used a computer model to analyze various parts of the brain that might be involved in neural firing while processing auditory signals. Using the computational model, scientists were able to identify the brain activity involved in processing auditory information when subjects were presented with recording of individual words.[19] Later, the computer model of auditory information processing was used to reconstruct some of the words back into sound based on the neural processing of the subjects. However the reconstructed sounds were not of good quality and could be recognized only when the audio wave patterns of the reconstructed sound were visually matched with the audio wave patterns of the original sound that was presented to the subjects.[19] However this research marks a direction towards more precise identification of neural activity in cognition. Recognizing brain waves in security [ edit ] In 2013 a project led by University of California Berkeley professor John Chuang published findings on the feasibility of brainwave-based computer authentication as a substitute for passwords. Improvements in the use of biometrics for computer authentication has continually improved since the 1980s, but this research team was looking for a method faster and less intrusive than today's retina scans, fingerprinting, and voice recognition. The technology chosen to improve security measures is an electroencephalogram (EEG), or brainwave measurer, to improve passwords into "pass thoughts." Using this method Chuang and his team were able to customize tasks and their authentication thresholds to the point where they were able to reduce error rates under 1%, significantly better than other recent methods. In order to better attract users to this new form of security the team is still researching mental tasks that are enjoyable for the user to perform while having their brainwaves identified. In the future this method could be as cheap, accessible, and straightforward as thought itself.[20] Ethical issues [ edit ] With brain scanning technology becoming increasingly accurate, experts predict important debates over how and when it should be used. One potential area of application is criminal law. Haynes states that simply refusing to use brain scans on suspects also prevents the wrongly accused from proving their innocence.[2] It has been argued that allowing brain scans in the United States would violate the 5th Amendment's right to not self incriminate. One of thousands of important questions is whether brain imaging is like testimony, or instead like DNA, blood, or semen. Paul Root Wolpe, director of the Center for Ethics at Emory University in Atlanta predicts that this question will be decided by a Supreme Court case.[4] In other countries outside the United States, thought Identification has already been used in criminal law. In 2008 an Indian woman was convicted of murder after an EEG of her brain allegedly revealed that she was familiar with the circumstances surrounding the poisoning of her ex-fiancé.[4] Some neuroscientists and legal scholars doubt the validity of using thought identification as a whole for anything past research on the nature of deception and the brain.[21] Future research [ edit ] Experts are unsure of how far thought identification can expand, but Marcel Just believed in 2014 that in 3–5 years there will be a machine that is able to read complex thoughts such as 'I hate so-and-so'.[4] Donald Marks, founder and chief science officer of MMT, is working on playing back thoughts individuals have after they have already been recorded.[22] Researchers at the University of California Berkeley have already been successful in forming, erasing, and reactivating memories in rats. Marks says they are working on applying the same techniques to humans. This discovery could be monumental for war veterans who suffer from PTSD.[22] Further research is also being done in analyzing brain activity during video games to detect criminals, neuromarketing, and using brain scans in government security checks.[3][4] See also [ edit ] |
BY: Follow @MaryLouByrd12 The Wichita State University student government has refused to recognize a libertarian group on campus because of its First Amendment principles, and a nonprofit group that defends freedom of speech and academic freedom on campuses is asking the university president to reverse their decision. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education in a letter on Friday to Wichita State President John Bardo demanded he immediately reverse the student government's decision. The letter also asked Bardo to instruct the student government that it cannot discriminate against prospective student groups based on their own viewpoints. "The Wichita State student government is engaged in a full-frontal assault on the First Amendment: It unconstitutionally denied a student group official recognition because, ironically, the student group supports the right of freedom of speech," said Ari Cohn, director of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program, in a prepared statement. "The Wichita State administration cannot give its student government authority to grant or deny recognition to student groups and then stand idly by when that authority is exercised in a viewpoint discriminatory manner," said Cohn, adding that the university must reverse the student government's "unconstitutional actions." The student government questioned student Maria Church about her application to form a campus chapter of the Young Americans for Liberty on April 5. They also asked her about the group's political positions, the issues it will address, and even the group's views on the First Amendment. Church was asked about her position on "safe spaces", YAL's position on "hate speech", and YAL's opposition to "free speech zones." Several senators were against officially recognizing YAL because other chapters of the group have invited speakers such as former Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulous to speak on campus. "We've seen very dangerous statements being said in the name of free speech," said one senator. Another said, "if you want to talk about having free speech, [YAL's] definition of free speech is highly skewed, based on the empirics of this. After debating YAL's application, the student government voted against recognizing the libertarian group. According to FIRE, their decision is directly in conflict with longstanding First Amendment jurisprudence. In Healy v. James (1972), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a public college may not deny recognition of a student group "simply because it finds the views expressed by any group to be abhorrent." Church was discouraged by the student government's decision and claimed they are attacking and silencing students they claim they stand for. "It is discouraging to see elected student officials opposing the free speech of those who disagree with their political agendas," said Church in a prepared statement. "While they claim to stand for diversity and acceptance, they are attacking one of the most diverse groups on campus. The student senate is effectively silencing the very people they're claiming to stand up for." |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.