Datasets:

harsharora

/

Rp_CommonC_207

like 0

__label__wiki

Will GordonWill Gordon Julia Michaels Defends Selena Gomez’s Songwriting Skills Emma McIntyre, Getty Images Julia Michaels came to Selena Gomez's defense after someone shaded her songwriting abilities. It's recently been confirmed the 27-year-old pop star is gearing up to release new music four years after dropping her chart-topping album Revival. She also announced she'll be releasing the single "Lose You to Love Me" on (October 23). Days later, rumored started to circulate that Michaels co-wrote the track with Gomez and that songwriter Justin Tranter and Billie Eilish's brother (and producer) Finneas were involved as well. However, ahead of the song's release, Twitter trolls accused Gomez of not writing her own songs so Michaels stepped in to set the record straight. "I can actually 100% say that selena is VERY much a songwriter," she wrote. "Coming from someone that has written with her multiple times. Please don’t comment on things you know nothing about. It’s extremely rude. Michaels has co-written a number of hit songs with Gomez, including "Good for You," "Hands to Myself" and "Bad Liar." They also collaborated on the track "Anxiety." At the time, Gomez thanked Michaels for letting her be a part of the song: “My sweet soul sister. Julia you have been a huge part of my life," she wrote. "You have taught me how to have courage when I have self-doubt. This song is extremely close to my heart as I’ve experienced anxiety and know a lot of my friends do too. You’re never alone if you feel this way. The message is much needed and I really hope you guys like it!” Michaels is currently on tour performing shows in cities across the U.S., Canada and Mexico. You can get tickets and all the information you need about upcoming concerts here. Selena Gomez's Best Red Carpet Photos Source: Julia Michaels Defends Selena Gomez’s Songwriting Skills Filed Under: selena gomez Lumberjaxe Throwing Co Opening Location in Bozeman

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511803

__label__cc

Office Contact: Alfonso Smith Coop. Virg. Chorrera 0843-00642 Email: panama@vgroffice.org Country Demographics Spanish (official), English 14%; many Panamanians are bilingual Roman Catholic 85%, Protestant 15% Life Expectancy: GDP per-capita: The southernmost country of Central America. Situated on an isthmus, some categorize it as a transcontinental nation connecting the north and south parts of America. A nearly impenetrable jungle forms the Darien Gap between Panama and Colombia. It creates a break in the Pan-American Highway, which otherwise forms a complete road from Alaska to Patagonia. Home to the Panama Canal, which links the North Atlantic Ocean via the Caribbean Sea with the North Pacific Ocean. Central America, bordering both the Caribbean Sea and the North Pacific Ocean, between Colombia and Costa Rica Manager History: We felt the need for an office in Panama for many years, but the Lord knew the time and person to help us. Brother Alfonso who works full time for the Panama Highway department he is responsible for the highway safety of the main road from Panama City north for over 200 miles. On the weekends he visits the Indians in the high wilderness area, and he also visits the churches to make sure they have enough material for the people.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511805

__label__wiki

Revisiting George Strait’s Film Debut, ‘Pure Country’ Posted byal walker January 12, 2020 January 12, 2020 Leave a comment on Revisiting George Strait’s Film Debut, ‘Pure Country’ Pure Country arrived in theaters on Oct. 23, 1992. It starred established country superstar George Strait as Wyatt “Dusty” Chandler; a singer overwhelmed by the surging popularity of country music. With a country music-dominated Super Bowl halftime show just a few months away and American culture’s love for cowboy hats and line dancers on the rise, the film’s themes of moving forward creatively without selling out made sense as Strait’s peers went uptown. Over 25 years later, the film seems more like a straight-to-cable guilty pleasure than something that played on the big screen. Still, it’s not without its charm or its place in Strait’s legacy, as established by these talking points. Predictable Yet Earnest If you’re a sucker for Hallmark movies, you’ll see every plot twist and love story trope from a country mile away. In a story very similar to John Mellencamp’s 1992 film Falling From Grace, Dusty Chandler maneuvers stardom as a wide-eyed country boy. When the bright lights and thick fog of an early ’90s country stage show become too much, Chandler runs away from the spotlight, finding both his true self and his true love (Harley, played by Isabel Glasser). The only food for thought to be found comes after Chandler’s manager (Lula, portrayed by Lesley Ann Warren) reacts to his departure by coldly putting an impostor on stage. It’s as if someone involved in this project might’ve felt that the Nashville machine swapped country singers in tight britches and cowboy hats on a dime when necessary. Plus, with crowds in stadiums so far away from the singers and the occasional case of a big name lip-syncer, it’s believable that this stunt might’ve worked in real life. Otherwise, the story reeks of sweet sentimentality. Of course, Strait appeals to sweet and sentimental folks, so it’s no surprise that many of his fans prefer kicking back and enjoying a fun movie to nitpicking plot limitations. Unsung Musical Guest Star John Doe Chandler’s best pal and drummer Earl is played by punk and roots rocker John Doe. As a singer and bassist in the band X, Doe played a major role in early West Coast punk rock. The interest that scene drummed up in outside-the-box live music created avenues for Dwight Yoakam and others to be themselves out West without scaring off mainstream tastemakers. From X’s country music side project the Knitters to Doe’s Americana-influenced solo material, the punk legend knows his stuff when it comes to the Western roots of California’s country and folk legacy, making him a better musical match for Strait than some might assume. Hardly a Critic’s Choice Critics had little choice than to pan the film’s feel-good if not predictable storyline. The handsome singer-turned-actor lead’s encounters with shady business dealings and an eligible bachelorette drew unflattering comparisons to the cheesy films of Elvis Presley. Overall, the film nets a lousy 38 percent on Rotten Tomatoes due to numerous negative reviews. For the most part, critics hammer the script instead of the star. Be it an understanding of the challenges faced by a first-time actor or a undeniable show of promise, many of those same negative reviewers see Strait’s involvement as the film’s silver lining. “If Strait weren’t so appealing, the movie would be easier to dismiss,” wrote Baltimore Sun film critic Stephen Hunter. “Let’s hope it does well enough to give him a second shot and that maybe he can find something a little bit less Las Vegas and a little bit more East Texas.” Even if the film wasn’t high art in the eyes of many would-be Siskels and Eberts, Strait’s fans still don’t seem to mind. Its fan rating on Rotten Tomatoes is a hefty 91 percent. Strait’s Best-Selling Album While the film made just $15 million at the box office against its $10 million budget, the soundtrack was a smash success. With over six million copies sold, it’s Strait’s best-selling non-compilation album. Its 11 tracks make up one of Strait’s strongest releases, anchored by “Overnight Male,” “Last in Love,” “Baby Your Baby,” “The King of Broken Hearts,” “Where the Sidewalk Ends,” “I Cross My Heart” and “When Did You Stop Loving Me.” The list of co-writers represented is staggering, including legendary television and film composer Steve Dorff, Americana legend Jim Lauderdale, country legend Mel Tillis to the Eagles founder Glenn Frey. If the film was seen at any point as a means for Warner Bros. to sell albums, then it surely surpassed any goals. This post was originally published on February 16, 2018. Now Watch: 10 Things You Didn’t Know About George Strait The post Revisiting George Strait’s Film Debut, ‘Pure Country’ appeared first on Wide Open Country. Posted byal walker January 12, 2020 January 12, 2020 Posted inArticlesTags: george strait, pure country ‘Booksmart’ Stars Win Big at Hollywood Critics Association Awards 2020! Meghan ‘sparked row between Prince Harry and David Beckham’ | Daily Mail Online 'Joker' tops nominations for British Academy film awards | CANVAS Arts WORST OF THE DECADE: Celebrity Freak-Outs! 'This Is Us (Original Score),' Featuring Siddhartha Khosla's Original Compositions from NBC Hit Show, Released Today by UMe

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511808

__label__cc

What AI researchers can learn from children’s learning Intrinsic motivation as a key ingredient in human and artificial intelligence Andy Kelly, Unsplash by Catherine Hartley In recent years, artificial agents have achieved superhuman levels of performance in complex games such as Go, poker, and Atari Arcade Classics. Underlying each of these artificial intelligence (AI) success stories is an algorithm called “deep reinforcement learning”, which combines neural network modeling with a process for learning from reward and punishment. In these games, rewards are baked into the environment: The artificial agents receive rewards when they win a hand, gain points, or advance to a subsequent round. In contrast, humans in the real world learn to solve problems in complex environments even in the absence of such extrinsic rewards. How might AI agents demonstrate intelligent behavior in contexts in which these rewards are absent? “How might AI agents demonstrate intelligent behavior in contexts in which extrinsic rewards are absent?” Insights from developmental science into how children learn may be key to building general purpose AI agents that can learn in the absence of explicit rewards. Developmental psychologists have proposed that human learning is scaffolded by intrinsic motivations. Intrinsic motivation refers to the impetus to do something because it is inherently rewarding. Curiosity and agency — drives to understand and influence one’s environment — are two such intrinsic motivations that have been proposed to guide children’s play and exploration and speed their learning. Recent advances in AI suggest that similar intrinsic motivations might also promote machine learning — when the drives to predict and control the environment are incorporated into the algorithms that govern the behavior of artificial agents, they learn faster and can solve a broader range of problems. “Beyond being motivated to understand their environments, children may also be motivated to control them by learning about when and how their actions can influence future events or outcomes.” What are children motivated to play with and explore in the lab and in the real world? Many laboratory studies suggest that children direct their exploration toward parts of the environment about which they are most uncertain. But uncertainty-directed exploration can fail in real-world contexts, because some aspects of our world will always be impossible to predict. For example, a robot programmed to explore the most uncertain parts of their environment might become stuck watching the static on a broken television, transfixed by a series of patterns that will always remain unpredictable and surprising. Human children don’t get stuck in this way, but instead, appear to preferentially engage with stimuli that are at an intermediate level of complexity — not entirely predictable, but still learnable. AI researchers have similarly found that by rewarding progress in learning, AI agents can learn to efficiently direct their exploration to the parts of the environment where they are able to reduce their uncertainty the most. “Intrinsic motivations such as curiosity and a drive toward agency that can be readily observed in children’s play and learning are also critical component processes for developing intelligence in artificial agents.” Beyond being motivated to understand their environments, children may also be motivated to control them by learning about when and how their actions can influence future events or outcomes. Infants or young children at play commonly engage in behaviors that may seem largely without purpose — sticking fingers or toes in their mouths, banging objects against a table, or stacking and knocking down blocks. However, through such play, infants learn contingencies between their actions and changes in what they see, hear, or feel. Laboratory studies suggest that infants and children prefer situations in which outcomes are contingent on their own actions. Being drawn to contexts in which one can exert control in turn provides a scaffolding for causal learning and planning, cognitive processes that are critical for goal-directed behavior. Likewise, artificial agents that are programmed to seek out high levels of “empowerment”, a metric of how much an agent can reliably and perceptibly influence their current environment, learn to solve complex tasks faster. These findings suggest that intrinsic motivations such as curiosity and a drive toward agency that can be readily observed in children’s play and learning are also critical component processes for developing intelligence in artificial agents. Beyond intrinsic motivation, building into artificial agents other features of children’s cognitive development, like the reactivation of prior experiences during sleep, the flexible use of different learning strategies, and the ability to monitor and infer the goals and intentions of others, may also promote the speed and flexibility of machine learning. “It may be that developmental science holds the key to the genesis of machine intelligence.” As so many of the algorithmic innovations that have yielded rapid advances in AI have strong parallels to processes that underpin the development of human learning, it may be that developmental science holds the key to the genesis of machine intelligence. Intrinsic Motivation Data Science newsletter – November 29, 2019 | Sports.BradStenger.com January 17 2020, 00:47 […] What AI researchers can learn from children’s learning […] Cognitive Artificial Intelligence: Building better machines (and babies!) by Moira R. Dillon / September 24, 2019 “Just being around peers seems to encourage curiosity” Interview by Sabine Gysi / December 15, 2017 How social robots can make children more curious by Goren Gordon / October 27, 2017

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511812

__label__cc

Friday Five- March 29,2019 Welcome to the Friday Five, where I talk about five things that caught my attention this week. 1) First up on the list, I like to listen to podcasts when I do my four mile beach walk when in Longboat Key. An NPR This American Life podcast from 2010 titled Petty Tyrant was riveting. It tells the story of the head of maintenance for the Schnectady, NY school district who terrorized the people who worked for him and how he got away with it for so long. It's a crazy story and you can find it here. 2) I volunteer at the Book Cellar, a used bookstore located in the basement of the Webster Library branch of the New York Public Library. (Our proceeds benefit branch libraries of the NYPL.) All of the items we sell are donated, and sometimes we find something really great. In one of our recent donations, we found a copy of Hamilton, the Revolution, a book about the phenomonal Broadway production. What made this so special is that is is signed by Liin-Manuel Miranda. A few weeks ago we discovered a signed copy of George W. Bush's book Portraits of Courage. We're on a roll! 3) I went to see a revival of Lanford Wilson's play Burn/This on Broadway. Keri Russell (whom I loved in TV's The Americans) and Brandon Uranowitz (whom I saw in An American In Paris and Falsettos on Broadway- he was wonderful in both) play NYC roommates whose third roommate died in a boating accident. When the dead man's larger-than-life brother barrels his way into their apartment, he causes problems when he won't go away. Adam Driver (nominated for an Academy Award this year for Blackk Klansman) plays the brother and he will probably get a Tony nomination. He was astounding, playing all shades of a very complex character. It's only on Broadway through July, you can find more info here. 4) Season two of Good Girls (Monday at 10pm on NBC) is so addictive. Christina Hendricks (Mad Men), Mae Whitman (Parenthood) and Retta (Parks & Recreation) play three Detroit suburban women who rob a grocery store out of desperation, only to find that the store was laundering money for a group of thugs. They get themselves in deep in season one, and in season two each episode just gets more and more tense. My stomach is in knots (in a good way!) the entire time I watch it. Retta plays a mom who used the money to pay for her young daughter's kidney transplant and she just breaks my heart as she struggles with the morality of her actions. If you liked Breaking Bad, give this one a try here. 5) I read two wonderful books this week- Elinor Lipman's Good Riddance is about a young woman who throws her mother's yearbook away in the recycling bin and what happens when her neighbor picks it up and creates a podcast out of it. It's funny and clever and pure Lipman. I also read Helen Ellis' book of essays Southern Lady Code, about her adventures living in NYC (in my neighborhood). Helen is from Alabama, and she recounts the words of wisdom her mother gives her about things a southern lady says and does. I loved Helen's last book, a short story collection titled American Housewife that is demented and delightful, and Southern Lady Code lives up to that one in laughter. (Full reviews on both to follow.) What did you do this week? Let me know in comments. Labels: Broadway, Burn This, Elinor Lippman, Friday Five, Good Girls, Good Riddance, Hamilton, Helen Ellis, NPR, Retta, Southern Lady Code, This American Life Two Novels by Wonderful Writers Reprinted from the Citizen: March is set aside to celebrate Women’s History Month, and in that spirit, this month’s Book Report will feature novels written by women and set in different time periods. Elizabeth McCracken’s “Bowlaway” begins at the turn of the 20th century in small New England town of Salford, Massachusetts. A woman named Bertha Truitt is found unconscious in the town cemetery with a bowling ball, a candlepin and some gold bars on her person. The entire town is curious as to where Bertha came from, but she either doesn’t know or won’t tell. She marries an African-American doctor, Leviticus Sprague, and opens a candlepin bowling alley in the town. (Apparently, this was a very New England activity.) She hires two men, Joe and Jeptha, who are considered outcasts in the town. They are fiercely loyal to Bertha, and even when Bertha encourages the town’s women to bowl at the alley, people come to accept this unusual woman and her ways. Bertha and Leviticus have a baby girl whom they dote on. When Bertha dies in a bizarre accident, Leviticus falls apart and sends the young child away to live with his family. Soon, a man named Nahum shows up claiming to be Bertha’s son from a previous marriage and wants to claim the bowling alley as his inheritance. This intense story weaves its way through the years. We follow the large cast of characters throughout their lives, all revolving around the bowling alley. McCracken writes the novel with some magical elements within it, and it is a unique story, but she is such an amazing storyteller the reader becomes captivated by it. Her characters and their journeys are fascinating and heartbreaking. We see how the past influences the present, and how secrets and choices can have such lasting consequences. McCracken’s writing is just stunning and lovely, and this book has received much critical praise. “Bowlaway” is not for everyone, but if you are looking for a big, sprawling story set in a small bowling alley with characters who are unforgettable, definitely give it a try. McCracken’s previous book, “The Giant’s House,” also featured characters that are outside the societal norms, and is just as wonderful. Taylor Jenkins Reid’s last book, “The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo,” (my review here) featured an Elizabeth Taylor-like movie star, and her story as told by a young journalist who has been chosen by Hugo to write her biography. It was fabulous and garnered much critical praise. Her latest novel, “Daisy Jones & the Six,” is about a 1970s rock band, similar to Fleetwood Mac, who have a meteoric rise and fall after releasing a monster-sized hit album. This story also involves a journalist who writes this book as a series of interviews with members of the band, their producers, friends and others. Billy Dunne begins a rock band with his brother Graham in their hometown of Pittsburgh. They eventually end up in Los Angeles, where they begin to have some success. Billy writes most of the songs and wants to be the one with final say on everything, something that rankles others in the band (now called The Six), including Graham. Daisy Jones is gorgeous and a terrific singer. She signs with The Six’s record company and struggles with the fact that she wants to record the songs she has written, but the record producers want her to sing something else. Daisy also drinks too much and ingests too many drugs, and she has no one looking out for her, save her friend Simone (a Donna Summer-like singer). The record company has Daisy sing a duet with Billy, and the song becomes a huge hit. Soon, Daisy joins the band and they become known as Daisy Jones & the Six, which angers Billy. The band tours arenas throughout the U.S. and Europe, and we see their love affairs, shifting alliances and fights as they become one of the biggest bands in the world. Through the interviews we see how everyone feels throughout this, including Billy’s alcoholism and struggle to stay sober and faithful to his wife, Daisy’s drug use and many men, and the other band members' frustration at being left out of the creative process. It’s interesting to see everyone’s perspective on events, such as their first big album cover photo shoot. If you have a worn-out copy of Fleetwood Mac’s famous album “Rumours” in a closet at home, “Daisy Jones & the Six” is for you. If you read BOOK: “Bowlaway” by Elizabeth McCracken COST: Hardcover, $27.99 BOOK: “Daisy Jones & the Six” COST: Hardcover, $27 Subscribe to Breaking News Diane La Rue is a member of the National Book Critics Circle and blogs about books at http://bookchickdi.blogspot.com. You can follow her on Twitter @bookchickdi, and she can be emailed at laruediane2000@yahoo.com. Labels: book reviews, Bowlaway, Daisy Jones and the Six, Ecco, Elizabeth McCracken, fiction, literary fiction, Penguin Random House, Taylor Jenkins Reid, the Citizen Friday Five-March 22,2019- Florida Edition This week's Friday Five comes to you from Longboat Key, Florida where we have been for the past week. Between the rainy cold first few days and the beautiful warm sunshine of the past three days, I have gotten in a lot of reading and catching up on Netflix and Hulu. 1) I read two big books- big in scope and page numbers. The first was Kate Quinn's The Huntress. I received an ARC at the Book Club Girls' Night Out at Harper Collins last summer, where I listened to Kate and Jennifer Robson (The Gown) talk about their books. If you read Quinn's The Alice Network you will love The Huntress. It tells the story of female Russian fighter pilots in WWII, and the hunt for a female Nazi who assassinated innocent Polish children during the war. It's brilliant and you will find yourself holding your breath as you read certain passages. (Full review to come) 2) The second big book I read was Jennifer Weiner's upcoming June novel Mrs. Everything, which tells the life story of two sisters from the 1950s to the current day. Beth is the pretty one who works hard to be the good girl, and Jo is her older sister who tries to fit the mold of what a good girl should be but just can't do it. We follow their lives through college, careers, marriage and relationships. It reminded me so much of Irwin Shaw's Rich Man, Poor Man, which I loved in high school. It's Weiner's best book yet. (Full review to come) 3) Tuesday was a rainy day all day, so I caught up on some Netflix, Amazon and Hulu series. I finished season 5 of Netflix's Grace and Frankie, starring the incomparable Jane Fond and Lily Tomlin. I have to say that this season didn't grab me as much as the previous ones, but it's still a shining star. I started and finished the fourth and final season of Catastrophe on Amazon Prime, created by and starring Sharon Horgan and Rob Delaney. It was a fitting end to this fantastic series, and I especially loved the sendoff they gave to Carrie Fisher, who played Rob's mom and passed away before the final season. I also started and finished the first season of Shrill on Hulu, starring Aidy Bryant from SNL. I love that Julia Sweeney and Daniel Stern play Aidy's parents, and Aidy is fabulous at playing such a complex character who doesn't always do the right thing. 4) I read two shorter books- Susan Silver's memoir Hot Pants in Hollywood- Sex, Secrets & Sitcoms and Laura Pedersen's Life in New York. I would have enjoyed Silver's book if it focused more on her experiences writing for sitcoms and less on her sex life. I really liked Pedersen's book. I loved her book Buffalo Gal about growing up in Buffalo in the 70s (as will anyone who grew up in the snowbelt), and this book had me laughing almost as much. 5) I watched the Paley Fest live stream of one of my all-time favorite sitcoms, Parks and Recreation or Parks and Rec as the cool kids call it. Patton Oswalt moderated the panel with all of the stars of the show, (Amy Poehler, Adam Scott, Rashida Jones, Nick Offerman, creator Michael Schur, etc.) It was an hour of pure joy, and watching Aziz Ansari crack up at everything Chris Pratt said was priceless. It was definitely worth the $7.99 price to watch it. Credit- Getty Photos I'm almost done soaking up the sun and it's nearly time to head back to NYC and reality. What did you do this week? Hit me up in Comments. Labels: Amazon Prime, Catastrophe, Friday Five, Grace and Frankie, Hulu, Jennifer Weiner, Kate Quinn, Mrs. Everything, Netflix, Parks and Rec, Shrill, The Huntress How to Know the Birds by Ted Floyd Published by National Geographic ISBN 9781426220036 Although the beautiful cover of Birding magazine editor Ted Floyd's How to Know the Birds may lead you to believe that this will be your typical book about birds, you would be wrong. Many bird books are field guides, with page after page of color photos or drawings of birds, along with short descriptions of what the bird look like and where you find them. Floyd's book is different. He begins by describing the history of birding, referencing the seminal books in the field. It was a quiet, gentle, often solitary study by people with sketchpads, pencils, binoculars and notebooks. Then he takes us into the present, where birding has evolved like most things- people use their smartphones to take photos to upload to numerous Facebook pages devoted to birding. There are apps to help birders organize and connect with other birders. It is much more immediate and social. Floyd introduces us to 200 bird species, each one getting a page but not necessarily a drawing. (There are a small number of beautiful pencil drawings by N. John Schmitt that accompany some of the text.) The contents are divided into six sections, organized by the calendar year, beginning with Spark Bird, which covers January-February. He discusses the birds you will likely find during those months in North America, gives the common name for the bird, such as American Robin, then its scientific name Turdus migratorius, which always capitalizes the first letter of the first name and the second name always begins with a smaller case letter. He gives you a short description of the bird, and interesting fact about the bird that is the title of the page. For the essay titled He Says, She Says, we learn about the Great Horned Owl and the difference between the sounds the male and female makes. In The Upside of Human-Modified Landscapes, he talks about the Canada Goose and how these geese have evolved to "flourish in human-dominated landscapes" living near high-rise office buildings, on golf courses and wreaking havoc near airports. Floyd sprinkles in pop culture references, talking about the movie On Golden Pond in the essay about the Common Loon, or comparing a Star Trek TV series scene to a large nest which holds a tiny Bushtit. He of course mentions the Jack Black/Steve Martin movie The Big Year, perhaps the only movie about birding ever made. The book ends with a helpful checklist of all the birds described by species. How to Know the Birds is really written for the person who enjoys birding as a serious hobby more than for a person looking to get into birding. It would make a wonderful gift for your favorite birder, maybe in an Easter basket. Thanks to TLC Tours for putting me on Ted Floyd's tour. The rest of his stops are here: Tuesday, March 12th: Just a Secular Homeschooler Wednesday, March 13th: Man of La Book Monday, March 18th: Mockingbird Hill Cottage Tuesday, March 19th: Doing Dewey Wednesday, March 20th: Broken Teepee Thursday, March 21st: bookchickdi Monday, March 25th: The Birders Library Tuesday, March 26th: Instagram: @dropandgivemenerdy Wednesday, March 27th: Instagram: @bookishinmpls Thursday, March 28th: View from the Birdhouse Friday, March 29th: Based on a True Story Monday, April 1st: Pure Florida Date TBD: 10000 Birds Date TBD: The Birdist Date TBD: Jathan & Heather Posted by (Diane) bookchickdi at 6:00 AM 1 comment: Labels: book review, How to Know the Birds, National Geographic, non-fiction, ted Floyd, TLC Tours Friday Five- March 15, 2019 Edition A few years ago I started a weekly post called the Friday Five, about five things that I found interesting that week. I'm going to revive this and try to be really diligent about posting, so here goes Friday Five 2.0 1) I first discovered Paula Pell at the Saturday Night Live exhibit in NYC. They did a video interview with former head writers and she was in it. I found her so interesting, and didn't really hear too much about her until I watched the NBC sitcom A.P. Bio. She plays the school secretary and she is hilarious, especially in her scenes with Patton Oswalt, who plays the principal. Then I saw her on IFC's Documentary Now! in the episode that spoofs the famous documentary about the Broadway show Company. Pell takes on the Elaine Stritch role and she is nothing short of phenomenal. Watch part of it here: 2) Speaking of TV comedies, I'm addicted to Brooklyn Nine-Nine on NBC. It's made by Dan Goor and Michael Schur, who did one of my all-time favorites Parks & Rec. I have no idea why it took me so long to find this, but I have four seasons to catch up on. 3) I've seen some terrific Facebook Lives, all having to do with books. Author Adriana Trigiani has been doing them weekly, and it's like chatting with a good friend. She has some exciting movie news on this week's episode. If you like her books, check her Facebook page for these fun visits. You can see it here. I also watched two other recent Facebook Lives- Harper Book Studio 16 talk on Historical Fiction with author Lauren Willig and editor Rachel Kahan was the first one. They mentioned so many of my favorite books- The Thorn Birds and Gone With The Wind. You can see it here. The last one I watched was a Library Love Fest interview with actress Kate Mulgrew, who many know from Ryan's Hope, Star Trek Voyager and Orange is the New Black. She wrote a book called How to Forget about her parents. If it's half as good as her memoir Born with Teeth, it will be fantastic. I saw her speak about that book a few years ago at Barnes & Noble in Union Square, my post about that is here. The Facebook Live video is here. 4) As I've mentioned before, I volunteer at the Book Cellar, a used book store located in the Webster Library branch of the New York Public Library. All of the staff are volunteers, all of our books are donated, and our profits benefit the local branch libraries of the NYPL. People are very generous to us, we get some wonderful books, including rare and new books. This week we got an exciting book- an inscribed copy of Hamilton- the Revolution about the smash Broadway musical. The book is signed by Lin-Manuel Miranda, and I was so happy when I saw that signature. This is a big find for us. 5) Author Laura Lippman is trying to encourage people to read 100 pages daily for her #AlwaysForPleasure Twitter reading challenge during this Lenten season (although there is no correlation). I decided to follow her example and I finished two books- Jacqueline Winspear's 15th Maisie Dobbs book, The American Agent (which is one of her best!) and Jennifer Robson's historical novel about the women who made Queen Elizabeth's wedding dress, The Gown, which I also liked. I'm in the middle of two other books, Jennifer Weiner's Mrs. Everything and Kate Quinn's follow-up to her hit The Alice Network, titled The Huntress. I saw Jennifer Robson and Kate Quinn at HarperCollins' Book Club Girls' Night Out last year, where they talked about their books. That post is here. Whew, this is a long post. Most of the Friday Fives won't be this long, I promise. Let me know what you've found interesting this week in the Comments section. Have a great weekend! Labels: Adriana Trigiani, AP Bio, Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Friday Five, Jennifer Robson, Jennifer Weiner, Kate Mulgrew, Kate Quinn, Lauren Willig, Paula Pell The Gown by Jennifer Robson Published by William Morrow 9780062674951 If you were one of the many people who arose at a very early hour in the morning last year to watch Meghan Markle marry Prince Harry and were wowed by Meghan's stunning wedding dress, then Jennifer Robson's dual timeline novel The Gown is perfect for you. It begins in 2016 as Heather receives a phone call from her mother that Heather's beloved grandmother Ann has passed away. Among her belongings was a box with a label that read "For Heather". Inside were some beautiful embroidered applique flowers. Heather did a liitle online research and found that the designs matched the embroidery on Queen Elizabeth's wedding gown from 1947. When Heather loses her journalism job in Toronto, she plans a trip to London to learn more about her grandmother. In 1947, Ann Hughes works as an embroiderer for the esteemed London dressmaker Mr. Hartnell. She enjoys her job, but times were difficult in post-war London. Rationing of food was still going on, and Ann lived with her widowed sister-in-law Milly to make ends meet. When Milly moves to Canada to be with her family, Ann takes on a new roommate. Miriam Dassin is a French refugee who shows up at Hartnell's looking for work. She and Ann become coworkers, friends, and roommates, even though Miriam is closemouthed about her life during the war. The news that Princess Elizabeth will marry brought great joy to England, and when Mr. Hartnell is picked to design and make her wedding dress, Ann and Miriam are chosen to embroider the dress. While everyone is excited about this, they must be cautious- there are newspapers who have a put a bounty out for any information about the dress. (In case you thought that paparazzi are bad today, there were many pre-TMZ organizations back then as well who used lowdown tactics to get information.) When Ann is swept off her feet by a handsome man she meets at a dance, she can hardly believe her luck. He takes her to nice restaurants and makes her feel so very special. Miriam too meets a wonderful man, an editor for a local newspaper. But both women remain on their guard, knowing that people want information on the gown. The Gown is treasure trove for those who love fashion. There are so many wonderful scenes set in Hartnell's, where the ladies work hard to create the gown that the whole world will see. Robson also gives the reader a look at post-WWII London, which still reels from the bombings and losses sustained. I loved reading about Ann and Miriam's quiet evenings at home, listening to the radio and drawing in their sketchbooks, and Miriam's delight at finding a French grocer, where she purchased green olives, prunes, fennel seed and dried orange zest to make her grandmother's chicken dish. When Milly sends Ann a huge care package from Canada, the ladies are overwhelmed with her generosity: "There were tins of corned beef, salmon, evaporated milk, and peaches in syrup. Dried apricots and raisins. A big jar of strawberry jam. Packets of powdered milk, cocoa, tea, sugar and rice. Yards of heavy woolen suiting, finely woven tartan, and bolts of silky printed rayon, one of pale blue and the other a smoky purple, all with thread and buttons to match." Heather eventually gets some answers about her grandmother's life before she moved to Canada and why she hid her involvement in creating Princess Elizabeth's gown (which you see on the cover of the book). I enjoyed reading The Gown, for the setting and the story of female friendship between Ann and Miriam. I read it in just two days, completely absorbed in the story, and I highly recommend it for anyone who likes books set in WWII. Last summer Jennifer Robson appeared at Book Club Girls' Night Out with Kate Quinn and she spoke about writing The Gown. My post about that is here. Labels: book review, Jennifer Robson, The Gown, William Morrow Paperbacks, women's fiction Daisy Jones & the Six by Taylor Jenkins Reid Published by Random House ISBN 9781524798622 Last year I read Taylor Jenkins Reid's wonderful novel, The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo and loved it. Her take on an Elizabeth Taylor-like character was so engrossing, I couldn't put it down. So when I heard that her new novel Daisy Jones & the Six was publishing, I put it on the top of my To Be Read list. Daisy Jones & the Six is a take on a Fleetwood Mac-like band. It is written as a series of interviews with the band members, producers, friends and others, so you get everybody's point of view to the meteoric rise and fall of a rock band. Daisy Jones wanted to be known as a singer-songwriter, and with her gorgeous look and voice, she quickly garnered attention of men. She also used and abused drugs and alcohol and looked for love in the wrong places. Billy Dunne started a band called The Six with his brother Graham in their Pittsburgh hometown and build a solid following, eventually signing with a record company. He fell in love with Camilla, and even through the physical separations of him on tour and with his alcoholism, they managed to marry and start a family. When the record company had Daisy sing a song with The Six, it was lightning in a bottle. Daisy joined the band and wanted to contribute her own songs to the band, something that the controlling Billy wanted no part of. But when their album becomes a monster hit and they have a sold-out arena tour, there is no going back, through the love affairs, breakups and band fights. Writing the book as a series of interviews works very well here, and at the end of the book you discover why it was written that way. You see the ups and downs of being in the music business from a first-hand perspective. Jenkins Reid also includes the lyrics (that she wrote) to all of the songs from their breakout album and reading them feels like songs from the 1970s California rock scene. I wondered if someone will eventually put them to music. We may find the answer to that- Reese Witherspoon has optioned the book to turn into a 13-part TV series on Amazon. This book is tailor-made for a TV series and I for one can't wait. If you had a worn put copy of Fleetwood Mac's album Rumours, Dais Jones & the Six is for you. Posted by (Diane) bookchickdi at 12:32 PM 2 comments: Labels: book review, Daisy Jones and the Six, novel, Random House, Reese Witherspoon Book Club, Taylor Jenkins Reid California Girls by Susan Mallery Published by Mira ISBN 9780778351252 To say that the three Schmitt sisters are having a bad week in Susan Mallery's California Girls is an understatement. Finola, the hardworking host of a Los Angeles morning show has just been told by her husband that he is having an affair- right before she is to interview the much younger woman, a Taylor Swift-like popular singer, live on air. Sister Zennie is single and her latest date, a nice guy named Clark, has just broken up with her. She isn't that upset about it, she's happy being on her own, but she dreads telling her mother who will try to set her up with both men and women. Ali, the youngest, has just been informed by her fiance's brother that the wedding is off the day after the invitations have gone out. Her fiance wasn't going to tell her, he was just going to leave her at the altar until his brother stepped in. Top that off with their disapproving mother's insistence that the sisters must come help her clean out the home they grew up in because she is moving, and you've got a lot of stress for these ladies. Finnola thought that she had a solid marriage, so her husband's declaration has thrown her for a loop. They were preparing to go to Hawaii on vacation where she was planning to tell him that she was ready to start a family. Now she is dodging paparazzi and trying to hold it all together without her producers, fans, or heaven help her, her mother, finding out. Zennie's best friend , who survived ovarian cancer, comes to her with a huge favor to ask- would Zennie be their egg donor and surrogate mother for the baby she and her husband want to have? Zennie agrees, much to the consternation of her other friends and Finola, who think this is a very bad idea. And don't tell her mother who spends much of her time lamenting that her daughters have yet to make her a grandmother. Ali has to undo all the wedding plans, try to get deposits back, and find a new apartment since she was planning on moving in with her husband. His brother Daniel gallantly offers to help Ali with all of this, even though Ali always thought he never particularly liked her. The relationships between the sisters is very believeable and the characters are well-written. They have shifting alliances, and we get information about their upbringing that informs their relationships today. They are all at a crossroads in their lives and have to lean on others even though that may not be easy for them. They have to balance their careers and relationships, something that many readers will be able to relate to. Will Finola lose her job and her husband? Can Zennie really give up a baby she carries for nine months, and will her friendship survive her now-overbearing friend, and how will this affect her career as a surgical nurse? Will Ali finally speak up for herself and go for the job and man she wants? Mallery prides herself on always have a satisfying ending, so all of these storylines get wrapped up, if not in the obvious way, they all get an ending that will make readers happy. California Girls is a perfect beach read book, which is where I read it. If you're looking for a quick, easy read to take you out of this dreary weather, California Girls is it. Thanks to TLC Tours for putting me on Susan Mallery's tour. The rest of her stops are here: Review Tour: Monday, February 25th: Reading Reality Monday, February 25th: Book Reviews and More by Kathy Monday, February 25th: @booknerdingout Tuesday, February 26th: The Book Date Wednesday, February 27th: Palmer’s Page Turners Friday, March 1st: Books & Bindings Friday, March 1st: Not in Jersey Monday, March 4th: Bewitched Bookworms Monday, March 4th: Patricia’s Wisdom Tuesday, March 5th: Odd and Bookish and @oddandbookish Wednesday, March 6th: Bookchickdi Thursday, March 7th: Running Through the Storms Thursday, March 7th: Why Girls Are Weird Friday, March 8th: View from the Birdhouse Monday, March 11th: The Romance Dish Monday, March 11th: Tar Heel Reader and @tarheelreader Tuesday, March 12th: Girl Who Reads Wednesday, March 13th: Kahakai Kitchen Wednesday, March 13th: Romantic Reads and Such Thursday, March 14th: Moonlight Rendezvous Thursday, March 14th: Cheryl’s Book Nook Friday, March 15th: Mrs. Mommy Booknerd Monday, March 18th: Jathan & Heather Monday, March 18th: Rad Babes Read and @radbabesread Tuesday, March 19th: Thoughts on This ‘n That Wednesday, March 20th: From the TBR Pile Wednesday, March 20th: A Splendid Messy Life Thursday, March 21st: Broken Teepee Friday, March 22nd: Girls in Books and @girlsinbooks Monday, March 25th: Eliot’s Eats Tuesday, March 26th: A Chick Who Reads Wednesday, March 27th: Into the Hall of Books Thursday, March 28th: A Holland Reads Friday, March 29th: Diary of a Stay at Home Mom Friday, March 29th: What is That Book About Labels: book review, California Girls, Mira, Susan Mallery, TLC Book Tours, women's fiction Bully Brother by Craig Dial Publsihed by Craig Dial ISBN 9781982991272 Available on Kindle for $4.99, free on Kindle Unlimited, $9.99 trade paperback 252 pages What drew me to Craig Dial's memoir Bully Brother is that Craig is one of five children who grew up in the 1960s and '70s, like my husband and I both did. The book opens with a disturbing scene where eight-year-old Craig's older brother David has him pinned to the ground and is tormenting him. Craig screams for help, but no one comes. David torments Craig physically and emotionally, and Craig is fearful of him. Brothers tease each other and fight with each other, but this is something more disturbing. Craig's mom told him just to stay away from David, but David would seek him out to hurt him. On the occasions when David was nice to Craig, like when he would help him improve his baseball skills, things were good. The Dial family lived in Marin County, near San Francisco and growing up the late '60s and '70s, that meant the height of of the hippie movement. When the Dial family would picnic in Golden Gate Park, Craig would be fascinated by the people, especially the beautiful young women. His dad had to drive hours in awful traffic to get to his stressful white collar job as a cost estimator for a construction company, and was exhausted by the time he got home. The chapter when Craig gets to spend the day at his dad's office is a real eye-opener for the young boy, and I found it interesting as well. His mom is Italian, and she believes that food can solve any problem. She is a fantastic cook, which gets her in trouble when her husband hires contractors to work at the house and she makes them big lunches that take up hours and make them logy. The job took longer than it should have. There are lots of great scenes in this book- the family packing up for their annual camping trip to Yosemite, where Dad would construct an elaborate addition to their campsite and Mom would prepare delicious meals for all, was wonderful. When Craig is old enough to work, he gets a job cleaning at a meat company. He hosed down and cleaned all the butchering implements, a disgusting, dirty and dangerous job. I think young people today might be shocked at what he had to do. Craig had a second job washing dishes at a restaurant, and third job at a food packing plant and again, it might surprise many teens today that he worked three jobs and went to high school. Craig's relationship with his brother is at the heart of this story, and the end is a sad one. It's a very complicated sibling relationship, and one that haunts Craig to this day. What I enjoyed about Bully Brother is Dial's story of growing up in a family of seven in the '60s and '70s. He had the same cultural touchstones as I do, so I loved the music references and the playlist he curates at the end. The descriptions of his mother's food had me drooling. Reviewing self-published books is always tricky. I really liked the story, but the grammatical errors and sometimes stilted dialogue were distracting. (A good copy editor could have helped.) If you are the kind of person who can't overlook that, maybe this isn't for you. But I was able to overlook that and I'm glad I read Bully Brother. I find myself thinking about it long after I read it. Labels: book review, Bully Brother, Craig Dial, memoir On Broadway- The Ferryman A few years ago I saw a production of Jez Butterworth's Jersusalem, starring perhaps the best stage actor on the planet, Mark Rylance. It was amazing. This past October, I got to chat with actor Brian d'Arcy James, a three-time Tony nominee, and we both confessed to our admiration for Rylance. (I recounted that I met Rylance walking his dog outside the theater and almost passed out with excitement). Brian told me I should go see The Ferryman, Butterworth's brilliant new play that just opened on Broadway. The Ferryman Other people I respect had also told me to go see it, but I never got around to it. Then I heard that Brian d'Arcy James was going to be in the cast of The Ferryman starting in February and that sealed the deal for me. The Ferryman tells the story of a Northern Irish farming family in 1981, right around the time when Irish prisoners (including Bobby Sands) were on a hunger strike, asking to be recognized as political prisoners, something Britain's Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was unwilling to do. There was a lot of violence between the IRA and the British forces. The Carney family is preparing for the harvest, and the annual celebration that goes along with that. The huge household consists of Quinn and his wife Mary, their seven children, two aunts, an uncle, a sister-in-law and nephew. There is much joy and merriment, singing and dancing, until the local priest shows up. Father Horrigan (a great performance from Charles Dale) has some troubling news for Quinn, news that once it gets out turns everything in the household upside down. The Ferryman has 21 speaking parts (and a baby!) and Butterworth manages to make each character distinct, a remarkable feat. Quinn holds his boisterous family together, with the help of his brother's wife Caitlin, who cooks and cleans, as Quinn's wife Mary appears to be fragile. She spends much of her time in her room. (To be fair, she has seven children.) Uncle Pat recounts humorous stories to the children, while his serious sister Aunt Pat monitors the hunger strike situation on the radio. Aunt Maggie gets wheeled in to sit fairly motionless in the corner, waking occasionally to speak to the children, telling them of the futures she sees for them. Neighbor Tom Kettle (wonderfully portrayed by Shuler Hensley) is a large man who lives nearby and spends time with the family. Because he is English, some people are suspicious of him. But he is gentle giant, prone to pulling a stray rabbit of his pocket as a gift to people. As the harvest continues, the Carneys' young cousins come to help, and as young men sometimes do, get caught up in the situations over their head. When the local IRA boss comes to visit, things begin to unravel. As I sat in the audience, I was wondering how this play was going to end. I truly had no idea, and when the end came, the shock of it deeply affected the audience, their gasps proof of that. (That being said, there is one plot point that pretty much everyone can guess at.) Normally I would be wary of going to a play with a running time of three hours and fifteen minutes, but Butterworth has packed so much into this production I never once checked my watch. This is a show that I could imagine seeing more than once to go back and try and absorb things you missed the first time. Brian d'Arcy James is perfection in the role of Quinn. He is a proud man, trying to keep all the balls in the air, keep everything together, all the while hinting at something simmering under the surface. It is truly an ensemble production, and the young children in the cast are wonderful. They seem like young children, not actorly in any way. Emily Bergl (Mary), Holly Fain (Caitlin) and Fionnula Flanagan ( Aunt Maggie, who I fondly remember from TV's Rich Man, Poor Man) are particularly strong in their roles. I think I would like to find the book of The Ferryman to truly get everything I can from this stunning play. It has rightly been lauded as one of the best plays of the year, and it will surely be up for many Tony awards in June, including for the brilliant direction of Sam Mendes. There are discount tickets available for this, including rush tickets. Go see it, this is a don't-miss play. Labels: Brian d'Arcy James, On Broadway, play, The Ferryman On Broadway- To Kill A Mockingbird The hottest ticket on Broadway right now is To Kill A Mockingbird, based on Harper Lee's classic novel of the same novel. The novel was recently voted by the public as the Great American Read, and most Americans who have read the book read it in high school. If you haven't read the novel, perhaps you saw the 1962 movie, starring Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch, the upright and moral laywer who defends a black man accused of raping a young white woman in 1934 small town Maycomb, Alabama. To take this iconic book and movie and turn it into a Broadway play requires a certain amount of nerve, and the road to the stage was a rocky one, including litigation between the estate of Harper Lee and the producers. Once settled, playright and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (best known for creating TV's West Wing) wrote the script, and acclaimed actor Jeff Daniels took on the role of Atticus Finch. Although everyone knows the story, Sorkin manages to create such tension in the courtroom scenes that you could hear a pin drop in the theater. He had previous success with another courtoom drama, A Few Good Men. Sorkin also manages to include plenty of humor in this serious story, thanks mostly to the dialogue of the children, here played brilliantly by adults as children- Celia Keenan-Bolger is fabulous as Scout, our main narrator. She is a sure-fire Tony nominee this season. Will Pullen is also excellent as her older brother Jem, and Gideon Glick is a revelation as their friend Dill (a character Harper Lee reportedly based on her friend Truman Capote, whom she knew when they were children). They break the fourth wall in this production with their narration. Jeff Daniel's Atticus Finch is somewhat different than Gregory Peck's Finch. Daniels' Finch shows his temper and frustration more, and his interactions with the children is somewhat more playful. He gives new shades to his interpretation of Atticus Finch, not an easy task for a character so imbedded in the American psyche. Gbenga Akinnagbe brings the accused Tom Robinson to life, and his courtroom testimony is absolutely riveting. You cannot take your eyes off him in that scene. Frederick Weller is also fantastic as the racist and menacing Bob Ewell, spouting language that made everyone in the audience cringe. The biggest controversy in the show is the relationship between Atticus and Calpurnia, his black housekeeper who also cares for the children. Latanya Richardson Jackson's steely Calpurnia has a scene where she strongly shares her true feelings about the trial with Atticus, something than some people feel whould never have happened in 1934 Alabama between a white employer and his black employee. (This scene was not in the novel.) While I understand why people feel this way, I think the scene works very well for this production. This production of To Kill A Mockingbird is a profoundly moving piece of theater, and although written in 1960 and set in 1934, sadly some of it still resonates in today's America. There is a short speech by Atticus about the danger of mob mentality that so affected much of the audience that you could hear murmurs of agreement and people catching their breath. I'm happy to say that playwright Aaron Sorkin, director Bartlett Sher, Jeff Daniels and the rest of the cast have honored an American classic novel and movie, a Herculean task, with their unforgettable take on To Kill A Mockingbird. It is a production not to be missed at any ticket price. Labels: Aaron Sorkin, Broadway, Harper Lee, Jeff Daniels, play, To Kill A Mockingbird

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511814

__label__cc

Tag: Paula McLain Two nonfiction books: a frank account of an abortion; clutter-busting techniques. Two novels: amusing intellectual fare featuring a big dog or the Parisian Surrealists. Happening by Annie Ernaux (2000; English translation, 2019) [Translated from the French by Tanya Leslie] “I believe that any experience, whatever its nature, has the inalienable right to be chronicled,” Ernaux writes. In 1963, when she was 23 and living in a student residence in Rouen, she realized she was pregnant. An appointment with a gynecologist set out the facts starkly: “Pregnancy certificate of: Mademoiselle Annie Duchesne. Date of delivery: 8 July, 1964. I saw summer, sunshine. I tore up the certificate.” Abortion was illegal in France at that time. Ernaux tried to take things into her own hands – “plunging a knitting needle into a womb weighed little next to ruining one’s career” – but couldn’t go through with it. Instead she went to the home of a middle-aged nurse she’d heard about… This very short book (just 60-some pages) is told in a matter-of-fact style – apart from the climactic moment when her pregnancy ends: “It burst forth like a grenade, in a spray of water that splashed the door. I saw a baby doll dangling from my loins at the end of a reddish cord.” It’s such a garish image, almost cartoonish, that I didn’t know whether to laugh or be horrified. Mostly, Ernaux reflects on memory and the reconstruction of events. I haven’t read many nonfiction accounts of abortion/miscarriage and for that reason found this interesting, but it was perhaps too brief and detached for me to be fully engaged. With thanks to Fitzcarraldo Editions for the free copy for review. The Friend by Sigrid Nunez (2018) “Does something bad happen to the dog?” We animal lovers are wary when approaching a book about a pet. Nunez playfully anticipates that question as she has her unnamed female narrator reflect on her duty of care to her dead friend’s dog. The narrator is a writer and academic – like her late friend, a Bellovian womanizer who recently committed suicide, leaving behind two ex-wives, a widow, and Apollo the aging Great Dane. She addresses the friend directly as “you” for almost the whole book, which unfolds – in a similar style to Jenny Offill’s Department of Speculation – via quotations, aphorisms, and stories from literary history as well as mini-incidents from a life. This won the 2018 National Book Award in the USA and is an unashamedly high-brow work whose intertextuality comes through in direct allusions to many classic works of autofiction (Coetzee, Knausgaard and Lessing) and/or doggy lit (Ackerley; Coetzee again – Disgrace). As Apollo starts to take up more physical, mental and emotional space in the narrator’s life, she waits for a miracle that will allow her to keep him despite an eviction notice and muses on lots of questions: Is all writing autobiographical? Why does animal suffering pain us so much (especially compared to human suffering)? I was impressed: it feels like Nunez has encapsulated everything she’s ever known or thought about, all in just over 200 pages, and alongside a heart-warming little plot. (Animal lovers need not fear.) With thanks to Virago for the free copy for review. Outer Order, Inner Calm: Declutter and Organize to Make More Room for Happiness by Gretchen Rubin (2019) What with all the debate over Marie Kondo’s clutter-reducing tactics, the timing is perfect for this practical guide to culling and organizing all the stuff that piles up around us at home and at work. Unlike the rest of Rubin’s self-help books, this is not a narrative but a set of tips – 150 of them! It’s not so much a book to read straight through as one to keep at your bedside and read a few pages to summon up motivation for the next tidying challenge. Famously, Kondo advises one to ask whether an item sparks joy. Rubin’s central questions are more down-to-earth: Do I need it? Do I love it? Do I use it? With no index, the book is a bit difficult to navigate; you just have to flip through until you find what you want. The advice seems in something of a random order and can be slightly repetitive. But since this is really meant as a book of inspiration, I think it will be a useful jumping-off point for anyone trying to get on top of clutter. I plan to work through the closet checklist before I pass the book to my sister – who’s dealing with a basement full of stuff after she and her second husband merged their households. If I could add one page, it would be a flowchart of what to do with unwanted stuff that corresponds to the latest green recommendations. With thanks to Two Roads for the free copy for review. The Age of Light by Whitney Scharer (2019) This novel about Lee Miller’s relationship with Man Ray is in the same vein as The Paris Wife, Z, Loving Frank and Frieda: all of these have sought to rescue a historical woman from the shadow of a celebrated, charismatic male and tell her own fascinating life story. Scharer captures the bohemian atmosphere of 1929–30 Paris in elegant but accessible prose. Along with the central pair we meet others from the Dada group plus Jean Cocteau, and get a glimpse of Josephine Baker. The novel is nearly 100 pages too long, I think, such that my interest in the politics of the central relationship – Man becomes too possessive and Lee starts to act out, longing for freedom again – started to wane. Miller was a photographer as well as a model and journalist, and this is an appropriately visual novel that’s interested in appearances, lighting and what gets preserved for posterity. It’s also fairly sexually explicit for literary fiction, sometimes unnecessarily so, so keep that in mind if it’s likely to bother you. I especially enjoyed the brief flashes of Lee at other points in her life: in London during the Blitz, photographing the aftermath of the war in Germany (there’s a famous image of her in Hitler’s bathtub), and hoping she’s more than just a washed-up alcoholic in the 1960s. It would be a boon to have a prior interest in or some knowledge of the Surrealists. With thanks to Picador for the free copy for review. Would you be interested in reading one or more of these? Annabel Abbs autofiction Jenny Offill Sigrid Nunez Tanya Leslie Therese Anne Fowler Recommended May Releases May and June are HUGE months for new releases. I’ve been doing enough early reading via NetGalley and Edelweiss that I’ve found plenty to recommend to you for next month. From a novel voiced by one of Hemingway’s wives to a physicist’s encouragement to waste more time, I hope there will be something here for everyone. The Pisces by Melissa Broder [Coming from Hogarth Press (USA) on the 1st and Bloomsbury (UK) on the 3rd] At first I thought this was one of those funny, quirky but somewhat insubstantial novels about a thirtysomething stuck with a life she isn’t sure she wants – something along the lines of Goodbye, Vitamin, The Portable Veblen, or All Grown Up. Then I thought it was just a crass sex comedy. But the further I read the deeper it all seemed to become: tropes from Greek myth and the fluidity of gender roles made me think of You Too Can Have a Body Like Mine, another debut novel that surprised me for its profundity. Lucy, a thirty-eight-year-old PhD student, agrees to spend a summer dog-sitting for her yoga entrepreneur sister in Venice Beach, California while she undertakes therapy for the twin problems of low self-esteem and love addiction. If you know one thing about this book, it’s that there’s sex with a merman. Ultimately, though, I’d say it’s about “the prison of the body” and choosing which of the different siren voices calling us to listen to. I found it outrageous but rewarding. How to Be a Perfect Christian by Adam Ford and Kyle Mann [Coming from Multnomah (USA) on the 1st] The Babylon Bee is a Christian version of The Onion, so you know what you’re getting here: a very clever, pitch-perfect satire of evangelical Christianity today. If, like me, you grew up in a nondenominational church and bought into the subculture hook, line and sinker (Awana club, youth group, courtship, dc Talk albums, the whole shebang), you will find that so much of this rings true. The book is set up as a course for achieving superficial perfection through absolute “conformity to the status quo of the modern church.” Sample advice: find an enormous church that meets your needs, has a great coffee bar and puts on a laser-lit worship performance to rival “an amusement park for cats or a Def Leppard concert”; master the language of Christianese (“Keeping it in prayer” pretty much covers your bases); and bring as little as you can to the church potluck (a 25-pack of napkins) but consume as much as is anatomically possible. So, a lot of fun, just a little overlong because you get the joke early on. The Ensemble by Aja Gabel [Coming from Riverhead (USA) on the 15th] In May 1994, the members of the Van Ness String Quartet are completing their final graduate recital at a San Francisco conservatory and preparing for the Esterhazy quartet competition in the Canadian Rockies. These four talented musicians – Jana, first violin; Brit, second violin; Henry, viola; and Daniel, cello – have no idea what the next 15 years will hold for them: a cross-country move, romances begun and lost, and career successes and failures. Drawing on her own history as a violinist and cellist, Aja Gabel infuses her debut novel with the simultaneous uncertainty and euphoria of both the artistic life and early adulthood in general. An alternating close third-person perspective gives glimpses into the main characters’ inner lives, and there are evocative descriptions of classical music. I think The Ensemble will mean even more to those readers who are involved in music, but anyone can relate to the slow fade from youth into middle age and the struggle to integrate art with the rest of life. Tropic of Squalor by Mary Karr [Coming from Harper (USA) on the 8th] Mary Karr is mostly known as a memoirist, but this is actually her fifth poetry collection. Death is a major theme, with David Foster Wallace’s suicide and 9/11 getting multiple mentions. Karr also writes self-deprecatingly about her Texas childhood. Best of all is the multi-part “The Less Holy Bible”: a sort of Devil’s Dictionary based loosely around the books of the Bible, it bounces between Texas and New York City and twists biblical concepts into commonsense advice. Not one for those who are quick to cry heresy, perhaps, but I enjoyed it very much, especially “VI. Wisdom: The Voice of God”: “Ninety percent of what’s wrong with you could be cured with a hot bath, / says God through the manhole covers, but you want magic, to win / the lottery you never bought a ticket for. … Don’t look for initials in the geese honking / overhead or to see through the glass even darkly. It says the most obvious shit, / i.e. Put down that gun, you need a sandwich.” In Praise of Wasting Time by Alan Lightman [Coming from Simon & Schuster / TED (USA and UK) on the 15th] Lightman, a physicist and MIT professor, argues that only in unstructured time can we rediscover our true identity and recover our carefree childhood creativity. This work-as-play model goes against the modern idea that time is money and every minute must be devoted to a project. “For any unexpected opening of time that appears during the day, I rush to patch it, as if a tear in my trousers. … I feel compelled to find a project, to fill up the hole.” Yet there is another way of approaching time, as he discovered when doing research in a village in Cambodia. He realized that the women he talked to didn’t own watches and thus had no real sense of how long any task took them. This sharp, concise treatise ruminates on the cultural forces that have enslaved us in the West to productivity. (In short, he blames the Internet, but specifically smartphones.) Lightman insists on the spiritual benefits of free time and solitude. “With a little determination, each of us can find a half hour a day to waste time,” he asserts. Love and Ruin by Paula McLain [Coming from Ballantine Books (USA) and Fleet (UK) on the 1st] This is the weakest of the three McLain novels I’ve read, but when we’re talking about a writer of this caliber that isn’t much of a criticism. It’s strange to me that, having written a novel from the perspective of Hadley Richardson, Ernest Hemingway’s first wife, McLain would choose to tell the story of another Hemingway wife – this time Martha Gellhorn, a war reporter and author in her own right. If I set aside this misgiving, though, and just assess the quality of the writing, there are definitely things to praise, such as the vivid scenes set during the Spanish Civil War, the dialogues between Martha and Hem, the way he perhaps fills in for her dead father, her fondness for his sons, and her jealousy over his growing success while her books sink like stones. I especially liked their first meeting in a bar in Key West, and the languid pace of their life in Cuba. I read such books because I’m intrigued about the appeal of a great man, but here I got a little bogged down with the many settings and events. What May books do you have on the docket? Have you already read any that you can recommend? Aja Gabel Alexandra Kleeman Devil’s Dictionary evangelical Christianity Hadley Richardson Rachel Khong 2017’s Runners-Up and Other Superlatives The choices below are in alphabetical order by author, with any previously published reviews linked in (many of these books have already appeared on the blog in some way over the course of the year). You know the drill by now: to keep it simple for myself as well as for all of you who are figuring out whether you’re interested in these books or not, I’m limiting myself to two sentences per title. The first is a potted summary; the second tells you why you should read it. Across these three best-of posts (see also my Top Nonfiction and Best Fiction posts), I’ve spotlighted roughly the top 15% of my year’s reading. Runners-Up: As a God Might Be by Neil Griffiths: The themes and central characters were strong enough to keep me powering through this 600-page novel of ideas about encounters with God and the nature of evil. This turned out to be just my sort of book: big and brazen, a deep well of thought that will only give up its deeper meanings upon discussion and repeat readings. Spaceman of Bohemia by Jaroslav Kalfař: The story of Jakub Procházka, a Czech astronaut who leaves his wife behind to undertake a noble research mission but soon realizes he can never escape his family history or the hazards of his own mind. A terrific blend of the past and the futuristic, Earth and space. English Animals by Laura Kaye: A young Slovakian becomes a housekeeper for a volatile English couple and discovers a talent for taxidermy. A fresh take on themes of art, sex, violence and belonging, this is one of the more striking debut novels I’ve encountered in recent years. Goodbye, Vitamin by Rachel Khong: Reeling from a broken engagement, Ruth Young returns to her childhood home in California for a year to help look after her father, who has Alzheimer’s. This is a delightfully quirky little book, but you may well read it with a lump in your throat, too. Midwinter Break by Bernard MacLaverty: In MacLaverty’s quietly beautiful fifth novel, a retired couple faces up to past trauma and present incompatibility during a short vacation in Amsterdam. My overall response was one of admiration for what this couple has survived and sympathy for their current situation – with hope that they’ll make it through this, too. (Reviewed for BookBrowse.) Conversations with Friends by Sally Rooney: An Irish college student navigates friendships and an affair with a married man. This is much more about universals than it is about particulars: realizing you’re stuck with yourself, exploring your sexuality and discovering sex is its own kind of conversation, and deciding whether ‘niceness’ is really the same as morality; a book I was surprised to love, but love it I did. Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders: The residents of Georgetown cemetery limbo don’t know they’re dead – or at least won’t accept it. An entertaining and truly original treatment of life’s transience; I know it’s on every other best-of-year list out there, but it really is a must-read. The Smell of Fresh Rain by Barney Shaw: Shaw travels through space, time and literature as he asks why we don’t have the vocabulary to talk about the smells we encounter every day. If you’re interested in exploring connections between smell and memory, discovering what makes the human sense of smell unique, and learning some wine-tasting-style tips for describing odors, this is a perfect introduction. A Life of My Own by Claire Tomalin: Tomalin is best known as a biographer of literary figures including Mary Wollstonecraft, Samuel Pepys and Charles Dickens, but her memoir is especially revealing about the social and cultural history of the earlier decades her life covers. A dignified but slightly aloof book – well worth reading for anyone interested in spending time in London’s world of letters in the second half of the twentieth century. Sing, Unburied, Sing by Jesmyn Ward: The story of a mixed-race family haunted – both literally and figuratively – by the effects of racism, drug abuse and incarceration in Bois Sauvage, a fictional Mississippi town. Beautiful language; perfect for fans of Toni Morrison and Cynthia Bond. I’ve really struggled with short stories this year, but here are four collections I can wholeheartedly recommend: What It Means when a Man Falls from the Sky by Lesley Nneka Arimah (Reviewed for Shiny New Books.) Unruly Creatures: Stories by Jennifer Caloyeras Bad Dreams and Other Stories by Tessa Hadley The Great Profundo and Other Stories by Bernard MacLaverty (1987) The Best 2017 Books You Probably Never Heard of (Unless You Heard about Them from Me!): The Education of a Coroner by John Bateson: The coroner’s career is eventful no matter what, but Marin County, California has its fair share of special interest, what with Golden Gate Bridge suicides, misdeeds at San Quentin Prison, and various cases involving celebrities (e.g. Harvey Milk, Jerry Garcia and Tupac) in addition to your everyday sordid homicides. Ken Holmes was a death investigator and coroner in Marin County for 36 years; Bateson successfully recreates Holmes’ cases with plenty of (sometimes gory) details. Cork Dork by Bianca Bosker: Tasting notes: gleeful, ebullient, learned, self-deprecating; suggested pairings: Sweetbitter by Stephanie Danler; Top Chef, The Great British Bake Off. A delightful blend of science, memoir and encounters with people who are deadly serious about wine. A Paris All Your Own: Bestselling Women Writers on the City of Light, edited by Eleanor Brown: A highly enjoyable set of 18 autobiographical essays that celebrate what’s wonderful about the place but also acknowledge disillusionment; highlights are from Maggie Shipstead, Paula McLain, Therese Anne Fowler, Jennifer Coburn, Julie Powell and Michelle Gable. If you have a special love for Paris, have always wanted to visit, or just enjoy armchair traveling, this collection won’t disappoint you. Ashland & Vine by John Burnside: Essentially, it’s about the American story, individual American stories, and how these are constructed out of the chaos and violence of the past – all filtered through a random friendship that forms between a film student and an older woman in the Midwest. This captivated me from the first page. Tragic Shores: A Memoir of Dark Travel, Thomas H. Cook: In 28 non-chronological chapters, Cook documents journeys he’s made to places associated with war, massacres, doomed lovers, suicides and other evidence of human suffering. This is by no means your average travel book and it won’t suit those who seek high adventure and/or tropical escapism; instead, it’s a meditative and often melancholy picture of humanity at its best and worst. (Reviewed for Nudge.) The Valentine House by Emma Henderson: This is a highly enjoyable family saga set mostly between 1914 and 1976 at an English clan’s summer chalet in the French Alps near Geneva, with events seen from the perspective of a local servant girl. You can really imagine yourself into all the mountain scenes and the book moves quickly –a great one to take on vacation. The year’s runners-up and superlatives that I happen to have around in print. Various Superlatives, Good and Bad: The 2017 Book Everybody Else Loved but I Didn’t: Eleanor Oliphant Is Completely Fine by Gail Honeyman. (See my Goodreads review for why.) The Year’s Biggest Disappointments: All Grown Up by Jami Attenberg, Future Home of the Living God by Louise Erdrich, Between Them by Richard Ford and George and Lizzie by Nancy Pearl. The Worst Book I Read This Year: Books by Charlie Hill (ironic, that). My only one-star review of the year. The Downright Strangest Book I Read This Year: An English Guide to Birdwatching by Nicholas Royle. My Best Discoveries of the Year: Beryl Bainbridge, Saul Bellow, Bernard MacLaverty and Haruki Murakami. I’ve read two books by each of these authors this year and look forward to trying more from them. The Debut Authors Whose Next Work I’m Most Looking Forward to: Lesley Nneka Arimah, Laura Kaye, Carmen Marcus, Julianne Pachico and Sally Rooney. The Best First Line of the Year: “History has failed us, but no matter.” (Pachinko, Min Jin Lee) The Best Last Line of the Year: “If she was an instance of the goodness in this world then passing through by her side was miracle enough.” (Midwinter Break, Bernard MacLaverty) Coming tomorrow: Some early recommendations for 2018. Barney Shaw Bernard MacLaverty Beryl Bainbridge Carmen Marcus Charlie Hill Claire Tomalin Cynthia Bond Emma Henderson Jaroslav Kalfař Jennifer Caloyeras Jennifer Coburn Jesmyn Ward John Bateson Julianne Pachico Julie Powell Maggie Shipstead Michelle Gable Min Jin Lee Nancy Pearl Neil Griffiths Nicholas Royle oni Morrison Tessa Hadley Thomas H. Cook Literary Blind Spots: Hemingway and Fitzgerald Despite being educated through university level in the United States, I’m better acquainted with British literature than American, in part due to my own predilections. Ernest Hemingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald are two of the American authors I’ve most struggled with. For one thing, their novels’ titles are interchangeable, abstract quotations that I can never keep straight. Which is which? The Sun Also Rises is the bullfighting one, right? And is A Farewell to Arms the other one I’ve read? Fitzgerald is an even worse offender as titles go, with The Great Gatsby the only one that actually refers to its contents. For the record, I recognize The Great Gatsby as a masterpiece, and I absolutely loved A Moveable Feast, Hemingway’s memoir of life in Paris. I also enjoy reading about the Hemingways (Paula McLain’s The Paris Wife and Naomi Wood’s Mrs. Hemingway) and the Fitzgeralds (Therese Anne Fowler’s Z: A Novel of Zelda Fitzgerald and R. Clifton Spargo’s Beautiful Fools). But when I’ve tried to go deeper into the authors’ work, it hasn’t been an unmitigated success. The above two Hemingway novels are just okay for me. The Sun Also Rises struck me as having a thin plot, two-dimensional characters and repetitious dialogue. When I eagerly approached Tender Is the Night last year – having recently read a novel about the real-life couple who inspired Fitzgerald’s portrait of Dick and Nicole Diver, Gerald and Sara Murphy (Villa America by Liza Klaussmann) – I pulled out a lot of great individual lines but had trouble following the basic plot and only really enjoyed the early chapters of Book Two. Here are some of those pearls of prose: The delight in Nicole’s face—to be a feather again instead of a plummet, to float and not to drag. She was a carnival to watch—at times primly coy, posing, grimacing and gesturing—sometimes the shadow fell and the dignity of old suffering flowed down into her finger tips. somehow Dick and Nicole had become one and equal, not apposite and complementary; she was Dick too, the drought in the marrow of his bones. He could not watch her disintegrations without participating in them. Well, you never knew exactly how much space you occupied in people’s lives. women marry all their husbands’ talents and naturally, afterwards, are not so impressed with them as they may keep up the pretense of being. Imagine my surprise when I learned from a note at the end of my Penguin paperback that Fitzgerald made a major revision that rearranged the action into chronological order, thus opening with Book Two. That text, edited by Malcolm Cowley, appeared in 1951 and was printed by Penguin from 1955. However, the version I have – as reprinted from 1982 onwards – goes back to Fitzgerald’s first edition. Would I have had a more favorable reaction to the novel if I’d encountered it in its revised version? Somehow I think so. Is there a Hemingway or Fitzgerald novel that will change my opinion about these literary lions? Share your favorites. Gerald and Sara Murphy Malcolm Cowley R. Clifton Spargo

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511815

__label__wiki

Barnes&Noble.com - $2,199.50 Computational Molecular Science Peter R. Schreiner, Wesley D. Allen, Modesto Orozco, Walter Thiel, Peter Willett Wiley, Apr 14, 2014 - Science - 3456 pages Easy access to information on all aspects of molecular computations Order the six-volume set today and benefit from the special introductory price – full details below Computational Molecular Science is the successor of the highly acclaimed Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry, which was published by Wiley in 1998, and is the ultimate resource on all aspects of computational chemistry and its applications in chemistry, biology and materials science. Capturing the interdisciplinary flavour of the field, authors address key topics from differing perspectives such as chemistry, biology and materials science. In order to make the material accessible to students, practitioners and researchers alike the content is presented at different depths and levels in a range of article types: Overviews provide broad and non-technical treatment of important topics at an accessible level Key areas of research in the style of leading review journals are presented in Advanced Reviews for researchers and advanced students Focus Articles present short, technical contributions describing specific real-world issues, e.g. implementations etc. Software Reviews feature specific software packages of high utility in the field, with an emphasis on their capabilities and implementation rather than methodology Opinions present individual perspectives from thought leaders in the field A special focus has been placed on computations and modeling of relevant biomolecules which are essential to new developments in medicinal chemistry. Covering all areas relevant to the understanding of computational molecular methods the content is structured in the following sections: Computer and Information Science includes a wide range of techniques and applications used in cheminformatics, such as artificial intelligence, patent information, semantic web, data mining, automated synthesis design, etc. Electronic Structure Theory covers computations of molecules based on ab initio quantum molecular methods and density functional theory Simulation Methods includes free energy methods, molecular dynamics, Monte-Carlo methods and molecular mechanics Software describes examples of commercial and shareware software packages for molecular computations and modeling Structure and Mechanism concentrates on applications in the areas of computational biochemistry and biophysics, computational materials science, molecular structures and dynamics, and reaction mechanisms Theoretical and Physical Chemistry includes reaction dynamics, kinetics and spectroscopy Experience the scope of content in Computational Molecular Science for yourself with a selection of free articles available to download now: Predictions of protein–RNA interactions Cheminformatics and the Semantic Web: adding value with linked data and enhanced provenance Density functional theory in materials science Metadynamics Noncovalent interactions in biochemistry All chapters included in Computational Molecular Science have also been published online in WIREs Computational Molecular Science between January 2011 and June 2014. WIREs Computational Molecular Science Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews, or short WIREs, combine the best possible features of major online reference works (didactic structure, high visibility, fast searches, and electronic accessibility) with the completeness, rigor, and overall high quality of review journals. WIREs Computational Molecular Science uses all the advantages of the WIREs concept and is the logical online successor of the highly acclaimed Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry. As a review journal WIREs Computational Molecular Science includes all the material published in the book edition and will continue to publish much more material in the future, establishing itself as THE REVIEW JOURNAL in the field of computational chemistry and biology, offering the following advantages: An impact factor of 5.783 according to 2012 ISI Journal Citation Reports with the following Ranking: 1/47 (Mathematical & Computational Biology) and 22/152 (Chemistry Multidisciplinary) Indexed in all major A&I services such as CAS, TRSI and Scopus Important new forum to promote cross-disciplinary research on computational chemistry, biochemistry and materials science Authoritative, encyclopedic resource addressing key topics from diverse research perspectives Recommend that your librarian requests a free trial for your institution, click here For further information about WIREs Computational Molecular Science and other WIREs titles visit www.wires.wiley.com/compmolsci Peter R. Schreiner,Wesley D. Allen,Modesto Orozco,Walter Thiel,Peter Willett Peter R. Schreiner, Justus-Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany Full professor of Organic Chemistry, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, 2002–today Associate Professor of Organic Chemistry, Univ. of Georgia, Athens, USA, 1999–2002 Habilitation, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 1996–1999 Project Coordinator, The Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry, 1995–1996 Ph.D. (Computational Chemistry, Prof. Henry F. Schaefer III), UGA, Athens, USA, 1995 Dr. rer. nat. (Organic Chemistry, Prof. Paul v. R. Schleyer), Univ. Erlangen, 1994 Dipl. Chem. (Organic Chemistry, Prof. Paul v. R. Schleyer), Univ. Erlangen, 1992 M. Sc. (Organic Chemistry, Prof. Richard. K. Hill), UGA, 1991 Selected Associations and Functions Associate Editor, The Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry, 2011–today Member of the University Senate, 2011-today Speaker of the list "Vereinigte Professoren", 2010-today Head, Association of German Chemistry Professors (Arbeitsgemeinschaft deutscher Universitätsprofessoren Chemie, ADUC), 2011-2013 Chairman, Dechema Section on "Kinetics and Reaction Mechanisms", 2008-today Editor-in-Chief, WIRES-Computational Molecular Sciences, 2008-today Associate Editor, The Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry, 1996 - 1998 Editor, The Journal of Computational Chemistry, 2000-today Wesley D. Allen, Associate Professor, Department of Chemsitry, University of Georgia, Athens, USA. Walter Thiel, Director of Institute for Theoretical Chemistry, Max-Planck-Institut für Kohlenforschung, Germany. Modesto Orozco, Professor and Group Leader of the Institute of Molecular Modelling and Bioinformatics, Institute for Research in Biomedicine, Barcelona, Spain. Peter Willett, Professor of Information Science, University of Sheffield, UK. Title Computational Molecular Science Editors Peter R. Schreiner, Wesley D. Allen, Modesto Orozco, Walter Thiel, Peter Willett Publisher Wiley, 2014 Science / Chemistry / Computational & Molecular Modeling Science / Chemistry / General

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511819

__label__wiki

Xiaomi rolls out MIUI 9 stable ROM for all compatible devices With the launch of the Redmi 5 just a day away now, Xiaomi has made a decision to increase the price of the Redmi 5A . As per some reports from the gadgets 3... Man who shot and killed Chicago police commander pleads not guilty Legghette allegedly encountered Bauer as he was being chased by police officers outside the Thompson Center in broad daylight on a busy workday, Maher noted. "I... NASA plans nuclear-armed HAMMER to save Earth from asteroid Scientists and engineers with the US government have drawn up plans for a spacecraft that could knock big, incoming space rocks off course via blunt-force impac... Honda prices 160 cc motorcycle, X-Blade, at Rs 78500 Not only this, but it will also offer faster acceleration along with better load carrying capability. It gets a rather sharp-looking LED headlamp, sporty fuel t... Google Maps wants to simplify Indian address with open-source Plus Codes Google on Tuesday launched " Plus Codes ", an open source solution that assigns unique codes to different locations. Well, I don't know about other features,... Injuries reported after ductwork falls from ceiling at Kalahari waterpark in Sandusky Two were briefly hospitalized, while the other three refused emergency medical attention. One person on Twitter shared a photo of the pool after the incident,... HS Management Partners LLC Lowers Stake in Facebook Inc (FB) It has outperformed by 10.05% the S&P500. Peregrine Asset Advisers Inc decreased its stake in Boeing (BA) by 27.26% based on its latest 2017Q3 regulatory fili... Global Automotive Vehicle Security Systems Market 2018 - GM, Daimler, Ford, Hyundai, Chrysler The Complete Automotive report also consists key drivers and limiting factors affect the Complete Automotive market growth, change in industry trends or chall... Why Is The New Honda Accord Already Struggling To Sell? The 2018 Honda Accord is sleeker, lighter, lower, and cuts a smaller hole in the air than the last model, but its two-motor hybrid powertrain carries only ve... Bharti board gives nod to raise upto $1 billion The country's biggest telecom company has been facing stiff competition from Reliance Jio that began services in September 2016. "National Company Law Tribu... New Exoplanets Discovered Near Solar System, One Could Have Liquid Water Chances of finding alien life in new exoplanets discovered keep increasing as more exoplanets are found that may have the right conditions. Now, in a boost to... Apollo Global Management, LLC (APO) Formed Double Top; Buyers Could Thrive Argan Inc now has $664.71 million valuation. The stock increased 0.42% or $0.14 during the last trading session, reaching $33.7. About 1.37 million shares trade... The Division 2 Set To Be Biggest Ubisoft Game Of All According to a source close to the project who spoke to Gamereactor , there are over 1,000 people who are now working on The Division 2! The press release is... Google Pixel Buds to get new features according to APK breakdown It could be that these are features that are in testing that might not make the final cut, but we guess we'll just have to wait and see. Keep in mind that Googl... Register for Early Access — Westworld Mobile Game If you've been hyped to play the Westworld mobile game, the release date inches closer and Warner Brothers Interactive Entertainment have begun pre-registrati... Steam's Warhammer: Vermintide 2 Gets Off To A Very Fast Start Check out our guide to Vermintide 2 careers and classes . After its launch, Fatshark has released an update that enables Twitch game mode and fixes some of the... Apple Music Now Has 38 Mln Subscribers Cue said Apple has eight million subscribers now in the free trial period, the first time Apple has disclosed the number of trial users. Apple is locked in ra... Healthcare Services Group, Inc. (HCSG) Stake Raised by Aperio Group LLC About 67,178 shares traded. Bank of New York Mellon Corp decreased its holdings in shares of Healthcare Services Group, Inc . Riverbridge Partners Llc who ha... The Hubble Space Telescope captured two galaxies colliding Hubble's Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) and the Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) captured the image, and with such a distinct galactic convergence underway, it's p... Is Earth Flat Or Round? Neil deGrasse Tyson Has The Answer He stated that there could be distortion in the shape like when the planet is revolving at a massive speed, it might look something bulgy like a disk but it is ... Assam to present first e-Budget today Sarma presented a Rs 2,149 crore deficit budget with an annual outlay of Rs 90,673 crore. The girls in Assam will be provided with an annual stipend of Rs 600... Today Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) Stock Reaches 52-Week High The stock increased 0.56% or $0.11 during the last trading session, reaching $19.65. About 4.53M shares traded. Amazon.com, Inc. (NASDAQ: AMZN ) has risen 37.41... Microsoft's Slack competitor is getting Cortana integration and message translation Microsoft announced its group collaboration platform Teams nearly a year and a half ago, but it was made generally available at this time last year . Microso... Shadow of the Colossus Remake Team Working on Even Bigger Game It will not be The Last Guardian, however, as the game came out too recently. Digital Foundry had the opportunity to talk with the team about the technology... Apple to acquire Texture, the 'Netflix for magazines' Most notably, he addressed the company's upcoming video service and the increasing importance of augmented reality (AR) to Apple. Some publications available in... Instagram and Snapchat pull Giphy integration after racist GIF surfaces While tons of users on both Snapchat and Instagram have not been impressed with the feature being pulled from both platforms, the reason behind the sudden disco... Google might soon let Android users send money from Google Contacts app It means that the video messages you sent will remain alive for only a day. As in case of all calls made on Duo , video messages are secure and end-to-end encr... Honor 7C Announced With 4GB Of RAM, Android 8.0 Oreo It is powered by a 1.8GHz Octa-Core Snapdragon 450 processor, along with Adreno 506. The device will be available in Black, Red, Gold and Blue color options. ... WhatsApp extends Delete for All message time limit In a related development, WhatsApp, after Android , has begun testing extended deadline for "delete for everyone" for iOS version. An hour means you now ha... Google honours British chemist Perkin with sketch doodle on his 180th birthday While cleaning out the dark muck from a beaker after a failed experiment, the 18-year-old laboratory assistant noticed that the substance left a vivid purple st... Back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 Forward The name of Sony's next-gen controller for PlayStation 5 may have ... In the USA , it has placed an order for 100,000 electric delivery truc... There were also no second-prize, $1 million tickets sold across the co...

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511828

__label__wiki

Western Waters AZ. vs CA. page ii chart 10 Update item information Title AZ vs. CA:10 California Exhibits, Vol. X; Nos. 458-528 Creator Arizona, complainant.; California, ; defendant.; Palo Verde Irrigation District (Calif.), ; defendant.; United States.; Supreme Court. Subject Water rights; Water consumption; Rivers [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : California exhibits. Rights Management Digital Image Copyright 2005, University of Utah. All Rights Reserved. Holding Institution 5th Special Coll. Rare, University Library, California State University, Long Beach Source Physical Dimensions 25 v. : ill. (some folded) ; 25 cm. Metadata Cataloger Seung Hoon Yoo Scanning Contractor Backstage Library Works - 1180 S. 800 E. Orem, UT 84097. ARK ark:/87278/s67p8x9t Setname wwdl_azvca Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s67p8x9t behalf of the United States a contract with Six Companies, Inc., whereby it was agreed that the company would construct for the United States across the Colorado River at a point about 18 miles upstream from Parker, Arizona, a large monolithic concrete dam. The eastern abutment of said dam will rest upon public lands of the United States in the State of Arizona and its western abutment will rest upon unsurveyed public lands in the State of California. The aforesaid contract is now in force. On September 10, 1934, the contractor, Six Companies, Inc., was directed to proceed with performance of its contract, and construction work was commenced. In addition to the contract work the United States has engaged at the dam site a large number of employees who are supervising and assisting in the contract work and in other work at the dam site. The State of Arizona has made great efforts to prevent the development of the Colorado River Basin which has been undertaken pursuant to the laws of the United States, including the Boulder Canyon Project Act (45 Stat. 1063) ; and in litigation before this Court failed in a suit to enjoin construction of Boulder Dam as an alleged interference with said State's alleged water rights. (Arizona v. California, 283 U. S. 423.) Subsequent to its failure in the aforesaid litigation before this Court, the State of Arizona has negotiated with affiant for a contract between the United States and the State of Arizona for the delivery of water from Boulder Source Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : California exhibits. Resource Identifier 100102-UUM-AvC-v10t467_page 2.jpg Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s67p8x9t/1121813

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511830

__label__wiki

Antoine Winfield Jr. Micah Parsons Roots Manuva Sean Clifford Rodney Smith Yetur Gross-Matos Sports Football College sports FBS College Football Playoff College football Big Ten Penn State Minnesota Kent State No. 5 Penn State at No. 13 Minnesota, matchup of unbeatens By The Associated Press - Nov. 07, 2019 05:04 PM EST FILE - In this Sept. 14, 2019, file photo, Penn State quarterback Sean Clifford (14) scrambles during an NCAA college football game against Pittsburgh, in State College, Pa. Penn State (8-0) plays against Minnesota (8-0) on Saturday, Nov. 9. (AP Photo/Barry Reeger, File) No. 5 Penn State (8-0, 5-0 Big Ten, No. 4 CFP) at No. 13 Minnesota (8-0, 5-0, No. 17), Saturday at 12 p.m. EST (ABC). Line: Penn State by 6 1/2. Series record: Penn State leads 9-5. The Nittany Lions have their sights set on their first appearance in the College Football Playoff, and a road win against a ranked team would be another resume-booster that would sure come in handy come selection time. Penn State plays at Ohio State, which has the top spot in the first edition of the CFP rankings, in two weeks to likely determine the front-runner in the East Division. This is the most-anticipated game at Minnesota since Oct. 10, 2003, when the 17th-ranked Gophers lost 38-35 at the Metrodome to 20th-ranked Michigan. The Golden Gophers not only have a 10-game winning streak that's the program's longest since the early 1940s, but they have a two-game lead on Iowa and Wisconsin in the West Division with those teams playing each other on Saturday. Their first trip to the Big Ten championship game is legitimately in play. Minnesota running back Rodney Smith vs. Penn State's front seven. The third-leading rusher in the conference this season and the third-leading rusher in program history, Smith will be leaned on heavily by a Gophers offense that has run the ball more than any other Big Ten team. The Nittany Lions, led by linebacker Micah Parsons and defensive end Yetur Gross-Matos, have the second-stingiest run defense in the FBS with an average of 68.4 yards given up per game on the ground. Penn State: QB Sean Clifford. He leads the Big Ten in total offense, accounting for an average of 276.4 yards per game. Minnesota: FS Antoine Winfield Jr. He's third on the team in tackles and is second in the FBS with five interceptions. Penn State and Minnesota are two of the seven remaining undefeated teams in the FBS. ... Penn State won the most recent meeting in 2016, a 29-26 decision in overtime at home. The Gophers won the last matchup in Minnesota, 24-10 in 2013. ... The Nittany Lions are 8-0 for the first time since 2008. The Gophers are 8-0 for the first time since 1941. More AP college football coverage: https://apnews.com/Collegefootball and https://twitter.com/AP_Top25

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511831

__label__cc

Government Studies on Chiropractic There have been a number of large investigations conducted on chiropractic by the American, Canadian, New Zealand, Swedish and Australian governments over the last few decades. In all cases, their findings have supported the effectiveness and efficacy of Chiropractic. Canada's 1993 Manga Report strongly recommended chiropractic care over medical care for the treatment and management of most low-back conditions. The 1994 AHCPR Study from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services suggested that chiropractic spinal manipulation was a conservative and safe treatment for many low-back conditions and should be utilized prior to any surgical interventions in most cases. Doctors of Chiropractic have now become integral to the development of governmental guidelines for the treatment of back conditions in Canada and the U.S. In addition, many hospitals are extending privileges to chiropractors and referrals between medical doctors and chiropractors are becoming increasingly common. US - "The Agency on Health Care Policy and Research Study" CANADA - "The Manga Report" NEW ZEALAND - "The New Zealand Commission Report" SWEDEN - "The Sweden Report" AUSTRALIA - "The Australian Report" US - The Agency on Health Care Policy and Research Study CANADA - The Manga Report NEW ZEALAND - The New Zealand Commission Report This 377 page report, Chiropractic In New Zealand, was the most comprehensive and detailed independent examination of chiropractic ever undertaken at that time. The report withstood judicial hearings and extensive investigations by the Commission in New Zealand, the United States, Canada, England and Australia. According to the researchers, "We entered into our inquiry in early 1978. We had no clear idea what might emerge. We knew little about chiropractors. None of us had undergone any personal experience of chiropractic treatment. If we had any general impression of chiropractic it was probably that shared by many in the community: that chiropractic was an unscientific cult, not to be compared with orthodox medical or paramedical services. We might well have thought that chiropractors were people with perhaps a strong urge for healing, who had for some reason not been able to get into a field recognized by orthodox medicine and who had found an outlet outside the fringes of orthodoxy." "But as we prepared ourselves for this inquiry it became apparent that much lay beneath the surface of these apparently simple terms of reference. In the first place it transpired that for many years chiropractors had been making strenuous efforts to gain recognition and acceptance as members of the established health care team. Secondly, it was clear that organized medicine in New Zealand was adamantly opposed to this on a variety of grounds which appeared logical and responsible. Thirdly, however, it became only too plain that the argument had been going on ever since chiropractic was developed as an individual discipline in the late 1800's, and that in the years between then and now the debate had generated considerable more heat than light." "By the end of the inquiry we found ourselves irresistibly and with complete unanimity drawn to the conclusion that modern chiropractic is a soundly based and valuable branch of the health care in a specialized area..." Their report includes the following findings: Chiropractic is a branch of the healing arts specializing in the correction by spinal manual therapy of what chiropractors identify as biomechanical disorders of the spinal column - they carry out spinal diagnosis and therapy at a sophisticated and refined level; Chiropractors are the only health practitioners who are necessarily equipped by their education and training to carry out spinal manual therapy; General medical practitioners and physiotherapists have no adequate training in spinal manual therapy; Spinal manual therapy in the hands of a registered chiropractor is safe; The education and training of a registered chiropractor are sufficient to enable him/her to determine whether there are contraindications to spinal manual therapy in a particular case, and whether the patient should have medical care instead of or as well as chiropractic care; Spinal manual therapy can be effective in relieving musculoskeletal symptoms, such as back pain and other symptoms known to respond to such therapy, such as migraine; In a limited number of cases where there are organic and/or visceral symptoms, chiropractic treatment may provide relief, but this is unpredictable, and in such cases the patient should be under concurrent medical care if that is practicable; In the public interest and in the interests of patients, there must be no impediment to full professional cooperation between chiropractors and medical practitioners; It is wrong that the present law, or any medical ethical rules, should have the effect that a patient can receive spinal manual therapy which is subsidized by a health benefit only from those health professionals least qualified to deliver it; The responsibility for spinal manual therapy training, because of its specialized nature, should lie with the chiropractic profession and part-time or vacation courses in spinal manual therapy for other health professionals should not be encouraged. New Zealand Report. Hasselberg PD. Government Printer, Wellington - 1979. SWEDEN - The Sweden Report Up until the late 1980's, Sweden had no legislation regulating the practice of chiropractic, although there were approximately 100 chiropractors in Sweden educated in accredited chiropractic colleges. In 1987, a commission on Alternative Medicine in Sweden conducted a detailed investigation of chiropractic education. They had the scientific literature assessed by university medical faculty and additionally commissioned a demographic survey by Statistics Sweden. Subsequent to the report, the Swedish government passed legislation recognizing and regulating the chiropractic profession in Sweden. Then, together with the governments from Denmark, Finland and Norway, it established a school of chiropractic at the University of Odense in Denmark to provide a regional chiropractic college for students from those countries. The reports findings included: Doctors of chiropractic should become registered practitioners and be brought within the national insurance system in Sweden; Training for Doctors of Chiropractic follows a 4-5 year course of university level training and was found to be the equivalent to Swedish medical training - chiropractors have "competence in differential diagnosis" and should be regulated on a primary care basis"; "Measures to improve cooperation between chiropractors, registered medical practitioners and physiotherapists are vital" in the public interest. Ref 11 Supra. In July of 1984 the Australian Federal Minister for Health asked their Medicare Benefits Review Committee to "consider requests for extending the scope of Medicare (government-funded health care) arrangements to provide benefits for certain paramedical services" - which included chiropractic services. The Committee recommended funding for chiropractic in hospitals and other public institutions, and stated: "We are aware of the very considerable organizational and professional obstacles... orthodox practitioners and, indeed, some chiropractors may initially find the experience an uneasy one, but we consider the differences that currently exist to be unreasonable and efforts should be made to bridge the gap." "... the continuing schism between the two professions does little to help improve the health of the many Australians who might benefit from a joint chiropractic/medical approach to their problems." Second Report Medicare Benefits Review Committee. Thompson CJ. Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra, Australia, Chapter 10 (Chiropractic) - June 1986.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511834

__label__wiki

'Bramhachari' Is This Generation's 'Anubhava' uday mehta, aditi prahudeva, sathish ninasam, bramhachari, Bramhachari movie Image Satish Neenasam starrer 'Bramhachari' is all set to release tomorrow across Karnataka. Chandra Mohan has scripted the film apart from directing it. Till now, there was no news about who had written the story. Now it has been revealed that producer Uday Mehta himself has written the story of the film. Uday Mehta in a recent press meet has announced that he has written the story of the film and Kashinath is a big inspiration for him to write the story. 'I have grown up watching his films. That's when the idea of this film came. I would like to call the film as this generation's 'Anubhava'' says Uday Mehta. Though Uday Mehta wrote this story in 2015, it is being made into a film only in 2019. One of the highlight is, Satish Neenasam starrer 'Love in Mandya' produced by Uday Mehta was released on 29th November 2014. Now Satish and Uday Mehta's second outing is getting released on the same day five years later. The film will be released in more than 250 theaters across Karnataka.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511835

__label__cc

CHRIS HEMSWORTH NETWORK Welcome to Chris Hemsworth Network - your online resource for all things featuring the talented Australian actor, Chris Hemsworth. Chris may be best known as "Thor" in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Fans may also recognize Chris from other projects such as The Cabin in the Woods, Rush, Snow White and the Huntsman and In the Heart of the Sea. Online since May 2009, our goal is to bring you all the latest news and images regarding Chris and his career. We hope you enjoy your stay, bookmark the site and visit often for all your Chris needs. Home > Film Productions > Thor (2011) > Posters Filename: poster_003.jpg Album name: rachel / Posters URL: http://chris-hemsworth.org/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=16741 © 2015 Chris Hemsworth Network | Theme by MonicaNDesign | Powered by Coppermine Chris Hemsworth Network is a non-profit fan site, completely unofficial, and is in no way trying to infringe on the copyrights or businesses of any of the entities. We have no affiliation with Chris Hemsworth, anyone around him or anyone who represents him. All pictures, videos and other media are copyright to their respective owners, no copyright infringement is ever intended. If there is anything on this site that belongs to you and you'd like it removed, please contact us. If you have something you would like to donate to the photo archive, please do so by emailing us.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511836

__label__cc

culture designers © 2019 Press Play: Los Wálters November 18, 2016 CULTURE, MUSIC, z In an age of cornucopian music accessibility how can one thoughtfully curate a playlist without having an algorithm decide for you? Enter Culture Designers ®. For those keeping a close eye on the emerging Caribbean electropop scene, one would be hard pressed to look over the Puerto Rican based band Los Wálters. Originally, an online collaboration between two members traveling between various cities including our home turf, they now have additional band members in their live act. We chatted briefly with Los Wálters at our HQ, Product/81 creative lab. Lauren: Break down the international collaboration process. Ángel: We started out in Puerto Rico and had different music projects in the beginning.I was in Philly and he was in Barcelona, it really started as an experiment. For the first EP [extended player], we met in Philly. Luis: I saw snow! Ángel: We got in the studio for 5 days and that’s what came out. It started as a random thing, and it evolved. Luis: Turtle studios also inspired us in Philly because they have more Blues and Jazz. Lauren: What are your musical influences loosely? Ángel: I think it’s a mix between what we write, the lyrics inspired by more Spanish songs. We start with a beat. More English speaking bands for the beat, but we put in this Spanish flavor. Luis: Like New Order, more dance with the 80’s influence. Depeche Mode and Kraftwerk too. Newer bands from Australia like Cut Copy. All the bands that started adding the Funk like Italo-Disco. Ángel: We try also try to keep influences from Puerto Rico. You always hear instruments like maracas, congas, bongas, timbales. We use those sounds, electronically. Los Wálters Isla Disco dropped late last month and is definitely worth checking it out, in fact do yourself a favor and explore the rest of their catalogue. This is a band to watch. Once you do that, go see them live at House of Creatives Music Festival this Saturday November 19th! WORDS BY: Lauren Ruiz BACK IN TIME Select Month December 2017 (4) November 2017 (5) October 2017 (1) August 2017 (2) July 2017 (5) May 2017 (1) April 2017 (3) March 2017 (6) February 2017 (5) January 2017 (4) December 2016 (4) November 2016 (8) September 2016 (6) August 2016 (1) July 2016 (2) May 2016 (4) April 2016 (3) March 2016 (4) February 2016 (2) January 2016 (4) December 2015 (7) November 2015 (3) October 2015 (7) September 2015 (9) August 2015 (3) July 2015 (9) June 2015 (12) May 2015 (11) April 2015 (17) March 2015 (20) February 2015 (17) January 2015 (19) December 2014 (6) November 2014 (14) October 2014 (24) September 2014 (15) August 2014 (14) July 2014 (22) June 2014 (18) May 2014 (20) April 2014 (10) March 2014 (14) February 2014 (11) January 2014 (5) November 2013 (2) October 2013 (5) September 2013 (3) August 2013 (3) July 2013 (4) June 2013 (6) May 2013 (5) April 2013 (3) March 2013 (5) February 2013 (6) January 2013 (13) December 2012 (14) November 2012 (1) October 2012 (4) September 2012 (3) August 2012 (6) July 2012 (8) June 2012 (7) May 2012 (10) April 2012 (7) March 2012 (6) February 2012 (5) January 2012 (10) December 2011 (5) November 2011 (3) October 2011 (6) September 2011 (8) August 2011 (12) July 2011 (13) June 2011 (13) Get your culture fix.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511841

__label__wiki

No wonder you’re late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow. Mad Hatter (from Alice in Wonderland, 1951) Continents ▾ Continents Conversion ▾ Conversion Inches to cm Cm to inches Pounds to kg Kg to pounds Time Format ▾ Time Format Show seconds Set 24-hour clock (military time) Current time by city For example, New York Current time by country For example, Japan For example, London For example, Dubai For example, Hong Kong For example, Delhi For example, Sydney For example, Paris For example, Rome Time difference between Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte, Sri Lanka and Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte is 1 hour 30 minutes behind Krasnoyarsk. Time in Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte Time in Krasnoyarsk Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte time zone: UTC+05:30 or +0530 04:44 AM Krasnoyarsk time zone: UTC+07:00 or +07 Find out the distance between Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte and Krasnoyarsk Find out the time difference between Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte and other cities Find out the time difference between Krasnoyarsk and other cities Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte, Sri Lanka: basic facts and figures Country: Sri Lanka Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte coordinates: 6°52′58″ N, 79°54′25″ E Find out what time it is in Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte right now See the map of Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte Wikipedia article: Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte Find out the distance between Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte and other cities Find out the distance between Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte and the North Pole, the South Pole, the Equator, the Tropic of Cancer, the Tropic of Capricorn, the Arctic Circle, the Antarctic Circle Krasnoyarsk, Russia: basic facts and figures Federal subject: Krasnoyarsk Krai Krasnoyarsk coordinates: 56°01′06″ N, 92°52′01″ E Find out what time it is in Krasnoyarsk right now See the map of Krasnoyarsk Wikipedia article: Krasnoyarsk Find out the distance between Krasnoyarsk and other cities Find out the distance between Krasnoyarsk and the North Pole, the South Pole, the Equator, the Tropic of Cancer, the Tropic of Capricorn, the Arctic Circle, the Antarctic Circle Share on Facebook Tweet it Add this page to your bookmarks: Ctrl+D (⌘+D on Mac) © 2011-2020 dateandtime.info London | New York | Toronto | Sydney | Moscow | Berlin | Rome | Istanbul | Jerusalem | Dubai | Delhi | Hong Kong | Tokyo About | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | On Time | Greenwich Time Signal | 2020 Calendar

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511842

__label__wiki

The Magic Flute (1975) Posted on December 18, 2017 January 16, 2018 by Dave McAllister 2018 marks 100 years since director Ingmar Bergman’s birth, and celebrations across the globe are planned, not least a ten-week season at London’s BFI Southbank. In April, the BFI will release a bluray of his film of Mozart’s opera The Magic Flute, following a UK cinema release in February. As a Christmas treat it was previewed at the BFI Southbank. Now I must confess that although I enjoy some classical music, a lot of opera leaves me cold and I often find Mozart lightness of touch to be maddeningly twee and dull. But I love Bergman’s films and this is one of the few of his that I haven’t seen. So I leapt at the chance to see it in the cinema. The Magic Flute was made for TV and was first broadcast on Swedish TV on New Years Day 1975. Incredibly, one in four of the Swedish population watched it and it was subsequently released in cinemas. I just can’t imagine that level of enthusiasm in the UK, even when we were limited to four or five channels on TV. But by 1975 Ingmar Bergman was an international star and revered in his home country. He had recently completed his magnificent and harrowing Cries and Whispers and had scored a huge TV hit with his multi-part masterpiece Scenes from a Marriage, a tough but life-affirming exploration of a difficult marriage and separation. The Magic Flute, is a complete contrast – light and joyful. According to his biography, Bergman first saw The Magic Flute as a boy and immediately set about recreating it in his toy marionette theatre. Anyone who has seen his semi-autobiographical Fanny and Alexander will understand Bergman’s childhood fascination with theatre. Apparently, he had the entire production planned out including layered scenery and lighting effects. In the end, he was unable to stage his miniature performance because he couldn’t afford to buy the music on record. So when he was asked if he’d like to film an opera, he leapt at the chance to direct The Magic Flute, his boyhood ambition. Ingmar Bergman directing The Magic Flute with Sven Nyqvist at the camera The plot of The Magic Flute is rambling and bizarre. In brief, Tamino our hero is sent on a quest by the Queen of the Night to find her beautiful daughter Pamina in return for Pamina’s hand in marriage. Pamina is being held captive the evil Monostratos, seemingly on behalf of her unwitting father Sarastro, the leader of a mystic order. We also follow warm-hearted Papageno who loves music and birds but yearns to find a girl to love: his own Papagena. Tamino and Pamina are noble and worthy; Papageno and Papagena are loving and homely. Pamina is rescued, and then the two men undergo three mystic trials to prove their worth and enlightenment. Tamino triumphs at the trials, and he and Pamina are initiated into the mystic order. Papagno lacks discipline and fails the trials, but he still gets his Papagena. The Queen of the Night, who turns out to be evil, is vanquished along with her army. The TV film starts with the camera surveying the theatre audience listening to the orchestral overture. We see close-ups on faces, people of all different ages, many young. Amongst the audience we see actor Erland Josefsson, cinematographer Sven Nyqvist, Bergman himself and his son Daniel before the camera settles on the face of a young girl. From now on, we will experience the opera through her eyes. Helene Friberg, the little girl in the audience who is captivated by The Magic Flute. We watch through her eyes Bergman was inspired by the baroque theatre at Drottningholm, which he visited as a child. However, the entire theatre stage was recreated in a film studio. The set had to be precise and accurate: Bergman was certain that the opera was written for a seven metre wide stage, derived from the distance needed for a character to pace its width stepping to the beat of the music. The production is unashamedly theatrical. From the start, the scenery and costumes are clearly contained on a stage and we regularly cut to the reaction of the young girl in the audience. In Act I we meet Tamino being chased by a monster, a comical dragon costume that could almost be from a school play. We are later introduced to Papageno backstage, he leaps out of bed when he hears his cue, completes his costume and rushes onto stage. We see scenery drop from the flytower above. There’s a scene with flute playing drawing comical animals from the forest. A lion, a bear and an applauding walrus; the costumes are childish and fun; again this is very theatrical. All of this reinforces to the audience that we are experiencing the magic of theatre and we are encouraged to suspend our disbelief through the eyes of a child. Despite being deliberately set on the theatre stage, Bergman takes a very cinematic approach. There’s a playful use of framing in the television 3:4 aspect ratio. The camera is carefully positioned for good composition, but also for what’s left just outside the frame. We just catch glimpses of theatrical effects at the edge of the screen. Somewhat comically, groups of singers hold cards with the printed libretto text that just fill the frame width passed up by hands just out of frame (of course, as the text is in Swedish, we get our own superimposed English subtitles). We’re always aware that we look through a camera, and that more things are happening just out of sight. But the film takes us beyond the theatrical limits of stage and prosecenium; this is more than a film record of a staged theatre production. Although Bergman is careful to establish that we are in the theatre – we see the theatre exterior, the curtains, the audience – he breaks these rules. We hear the audience applause after the first scene, but we don’t hear any further applause until the very end. The first few scenery changes are theatrical – we see the scenery raise and lower. But once we are immersed, the scene changes are achieved by camera editing: suddenly we cut to prison walls, or we are in the snow. The protagonists progress to different spaces during the trials near the near the end of the film, cutting to each new environment. Without fanfare, Bergman gradually moves us from the magic of the stage to the magic of film. Extras in one of the trials There are lots of faces. Bergman and Nyqvist are masters of expressive close-ups, it’s almost a signature. Acting on the stage involves big gestures and physicality; acting on film requires more subtle expression seen from close quarters, the cinema viewer is much closer than an audience in a large auditorium. Bergman directs his cast to achieve a subtle mixture of the two. Again, this is a film and a theatre production. Similarly with the sound design: opera singing on stage must project into the auditorium acoustics, but for a film this isn’t necessary as there are microphones. Accordingly, the style of singing is more understated. It’s easier on the ear, warmer and more engaging. I only noticed one exception: the queen of the night is a little more strident, but that may be intentional to match her character. Apparently, this was one of the first uses of stereo for Swedish broadcast television, and the voices are placed in the stereo mix to match their location on stage or in the frame. Music very important, not just because it’s an opera but important to the plot as well. There’s the magic flute itself, of course. Also a music box that is a tool to aid an unlikely escape from the clutches of evil Monostratos, who is distracted and inspired to dance with his underlings, charmed by the music. The box also later saves Papageno from suicide. The music from the flute protects our heroes in their trials In fact there are two scenes of attempted suicide, the darker one involves Pamina who believes herself spurned by Tamino intends to take her life using her mother’s dagger. These are surprisingly dark turns for what is otherwise a very light production. The ending is also very strange, involving a sort of three-stage initiation. The first is a trial of temptation from a sexy trio of female singers, caressing hands that wander teasingly just out of frame. Then a trial of silence. Then a strange trial of faith using the flute to walk through fiery furnace like a hell, complete with writing white-clad dancers, then a weird passage through a queasy green-lit forest of hands. This last section is a more mysterious tone, differing from the lightness of previous scenes. This change in tone grabbed my attention and came just as the film was beginning to outlast its welcome. I’ve read that Mozart’s opera depicts a Masonic journey of enlightenment, and presumably this culminates in the initiation / trials at the opera’s conclusion. Sarastro is regularly hailed as wise or enlightened by some sort of Druid-type sect all in robes. He decides on Tamino’s initiation as a test to prove his worthiness, and somehow it is vital that Pamina and Tamino’s love is tested to be worthy. There are supposedly many other Masonic references, such as the recurrence of the number three, including three boys and also three ladies that serve as guides. Masonic rituals led by Sarastro The women are seen as objects of desire and of appreciation, almost as precious objects to be possessed. The superficial ideal of falling in love with a beautiful face, particularly between Pamina and Tamino, would be problematic by today’s standards. There’s a particularly creepy and sinister sequence when the villain Monostratos expresses his desire by gliding his hands suggestively over the sleeping Pamina, not quite groping but not far off. By contrast, in a lovely scene in the forest Papageno and Papagena peel off one another’s muted winter clothes to reveal their true green woodland costumes, while singing of having children – the adults in audience would interpret that enthusiastic disrobing as sexual desire, but the younger viewers would find it entirely innocent. Papageno and Papagena, with his own simple musical instrument Despite the use of close-ups, I was surprised to discover the cinematography was by Sven Nyquist. The style, with filtered artificial light and muted tones, is the opposite to the high-contrast natural light that we are accustomed to seeing from him in his collaborations with Bergman. The film makes good use of lights and darks, with a chiaroscuro effect as you might expect from baroque theatre lighting design. The lighting contrasts day and night, dark caves and bright spring forest. Visually, the colour palate varies with the seasons – bright in summer, warm in autumn, cold in winter. It’s more muted than Powell and Pressburger’s Tales of Hoffmann, although towards the end of the film the hues are stronger and with greater contrast. This adds drama to the final trials and battle. The final battle has a darker palate The picture quality of this BFI restoration is good. It was filmed on 16mm due to budget restrictions and makes the picture appear slightly soft. There are also some flaws in the original source print most noticeable in the close-ups of the girl in the audience, but these are minimal and don’t distract. I expect this new BFI restoration is the best it can look. The soundtrack is mono, clean, warm and pleasingly intimate. The Magic Flute is a charming film. Bergman is not generally known for his lightness of touch and although some of his comedies are playful they seem dated nowadays. By contrast, this film is joyful and timeless. I’m pleased this minor but enjoyable film can now be appreciated in the UK. The Magic Flute will get a UK cinema release on 16th March 2018, and will be released on blu-ray and DVD by the BFI on 23rd April 2018. The Ingmar Bergman Archives page on The Magic Flute is here. Posted in blu ray / DVD, cinemaTagged Daniel Bergman, Erland Josefsson, Ingmar Bergman, Sven Nyqvist Previous Post The Goalie’s Anxiety at the Penalty Kick (1971) Next Post Star Wars Episode 8: The Last Jedi (2017)

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511843

__label__wiki

Paul Klee: Irony at Work Publisher: Prestel Artist(s): Paul Klee Dimensions: 9 1/4 x 12 in | 23.5 x 30.5 cm Reproductions: 257 color, 54 b&w Retail: $60 | £45 Texts by by Angela Lampe, Michael Baumgartner, Charles W. Haxthausen, Christine Hopfengart, Cathrin Klingsohr-Leroy Known for its whimsy and levity, Paul Klee’s art is often considered gleefully childlike. This groundbreaking volume argues that Klee’s style emerged from a philosophical school that originated with early German Romanticism and consisted of perpetual shifts between satire and affirmation of the absolute, finite and infinite, and real and ideal. Featuring approximately 250 works, this careful appreciation of Klee connects each stage of his career to the larger philosophical context. Exploring the satires and caricatures of Klee’s youth, his experimentations in Cubism and “mechanical theater,”and the constructivist approach of the Bauhaus school, this book follows the trajectory of Klee’s oeuvre as a reflection of prevailing styles. It closes with the artist’s final years, in which he was labeled a “degenerate artist” by the Nazi regime and struggled with illness. Viewed through the many facets of irony as a complex theme, and against the backdrop of Europe’s seismic political and artistic movements, Klee’s body of work takes on a renewed significance as one of the most critical of its generation. Paul Klee was born as a German citizen in Münchenbuchsee near Bern, Switzerland, in 1879. In 1911, he had his first solo exhibition at the Galerie Thannhauser in Munich. In the same year, he met fellow artist Wassily Kandinsky and became acquainted with the expressionist group Der Blaue Reiter (The Blue Rider), exhibiting with them at their second show in 1912. Later that year, after becoming familiar with the art of Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, and Robert Delaunay during a trip to Paris, Klee began incorporating cubist and other innovative colorist techniques and ideas into his own distinct practice. Two years later, in 1914, Klee traveled to Tunisia with his friends, the artists August Macke and Louis Moilliet, a revelatory experience that the artist credits with further awakening him to color. In 1921, he was appointed to the faculty of the Bauhaus by Walter Gropius, the founder and first director of the school, where he taught and worked as a “form master” from 1921 to 1925, while the school was in Weimar, and as a professor from 1926 to 1931, when the school was located in Dessau. Paul Klee: The Abstract Dimension

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511844

__label__cc

Extracurricular opportunities Post opportunity Get to know Crimson 108 opportunities found in United Kingdom Email me opportunities like this Oxford Flash Fiction Competition, Spanish: Year 7 - Year 13 Crimson Education United Kingdom If you are in Years 7-13, you are invited to enter a very short story to be in with a chance of winning up to £100. Oxford are looking for a complete story, written in Spanish using NO MORE THAN 100 WORDS. They are looking for imagination and creativity, as well as your ability to write in Spanish. Your use of Spanish will be considered in the context of your age and year group: in other words, we will not expect younger pupils to compete against older pupils linguistically. There are two categories: Years 7-11 and Years 12-13. A first prize of £100 will be awarded to the winning entry in each category, with runner-up prizes of £25. The winning entries will be published on our website. Imperial College London: Schools Science Competition The competition is open to teams of students of all ages from secondary schools, or home-schooled groups. Each team must comprise of a maximum of 4 students and must be mentored by a named Science, Maths or Design & Technology teacher from their school, or a home-educator. To enter, teams must create a 5 minute film that: briefly outlines the Global Goal they have selected; describes their innovative solution; explains the science behind the idea; and illustrates how their idea would address the goal. Guidance on making and editing a film can be found on the competiton webpage. Medic Insight UK Students on this placement will have the unique opportunity to gain experience in a state-of-the-art UK hospital. Students are coached on how to deal with emergency situations and will build up to running several simulation emergency situations themselves. It's an exciting and challenging environment supported by the Medical Projects team. The University of Cambridge, Marshall Society Economics Essay Competition The Marshall Society, the Economics society of the University of Cambridge, holds an annual essay competition. This is an opportunity for all students currently working towards A-levels, the IB or equivalent qualifications to demonstrate their ability to write a convincing and well-structured essay. Emphasis should be placed on sound explanation of economic theory and well-reasoned arguments, drawing on relevant real-world evidence. Entrants are advised to make their essays as concise as the topic allows: the guideline is 1500 words. The essays will be judged individually and the shortlist, runners up, and winner will be announced in September. The author of the winning essay will also receive £50; the two runners up will receive £25 each. Girton College, University of Cambridge: Humanities Writing Competition. The Humanities Writing Competition is run annually for any Year 12 (or equivalent) students with interests in the Humanities. The 2018-19 competition is currently open, and will close on 15 March 2019. The Humanities Writing Competition is based on five objects from the College’s small antiquities museum. This competition is an opportunity for research and writing beyond the curriculum using one or more of the six objects as your focus. Essays or creative responses (such as dramatic monologues or short stories) are equally welcome. We are looking for the ability to connect different areas of knowledge, to think about details and to communicate clearly. The prize-giving ceremony for the 2017-2018 finalists was held on Thursday 26 April, during which six students were welcomed to Girton College to celebrate their achievement. Peterhouse, University of Cambridge: Kelvin Science Essay Prize Peterhouse hold an annual Science essay competition for students with a keen interest in their chosen science. Competitors are advised that the main focus of the essay should not be material previously or currently being studied by the entrant as part of their sixth form studies. The entrant may refer to topics that will be studied in future so long as, at the time of the closing date, the entrant has received no formal tuition on the topic in question. All entries must be verified by a Head of Sixth Form or Head of History confirming that the essay is the entrant’s own work and that the main focus of the essay is not something which they have hitherto studied in the sixth form classroom. The prizes are open to all students in year 12 or equivalent (i.e. in their penultimate year of school and usually aged 16 or 17), regardless of nationality or school country. Essays must be written in English. Each competition has a prize pool of £750. Winners will be contacted by post - please make sure your postal address and other contact details are entered correctly! Peterhouse, University of Cambridge: Vellacott History Essay Prize Peterhouse hold an annual History essay competition for students with a keen interest and high calibre of History writing. The prizes are open to all students in year 12 or equivalent (i.e. in their penultimate year of school and usually aged 16 or 17), regardless of nationality or school country. Essays must be written in English. Please note that essays must be uploaded as pdf documents through our online submission system. All entries must be verified by a teacher and must conform to the guidelines given in terms of length and content, making sure that all citations and quotes are acknowledged using any recognised system. There is a strict limit of two entries per prize per school or college, unless your school requests extra entries before the closing date of the competition. Extra entries are granted at the discretion of the prize co-ordinators and must be arranged in advance by your teacher. Each competition has a prize pool of £750. Winners will be contacted by post - please make sure your postal address and other contact details are entered correctly! Peterhouse, University of Cambridge: Thomas Campion English Essay Prize Peterhouse hold an annual essay competitions for students with a keen interest and high writing calibre in English. Competitors are advised that the main focus of the essay should not be material previously or currently being studied by the entrant as part of their sixth form studies. The entrant may refer to topics that will be studied in future so long as, at the time of the closing date, the entrant has received no formal tuition on the topic in question. All entries must be verified by a Head of Sixth Form or Head of History confirming that the essay is the entrant’s own work and that the main focus of the essay is not something which they have hitherto studied in the sixth form classroom. Each competition has a prize pool of £750. Winners will be contacted by post - please make sure your postal address and other contact details are entered correctl UK Young Entrepreneur of the Year For business people aged 30 or less who have demonstrated a high degree of entrepreneurship, creativity and vision for the future. The judges will be looking to identify an individual who has set up a business that has set and achieved objectives within its business plans. In addition to this, judges will want to see an understanding of the relationship between your own development and the future success of the business. Not only the future of business, young entrepreneurs are the innovative zest of commerce today. They are the data-literate, socially savvy sharers who create new technologies to render old problems defunct. The fearless spirit of the young entrepreneur invigorates monopolies with fresh competition, while their acumen as digital pioneers empowers local businesses to adopt global horizons. Apart from age, there is no specific entry criteria for the Royal Bank of Scotland Great British Entrepreneur Awards. As long as you are an entrepreneur, and your business is registered and operates in the UK, you are free to enter! The entry deadline for the 2019 Great British Entrepreneur Awards is 2nd August 2019. Any extensions to entry deadlines will be announced via the website, social media and email. UK Mathematical Challenge Junior/U13 The UKMT Individual Maths Challenges are lively, intriguing multiple choice question papers, which are designed to stimulate interest in maths in large numbers of pupils. Junior UKMT is the first of the 3 levels and is aimed at 11-13 y/o The papers contain 25 multiple choice questions. Of these, the first 15 are more accessible whilst the final 10 will provide more food for thought. Gold, silver and bronze certificates are awarded to 40% of participants nationally in the Junior Challenges, The most successful participants are invited to enter follow-on rounds; Kangaroos (multiple choice questions) or Olympiads requiring full written answers. The University of Oxford, Oxford German Olympiad The deadline for all tasks is 12 noon, Friday 15th March 2019 . The prizegiving ceremony will take place in Oxford in June, and winning entrants will be invited to attend with a guest. Reasonable travel expenses will be covered. Open to ages 9-18 St Hilda's College, University of Oxford: Science Poetry Competition for under 18s St Hilda's College is hosting a Science Poetry competition as part of SciPo 2019. SciPo, a meeting of Science and Poetry led by our Emeritus Research Fellow Dr Sarah Watkinson , is now in its fourth year. The competition is open to students aged between 11 and 18 years. Entrants are asked to write a poem on the subject of 'Eating Plants'. The winning poem will be performed at St Hilda's College. The winner will receive a cash prize - £100 (1st), £50 (2nd), £25 (3rd) - and an invitation to read their poem at SciPo, St Hilda's, on 8 June 2019. St Hugh's College, University of Oxford: The Julia Wood Prize The Julia Wood Prize is an annual History essay competition open to Sixth Form pupils who have not been in the Sixth Form of any school or college for a period of more than two years. The Prize, worth up to £500, is offered by the Principal and Fellows of St Hugh’s College for the best historical essay submitted by the closing date The Julia Wood Prize opens for submissions by the start of February each year; details will be announced on the College website. The essay must be the entrant’s own work, but there are no restrictions on candidates submitting coursework to the competition. Oxford Flash Fiction Competition French Year 7 - Year 13 If you are in Years 7-13, you are invited to enter a very short story to be in with a chance of winning up to £100. Oxford are looking for a complete story, written in French using NO MORE THAN 100 WORDS. They are looking for imagination and creativity, as well as your ability to write in French. Your use of French will be considered in the context of your age and year group: in other words, we will not expect younger pupils to compete against older pupils linguistically. Faculty of Classics, University of Oxford: Summer Essay Competition (state school eligibility) This essay competition will be appropriate if you are studying any kind of humanities subject, but particularly history. It could also be something that you talk about in your personal statement. Essays will be judged by current Oxford Classics students. First prize will be a £100 book voucher, second prize £50 voucher and third £25. Royal College of Science: The Science Challenge The Science Challenge is the Royal College of Science Union's (RCSU) annual science communication competition. Requiring entrants to demonstrate their skills in scientific debate and reasoning, the Science Challenge tests the ability of today's young scientists to teach the public about the science that affects their lives. Entries are now opened to all Imperial and school students worldwide. Check out our judges and their questions for this year's competition! The UK Mathematical Challenge Senior/U17 The UKMT Individual Maths Challenges are lively, intriguing multiple choice question papers, which are designed to stimulate interest in maths in large numbers of pupils. The Senior individual challenge is the highest of the three levels and aimed at students in the final years of high school. The papers contain 25 multiple choice questions. Of these, the first 15 are more accessible whilst the final 10 will provide more food for thought. Gold, silver and bronze certificates are awarded to 60% of participants nationally in the Senior Challenge. The most successful participants at each level are invited to enter follow-on rounds; Kangaroos (multiple choice questions) or Olympiads requiring full written answers. The UK Mathematical Challenge Intermediate/U15 The UKMT Individual Maths Challenges are lively, intriguing multiple choice question papers, which are designed to stimulate interest in maths in large numbers of pupils. intermediate UKMT is the second of the 3 levels and is aimed at 14/15 year olds. The papers contain 25 multiple choice questions. Of these, the first 15 are more accessible whilst the final 10 will provide more food for thought. Gold, silver and bronze certificates are awarded to 40% of participants nationally in the Intermediate Challenges, The most successful participants are invited to enter follow-on rounds; Kangaroos (multiple choice questions) or Olympiads requiring full written answers. World Trade Organisation: Essay Award for Young Economists The WTO established the annual WTO Essay Award for Young Economists in 2009. The award, which carries a prize of CHF 5,000, aims to promote high-quality economic research on the WTO and WTO-related issues and to reinforce the relationship between the WTO and the academic community. The paper must address issues related to trade policy and international trade co-operation. The author(s) of the paper must possess or be engaged in the completion of a PhD degree and, if over 30 years of age, be no more than two years past a PhD defence. In the case of co-authored papers, this requirement shall apply to all authors. In addition, to be considered for the Award, essays cannot exceed 15,000 words. The winning essay will be published in the WTO Working Paper Series and it is the responsibility of the author(s) to endeavour to secure publication of the contribution in a journal. The University of Lancaster: Modern Languages Essay Prize Schools are invited to hold an essay competition for their Modern Languages A-level students and to submit one essay for consideration for the Essay Prize. The topic for differs every year and can be interpreted by the student as they will. Essays should be written in French, German or Spanish, should be no longer than 500 words, and should include a bibliography (not included in the word count). A prize of a £100 book voucher will be awarded to the best essay, judged by a panel of academics from the Department of Languages and Cultures. There are also two runners up prizes of £25 book vouchers. Opportunity Leaders

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511847

__label__wiki

Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association(2011) The Roberts Court The Free Speech Clause: Am. I, Cl. 3 California Governor Jerry Brown The Roberts Court (2010-2016). Seated, from left to right: Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Standing, from left to right: Sonia Sotomayor, Steven G. Breyer, Samuel A. Alito, and Elena Kagan. Entertainment Merchant's Association Today, most video games include ratings, such as “M for Mature.” However, those ratings are not compelled by law. Retailers choose to comply with the video game rating system, in much the same way that movie theaters comply with the voluntary movie rating systems. In 2005, California enacted Assembly Bill 1179. It prohibited the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. Parents and guardians could still buy the games for their children. The law included a very broad definition of violence. It covered games “[i]n which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being, if those acts are depicted in a manner that a reasonable person, considering the game as a whole, would find appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors, that is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the community as to what is suitable for minors, and that causes the game as a whole to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.” The violent-video-game law was sponsored by state senator Leland Yee. (Ironically, Yee was later sentenced to five years in prison for “promising votes and guns to an undercover agent who was funneling him contributions.”) The Entertainment Merchants Association (EMA), a trade group for the entertainment industry, challenged the constitutionality of the law. On appeal, the Supreme Court found that the California law was unconstitutional.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511855

__label__cc

Chromosomal instability, aneuploidy, and gene mutations in human sporadic colorectal adenomas Authors: Giaretti, Walter | Molinu, Silvia | Ceccarelli, Jenny | Prevosto, Claudia Affiliations: Biophysics and Cytometry, Department of Oncogenesis, National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy Note: [] Corresponding author: Dr. Walter Giaretti, Biophysics and Cytometry, Dept. Oncogenesis, National Institute for Cancer Research, Largo R. Benzi 10, 16132 Genova, Italy. Tel.: +39 010 5600969; Fax: +39 010 5600711; E‐mail: walter.giaretti@istge.it. Abstract: Whether in vivo specific gene mutations lead to chromosomal instability (CIN) and aneuploidy or viceversa is so far not proven. We hypothesized that aneuploidy among human sporadic colorectal adenomas and KRAS2 and APC mutations were not independent. Additionally, we investigated if 1p34–36 deletions by dual target FISH were associated with aneuploidy. Among 116 adenomas, 29 were DNA aneuploid by flow cytometry (25%) and 29 were KRAS2 mutated (25%). KRAS2 mutations were associated with aneuploidy (P=0.02). However, while G–C and G–T transversions were strongly associated with DNA aneuploidy (P=0.007), G–A transitions were not. Within a second series of 61 adenomas, we found, instead, that APC mutational status and aneuploidy by flow cytometry were not associated. However, a statistically significant association was found with specific APC mutations, i.e., occurring in the mutation cluster region (MCR, codons 1200–1500) or downstream (P=0.016). Finally, the correlation of 1p34–36 deletions with flow cytometric and FISH detected aneuploidy was also significant (P=0.01). Specific KRAS2 and APC mutations and loss of genes in the 1p34–36 region appear associated with aneuploidy suggesting that these events are not independent and may cooperate in inducing human sporadic colorectal adenomas. A cause effect relationship between gene mutations and aneuploidy remains, however, to be demonstrated. Keywords: Aneuploidy, chromosomal instability, oncogenes, tumor suppressor genes Journal: Analytical Cellular Pathology, vol. 26, no. 5,6, pp. 301-305, 2004

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511857

__label__wiki

Tag Archives: Daily Republican John Knoblock, Blackie Stevens, and 1920s Race Relations in Kansas When I was researching the Knoblock murder, I really struggled to understand why the citizens of of Coffey County were so quick to arrest Sherman “Blackie” Stevens and continue to keep him in jail despite having verified his alibi and likely innocence. As modern readers, we need to take a step back and look at race relations in Kansas in the 1920s to better understand what was happening in Coffey County and the potential danger Blackie Stevens was facing. Kansas and the KKK It is a common misconception that the Ku Klux Klan rose to power immediately following the Civil War and continued to gain momentum through the 1930s. The popularity the the KKK declined steadily through the 1870s, only to experience a resurgence in membership and power in the 1910s and 1920s. The KKK, which began as a Southern institution, worked its way into Kansas social circles through the early twentieth century and by 1925, Klan supporters controlled the Kansas Senate and had a good grip on the seats in the Kansas House of Representatives. This was scary news for minorities, immigrants, Catholics, and anyone else of whom the Klan did not approve. Thanks to the newspapers, we know that the Ku Klux Klan was operating in both Coffey and Lyon counties in 1925 and 1926. In fact, the KKK publicly denounced any connection to John Knoblock about the time that he was first arrested for the murder of his wife. Rumors were circulating that his arrest was delayed because of the KKK’s influence. According to the Emporia Gazette article, “…whether or not Knoblock ever was a klansman, it is certain that he is one no longer…as the leaders of the order have been embarrassed by stories connecting his name with the organization.” Not wanting to be associated with the murder of Florence Knoblock in any way, the normally invisible KKK publicly denies any association with John Knoblock. Meanwhile, in the Daily Republican, we occasionally run into ads not unlike ones for other fraternal organizations. This ad appeared in the May 15, 1926 Daily Republican. Not everyone was a fan of the KKK. William Allen White, the editor of the Emporia Gazette, was adamantly opposed to the Klan and ran for governor primarily to draw attention to the problems the KKK brought to Kansas. Charles Griffith, the attorney general who took an interest in the Knoblock murder case, was also working to drive the Klan out of Kansas. In June of 1926, the Emporia Gazette records an ongoing battle with the Klan, which wanted to march in a parade in downtown Emporia. The attorney general’s office issued an order disallowing the Klan to march with their masks in place, and the Klan argued that it was a violation of their rights to impose such an order. It took a legality to finally push back the tide of the Klan in Kansas: they did not have a charter to operate in the state. After the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the Klan’s appeal, they were forced to cease business in the Kansas. By this time, members around the country were reconsidering their associations with the KKK, and the Klan began to rapidly decline in numbers and influence. Lynching and Law Enforcement Lynch mobs did happen in Kansas, even if it wasn’t as frequent as in other states. The UMKC School of Law suggests there were 54 reported lynchings between 1882 and 1968, which is a low number when compared to Georgia, where 531 people were lynched in the same time period. Kansans were also more likely to lynch regardless of race; of the 54, 19 were African American (compared to 492 of the 531 lynched in Georgia). Still, lynchings were regularly reported, even if they happened in other states. At the time of the Knoblock murder investigation and trial, stories about lynchings appeared in the newspaper. Reports of a lynching in the August 7, 1926 Emporia Gazette. Does this mean that Sherman Stevens was in real danger? The potential for danger was real enough. Today, we would immediately argue that the sheriff violated Sherman Stevens’ rights by holding the man in prison for several weeks despite the fact that no charges were brought against the man and even the newspapers announced that evidence appears to clear the Sherman Stevens of any guilt beyond having worked on a bridge close to the Knoblock home and accepting strawberries from Florence on a previous occasion. Yet, we have to look at what else was going on in Kansas at the same time. Rumors were circulating in surrounding communities about the supposed mob that was going to lynch Sherman Stevens. Though he refutes the seriousness of these rumors, in the June 5, 1925 article “Some Wierd [sic] Tales Being Circulated About Burlington,” John Redmond writes, “There was some talk of lynching the negro suspect, but half of those who talked it wore a silly grin as they said it. One loud-mouthed man might have turned that crowd into a mob, but there was no leader and consequently nothing that looked like a mob, but the officers were taking no chances and kept the negro away as a precaution…” The talk was there. The situation didn’t escalate because there wasn’t an instigator. To the poor, inexperienced sheriff’s credit, all indications show that the law truly did investigate Sherman Stevens’ whereabouts. I really believe that they would have released Sherman Stevens much sooner if they were able to redirect the public’s attention to another, more viable suspect. However, because there was no other suspect, they continued to hold Sherman Stevens in jail for his own safety until speculation turned to John Knoblock as the potential murderer. What happened to Sherman Stevens after his release remains a mystery. We know that he spent some time in Garnett, Kansas, because he had communicated with the sheriff. But soon after, he leaves Anderson County and is never heard from again. Disturbing to me is the fact that, in an interview with John and Florence Knoblock’s granddaughter, I was told that she and her sister grew up believing that their grandmother’s killer had been hanged. Did a secret lynch mob chase down Sherman Stevens? Though we don’t know definitively, there is no evidence to suggest that he was lynched. I can’t imagine that the community would have allowed John Knoblock to endure two trials if they believed strongly enough that Sherman Stevens was the real killer. Kansas Battles the Invisible Empire: The Legal Ouster of the KKK from Kansas 1922-1927 by Charles William Sloan, Jr. Kansas Historical Quarterly, Autumn 1974. History of Lynchings in Kansas by Genevieve Yost. Kansas Historical Quarterly, May 1933. This entry was posted in Shadow on the Hill and tagged 1925, 1926, Books, Burlington, Charles Griffith, Coffey County, Daily Republican, Emporia, Emporia Gazette, Florence Knoblock, History, John Knoblock, John Redmond, Kansas, KKK, Ku Klux Klan, Lynch Mobs, Lynching, Lyon County, Newspapers, Race Relations, Sherman "Blackie" Stevens, William Allen White on April 24, 2013 by Diana Staresinic-Deane. The Men Who Told the Story: Reporters John Redmond and William L. White I never would have known about the murder of Florence Knoblock if I hadn’t stumbled upon a folder of newspaper clippings at the library in 2007. Although radios were finding their way into homes during the 1920s–John Redmond even reports that a Day-Fan radio was installed in the jurors’ room in the basement of the Coffey County Courthouse–the newspaper was still the most common form of daily widespread communication. As a both a reader and a researcher, I was really fortunate that most of the important newspaper articles were written by two extraordinary newspapermen: John Redmond of the Daily Republican in Burlington, Kansas, and William Lindsay White of the Emporia Gazette in Emporia, Kansas. Smart, funny, and extremely observant, both men vividly portrayed the events and people connected to the murder of Florence Knoblock in their own distinct writing styles. John Redmond (1873-1953) John Redmond, 1940. Photo courtesy of the Coffey County Historical Society and Museum. A native of Burlington, Kansas, John Redmond had all but finished law school and was ready to sit for the bar exam when legendary newspaperman William Allen White (father of William Lindsay White) rerouted Redmond into a journalism career with the Emporia Gazette. Redmond would go on to work for the Topeka Daily Capital, the Wichita Star, and the Wichita Beacon before returning to Burlington in 1898 to buy a paper called the Jeffersonian for $400. During the next several years, numerous local papers would be acquired and merged together into the Daily Republican, whose masthead would first appear in 1921. Redmond was an incredibly civic-minded man. During the Depression, he put a lot of energy into the Civilian Conservation Corps, which provided education and training to about 3,000 men during the years it was open. When Kansas began building reservoirs and enacting other flood prevention measures, Redmond championed Coffey County’s need for a reservoir, which would be named for Redmond after his death. John Redmond’s writing style was a reflection of the man himself. His stories not only reported on the events of the day, but how the community responded to them. For example, in “Some Wierd [sic] Tales Being Circulated About Burlington,” which ran June 5, 1925, he reports on how other newspapers are portraying Burlington: “Burlington has been getting some very undesirable notoriety from the outside papers in connection with the brutal murder of Mrs. John Knoblock. Many wild and wierd [sic] stories have been published in them under a Burlington date line, and some have worked up stories of their one [sic]…” Similarly, in a June 11, 1925 article called “Another Tourist Wandering Around Brought to Jail,” he writes, “With the nerves of the people still on edge following the brutal murder of Mrs. John Knoblock on Decoration day, it is unhealthy for strangers to wander around much on the country roads or even in the towns.” Reporters still run the Coffey County Republican out of the same building John Redmond built in the 1920s. His face is painted on a mural on the wall. Photo courtesy of Mark A. Petterson. His writing could be compassionate, such as in the June 17, 1925 article “Mrs. John Mozingo Made Very Ill By Thoughtless Talk,” where he wrote, “Mrs. John Mozingo is quite ill from a nervous breakdown at her home west of Burlington, made so by the thoughtless people who have phoned or talked to her so much concerning the brutal murder of her daughter, Mrs. John Knoblock, and the efforts to find the murderer.” Redmond could also be extremely funny. In the middle of a January 8, 1926 article listing all of the citizens subpoenaed to testify at John Knoblock’s first trial–an incredibly long list that goes on for several column inches–he throws in, “[George] Eaton’s dogs are not subpoenaed.” John Redmond’s humorous quip in the middle of a long list of subpoenaed witnesses in the January 8, 1926 Dialy Republican. William Lindsay White (1900-1973) William Lindsay White. A native of Emporia, Kansas, William Lindsay White was the son of the same William Allen White who rescued John Redmond from a career in law and set him on the path to journalism. White’s family home hosted people like Teddy Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, and Douglas Fairbanks, and his father was known far and wide for his forward-thinking editorials. Groomed to take over the paper some day, he would complete his degree at Harvard and would marry a New Yorker. When he returned to Emporia, he came back with a monocle, a walking stick, and a British accent–definitely NOT a typical Kansan and not nearly as well liked as his father. However, W. L. “Bill” White was an extraordinary journalist. He served as a war correspondent during World War II, wrote several books, and took the reigns to the Emporia Gazette after his father’s death in 1944. He was very involved in politics and even served in the Kansas Legislature. He was not popular for some of his in-town causes, however; he argued that the beautiful second courthouse should be repaired instead of replaced, and he fought against the construction of the Civic Auditorium, which was, ironically, named in his honor. The Emporia Gazette building in Emporia, Kansas. Photo courtesy of Cheryl Unruh. Like John Redmond, Bill White was an excellent observer, and took the time to describe what people looked like as well as what they said and did. In the January 19, 1926 article, “Stand By Knoblock: Relatives Substantiate Defense Version,” he describes Florence Knoblock’s sister. “Mrs. Ella Kellerman, a sister of the murdered woman, then testified in Knoblock’s behalf. She is a pretty, young woman in her early thirties, whose hair is more of a reddish gold than yellow. ” He was also keenly aware of the atmosphere at both trials, and in “Accept Two Jurors,” an article that appeared on May 3, 1926, during the second trial, he wrote, “The general atmosphere of the trial seems to be different in Emporia. The attorneys are the same…the principals are the same and the judge is the same but some unknown something that seemed to hang over the Coffey county [sic] courtroom like a fog is missing today.” Bill White’s description of John Mozingo ran in the January 19, 1926 Emporia Gazette. Bill White did not feel the need to hold back out of respect for the feelings of others. He would write that Florence Knoblock’s father, John Mozingo, had a head shaped like a pear; he waxed poetic on attorney Owen Samuels’ comb over; and speculated on how much tobacco juice an autopsy would find in attorney W. C. Harris’ neck–all in a space of three paragraphs (January 19, 1926). Covering the Murder, Investigation, and Trial When Florence Knoblock was murdered, John Redmond and Bill White were at very different places in their careers. John Redmond had been running his own newspaper for 27 years. Just shy of his twenty-fifth birthday, Bill White’s career was just beginning. Everyone in the courtroom was fair game. John Redmond tattles on Gazette reporter Bill White in the January 18, 1926 Daily Republican. We know that John Redmond was recording the story from the very first moment word got out about the murder. He arrived at the Knoblock farm with County Attorney Ray Pierson and Dr. Albert Gray shortly after Sheriff Frank Hunter and Coroner J. O. Stone were called to the scene. Determining when Bill White began covering the story is a little trickier. We know the murder and investigation were being covered by the Emporia Gazette because of the newspaper articles, but because newspapers generally didn’t run bylines back then, we are only sure of Bill White’s presence when John Redmond mentions him in a Daily Republican article during the first trial. The newspapers have two goals: report the news and sell newspapers. Because most people like to see themselves in the papers, newspaper reporters know that including as many names as possible is a great way to increase interest and sales. However, there is a caveat: you don’t want to irritate people into canceling their subscriptions. You don’t slam your own people. People outside your subscription area, though, are fair game. As a result, you almost have to read both the Daily Republican and the Emporia Gazette in order to get the complete picture. And because the two reporters report on each other, you get to know John Redmond and Bill White, who become part of their own stories. William Lindsay White entry at the Kansas State Historical Society Coffey County, Vol. 1 – A glimpse into its past, present and future!, compiled by Wanda Christy and published by Coffey County Today in 1987, is a good history of Coffey County with lots and lots of historic photographs. William Lindsay White: 1900-1973: In the Shadow of His Father, by E. Jay Jernigan, University of Oklahoma Press, 1997. This entry was posted in Shadow on the Hill and tagged Burlington, Coffey County, Daily Republican, Emporia, Emporia Gazette, Florence Knoblock, History, John Knoblock, John Redmond, Journalism, Kansas, Lyon County, murder, true crime, William Lindsay White on April 10, 2013 by Diana Staresinic-Deane. Finding branches of your family tree in someone else’s murder trial During the two years I spent researching the story of Florence Knoblock’s murder and the subsequent investigation and criminal trials, I was astonished by the number of names I encountered. I expected to find details about Florence and her family, but I hadn’t really appreciated just how well I would get to know the people living in Pleasant Township, the city of Burlington, and the various people working for the courts and the law. One of the great advantages of researching a major historic murder case in a small town: because they don’t happen often, when they do, they’re big news. The local paper may add extra sheets to cover the details if the editor thinks he can make enough sales. As Sherwood Anderson wrote in his book, Winesburg, Ohio: A Group of Tales of Ohio Small Town Life, “The paper…had one policy. It strove to mention by name in each issue as many as possible of the inhabitants of the village.” Let’s look at what this might mean for someone researching family history during a time period that coincides with the Florence Knoblock murder investigation. Statements from possible witnesses The Daily Republican included some early statements from various witnesses who might have seen a potential suspect. In addition to learning about what she saw, we learned that Mrs. E. E. Liggett worked at the Katy Store on West Neosho Street in Burlington and that she worked on Saturday mornings. E. E. Liggett’s statement, from “Deacon Stevens Claims He Was in Independence at the Time of the Murder,” Daily Republican, June 2, 1925. Law enforcement, medical personnel, and other officials Sometimes when researching family members, we might find names and dates of major life events, but we don’t always know much about what those ancestors actually did for a living. Newspaper articles tell us the roles played by various official personnel. Imagine being able to understand exactly where your great-uncle-so-and-so was the afternoon of May 30, 1925. Here, we learn the names and roles of the sheriff, the coroner, the county attorney, the marshal, and a doctor. From “Skull Crushed and Throat Cut–Mrs. Knoblock is Found by Her Husband Saturday Afternoon,” Daily Republican, June 1, 1925. Possible suspects Several different men are arrested during the investigation of the murder of Florence Knoblock. Because there was no apparent motive and no obvious suspects, anyone who was caught in the wrong place at the wrong time was likely to be arrested and questioned. For example, a man named Vance Fox cut through a farm field of William Strawn to shorten his walk home. After a manhunt involving a hundred people, he was taken into custody. A genealogist learned a lot about Vance Fox; where he lived, the fact that he was probably poor because he walked from Emporia to Strawn instead of taking the train or a car, and that he was healthy enough to make a 35-mile walk. From “Crowd Gathers in Response to Alarm Vance Fox Held,” Daily Republican, June 6, 1925. Subpoenaed witnesses Both the Daily Republican and the Emporia Gazette printed lists of subpoenaed witnesses. In the case of State of Kansas v. John Knoblock, the number of witnesses would ultimately clear one hundred. Here is an excerpt from the list printed for the preliminary hearing. The genealogist will see names, family connections, and lots of people who lived in the same neighborhood. From “Are Preparing for Hard Fight at Preliminary,” Daily Republican, November 7, 1925. Prospective jurors My favorite newspaper articles involved the jury selection process. Reporters John Redmond and Bill White listed every juror and every excuse they used to try to get out of jury duty. The genealogist might learn where their relatives live and work. They might learn that their ancestor was hard of hearing or was recovering from the flu, or that they can’t afford the financial burden of sitting on a trial instead of earning a living. A sampling of the juror selection process from the first trial. From “Making Good Progress Toward Securing Jury to Try John Knoblock,” January 12, 1926. A sampling of prospective jurors from the second trial. From “Accept Two Jurors,” Emporia Gazette, May 6, 1926. Reporting on other reporters To emphasize how important the trial might be, reporters might take the time to mention other reporters and important citizens who are attending the trial as spectators. For example, John Redmond mentions a newspaper reporter and a magazine reporter present at the trial. From “Notes on the Trial,” Daily Republican, January 13, 1926. Trial witnesses We expect to see information about testimony from witnesses in newspaper articles about murder trials. Genealogists may also learn details about the witness: where he/she works, lives, who he/she associates with, and even what he/she looks like. Although the local reporter might not go into great detail about local folks, an out-of-town reporter will make the extra effort to describe how witnesses appear on the witness stand. For example, here are two descriptions of Coffey County woman Stella Menard, a witness called by the prosecution, as written by Emporia Gazette reporter Bill White: From “Trial Slowing Up,” Emporia Gazette, January 14, 1926. From “State Rests Tonight,” Emporia Gazette, January 15, 1926. As I read through the newspaper articles about the Florence Knoblock murder, investigation and trials, I was overwhelmed by the hundreds of names that appeared connected just to this story. The tough part for the genealogist is learning about the major trials that might have happened in an area where his or her ancestors lived, and then accessing those newspapers if they’re not already available online. As part of my research, I created a giant spreadsheet of all of the names I encountered in just the newspaper articles. Although they don’t all turn up in Shadow on the Hill, I wanted to make the information easily available for anyone who might be researching family who lived in Coffey County and Lyon County between 1925 and 1926. It’s also a handy way to keep track of the several hundred people who do turn up in Shadow on the Hill. As you explore the database, think not only of the trial, but what it was like to be on that witness stand, or hoping to avoid jury duty, or being interviewed by the paper for something you saw. It’s an enlightening way to think about your ancestors–as regular human beings experiencing a moment in time. This entry was posted in Shadow on the Hill and tagged 1925, 1926, A. Grubb, A. N. Gray, Burlington, C. A. Paint, C. W. Sanders, Carl Goodrick, Coffey County, Daily Republican, Dora Goodrick, Dr. McConnell, E. A. Stone, E. O. Grant, E. W. Ellis, Emporia, Emporia Gazette, Everett White, Fate Moreland, Florence Knoblock, Frank Dewey, Frank Hiles, Frank Kecker, Franklin County, Genealogists, Genealogy, Geo. Griffith, Geo. Walters, George Alberts, George Dornes, George Wagner, Glick Fockele, Grace Goodrick, Harold Cleveland, History, Hugh C. Hainey, J. O. Stone, Joe Menard, John Dornes, John Knoblock, John Redmond, Kansas, Legends, Leslie Millison, M. E. Corbin, Martin Meyers, Mike Baker, Mr. and Mrs. Sam Shoup, Mrs. Bender, Mrs. E. E. Liggett, Mrs. J. Jaggers, Mrs. John T. Mozingo, Mrs. M. K. Jaggers, Mrs. Maud Carr, Mrs. Winchester, Murder Trial, Newspaper Stories, O. P. Davis, O. W. Hussa, R. O. Wilson, Ralph Shellenger, Ray Cox, Ray S. Pierson, Rev. A. C. Babcock, Rev. John Davis, Rosa Knapp, Scott Allen, Sheriff Frank Hunter, Sherman Stevens, Stella Menard, Vance Fox, W. S. Merritt, Walter Winters, Warren Ellis, William L. White, Wm. Dornes, Wm. Strawn, Wm. Utesler on February 20, 2013 by Diana Staresinic-Deane.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511858

__label__wiki

Home > JPHS > Vol. 17 (1989) > No. 1 Jackson Purchase Historical Society Verses of Yesteryear Hunter M. Hancock, Ph.D. (1989) "Verses of Yesteryear," Jackson Purchase Historical Society: Vol. 17 : No. 1 , Article 1. Available at: https://digitalcommons.murraystate.edu/jphs/vol17/iss1/1 United States History Commons All Issues Vol. 43, No. 1 Vol. 42, No. 1 Vol. 41, No. 1 Vol. 40, No. 1 Vol. 39, No. 1 Vol. 38, No. 1 Vol. 37, No. 1 Vol. 36, No. 1 Vol. 35, No. 1 Vol. 34, No. 1 Vol. 33, No. 1 Vol. 32, No. 1 Vol. 31, No. 1 Vol. 30, No. 1 Vol. 29, No. 1 Vol. 28, No. 1 Vol. 27, No. 1 Vol. 26, No. 1 Vol. 25, No. 1 Vol. 24, No. 1 Vol. 23, No. 1 Vol. 22, No. 1 Vol. 21, No. 1 Vol. 20, No. 1 Vol. 19, No. 1 Vol. 18, No. 1 Vol. 17, No. 1 Vol. 16, No. 1 Vol. 15, No. 1 Vol. 14, No. 1 Vol. 13, No. 1 Vol. 12, No. 1 Vol. 11, No. 1 Vol. 10, No. 1 Vol. 9, No. 1 Vol. 8, No. 1 Vol. 7, No. 1 Vol. 6, No. 1 Vol. 5, No. 1 Vol. 4, No. 1 Vol. 3, No. 1 Vol. 2, No. 1 Vol. 1, No. 1

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511859

__label__cc

We left the auction with a ‘56 Ford F100 pickup and the ‘41 Coupe that Tray had been dreaming about since he was probably a teenager. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if the Coupe ended up in his private collection for a while. If it did, I’d be alright with that. It was a damn good looking car. I ended up having to call Patrick out with a second truck and trailer to load up the pickup. I was pretty sure Tray was going to dive into the Coupe after he was done with the Galaxie. I, on the other hand, had yet to make contact with my son, so I was headed home to pull the spark plugs out of his truck. If it was gone I’d call my brother and have an APB put out on it. Jason knew as well as I did that Josh wasn’t a bad seed kid. Running away wouldn’t really occur to him. I wasn’t a domineering, oppressive mom. Hell, I probably gave Josh too much freedom. That was about to change. I pulled into my driveway just in time to see my son walking to his truck. Quickly I shifted courses to block him in. He wasn’t going anywhere until I knew where the hell he’d been all day. “Is your phone busted?” I asked when I got out of the car a minute later. “No,” he sighed. “Sorry, Mom. I didn’t mean to ignore you.” “Why weren’t you in school?” “Girl problems?” He said it as a question like he wasn’t sure how to respond. “Girl problems? What the hell does that mean?” I knew he wasn’t dumb enough to think a day date was a good idea. “Some, uh… I’ve been seeing a girl for a few months now and yesterday we had… some issues. I have to meet her dad right now.” The girlfriend was news to me. He hadn’t mentioned her. Like I told Isabel, either she was a mess or Josh really liked her. “Oh no you don’t. You have to deal with me right now,” I countered. “I’m sorry, Mom, I swear I won’t skip school again,” he promised. “Madi and I are going out to talk about it some more. I really lik– I love her, Mom. She was upset this morning so we took the day off…” “I’m sorry she’s having problems, but that’s no excuse for cutting school and not telling me. You know if you would have told me you needed a day I would have let you have it. Instead you pulled some shit and then ignored me. You’re not an adult yet, Joshua. I still make the rules. You’re not going out tonight,” I told him. “But, Mom,” he whined. “It’s a big deal. I don’t want to look bad in front of her dad. I…” He paused a moment before he continued. “I need to tell you something…” “You’ve got all night to tell me. You can wow her dad tomorrow.” I wasn’t going to budge. He knew it. Josh sighed and ran his fingers through his hair. He looked more stressed than I’d seen in a long time. Something was up, that was for sure. “What is it, Josh?” We weren’t besties like we were when he was six, but I liked to think we could still talk about stuff. “You’re gonna be really mad,” he said. Josh wasn’t a drama queen. I liked that he was a straight shooter like me. He got right to the point, and like me, he didn’t play around with what he meant. If he said something, he said what he meant. No guessing games. “Should I be sitting down for this?” There was a gnawing sense of dread creeping around my gut. I didn’t like it. “Probably lying down,” he replied. “You didn’t drop out of school, did you?” I asked. “No, I didn’t drop out. I uh… My girlfriend told me that uh… Well she’s kinda pregnant,” he said. Kinda? “There’s no kinda, Joshua. Either she is or she isn’t.” I wasn’t going to lose my shit in front of him. I remembered all too well how scared I was to tell my parents I was pregnant. Dad had snapped. I knew it was something he regretted, but it was still a painful thing eighteen years later. “She is,” he said quietly. “I went with her to get the test this morning. We’ve been trying to figure out how to tell you and her dad.” I took a deep breath and let it out slowly. “Josh,” I sighed. I shook my head, knowing exactly what a difficult road he was headed down. “I know, Mom. We were careful, I swear. Not even one accident,” he promised. “I want you to meet her… You’re going to love her.” It wasn’t how I imagined I would find out I was going to be a grandmother. I figured by the time that happened Josh would be working at some amazing restaurant with his life together, and on a definite path. At the very least he’d be capable of remembering to put his dirty clothes in the wash without me telling him to. “You’ve already decided what you’re going to do, I take it.” I wasn’t going to push one way or the other as far as their options. It was their decision to make. “We’re pretty decided. I know she doesn’t believe in abortion, not that I told her to get one,” he added quickly. “I think we want to keep it. We were going to talk tonight a little more about it.” I sighed again. “You’re sure you’re ready for this?” “No,” he admitted truthfully. “I do know I love her and that I’m not going to be like my sperm donor. I’m going to do whatever it takes to help her with our baby.” Our baby… dear Lord in Heaven… I wasn’t much of a crier, but I was scared for my kid. He had a plan for his life. All that was either going to be put on hold or scratched completely because he had to shift his priorities. I was proud of him for wanting to step up in ways his own father never would, but I was also disappointed that he had to. “I never wanted you to struggle like I had to, Josh,” I said, wiping a tear or two off my cheeks. He stepped forward to give me a tight hug. “I know, Mom. I didn’t intend for this to happen either. We’ll make it work, though, Madi and me.” I didn’t intend to get pregnant either. Just like Josh, I was positive everything was going to work out. In time, I suppose it did, but it wasn’t because I had a lick of help from Ben. My parents loved Josh, and I knew they loved me, but they also believed in making me stand on my own two feet. I chose to be a mom and a wife, and that meant I had to actually take on adult responsibility and not just talk about it. There was no safety net with them. I had some scary nights back in those days, but it also made me stronger and taught me I was capable of more than I thought. “Her parents don’t know yet, do they?” I assumed not since Josh was still breathing. “No. Her mom died when she was eight, it’s just her and her dad and sister,” he told me. “She’s a twin.” “And you haven’t met her dad yet? You better wear kevlar,” I told him. “I was going to meet him tonight,” he said. “If you’ll let me go still…” “I really shouldn’t.” I took a step back. “You know I’m too young to be a grandma. My boobs still look good.” “Mooooom, I don’t need to hear about your boobs. I’m just going to meet him tonight. I think she’s going to tell him this weekend. She thinks it’s safer if she tells him on her own.” “If he threatens you, you let me know,” I told him. “It takes two to tango just like it takes two to make a baby. He better remember that.” “I’ll let you know,” he promised. I didn’t go for all that nonsense where the girl was just some innocent victim, preyed upon by a horny teenage boy. No, I knew better than that. Whether or not that girl’s father wanted to admit it, she obviously wanted to have sex. I didn’t know if he was one of those dads who stuck his head in the sand and pretended that his precious princess was never going to have a sex life, but I had the talk with Josh before he really hit puberty. That way when he did start having those involuntary responses he didn’t know how to deal with, he wouldn’t be too traumatized by it. From washing his laundry I knew when the wet dreams started. His showers started getting longer and then he started talking about girls. It wasn’t too difficult to figure out that sooner or later, my sweet little boy would be a man. I had hoped to keep him from being a daddy too early by leaving a box of condoms on his bed right around his sixteenth birthday. Better to be safe than sorry. The way I saw it, I was doing my kid a disservice if I didn’t educate him. Maybe it was uncomfortable for him to know he got boners. Well how did he think he got here? It sure wasn’t immaculate conception. It was no more comfortable for me to know he could become a parent before he was ready, and that was what happened anyway. I didn’t regret my decision to be a mom so young, but that didn’t mean I wanted it for Josh. “So tell me about your baby mama,” I said. “She’s not just a baby mama. She’s a sweet girl, Mom. She’s funny and nice, and has the prettiest smile,” he swooned. “I’d ask about her dad, but you obviously haven’t met him yet.” “She said he’s a good dad. He’s been taking care of two girls all on his own for the last eight years. She respects him,” Josh told me. “I’m scared to meet him though. She said he’s really big.” “If he’s got the sense God gave geese, he won’t lay a hand on you.” I wasn’t a big woman but I could do some damage. “I don’t think he’d do that. Madi says he’s all bark.” “He better be. So what’s this girl’s last name?” I couldn’t remember all the kids he went to grade school with, but there was a chance he did. “Northman,” he answered. Oh fuck my life right in the ass! “Northman? Really, Josh?” He knew about the shit I’d dealt with thanks to Eric Northman. I may not have cared for him personally, but I never badmouthed the work he did. He, on the other hand… “Yeah… You can’t help who you love, Mom,” he shrugged. “That’s very, very true.” His own father was proof of that. “Get in the car. I’m going over there with you.” “Mom, are you sure about that…” “I’m sure Eric Northman is a pain in the dick and I’m not going to make you deal with his fool ass alone. I just saw him today at the auction I was at, talking shit like always.” I was convinced it was because he was jealous. I built what I had on my own. I didn’t need my daddy’s connections to make it. “We weren’t even going to tell him tonight,” he reminded me. “Might as well rip the Band-Aid off. Trust me when I tell you it won’t be any easier in two days.” “I don’t want you two arguing. I know you don’t like each other,” my son said. “I can behave myself. As long as he doesn’t go making one of his smart remarks, I’ll be good.” Josh rolled his eyes. “You two are like little kids,” he informed me. “I give as good as I get. It’s not my fault he’s an arrogant douche,” I shrugged. “If you’re going to share a grandbaby you should work on getting along,” he told me as he continued on to the driver side of his truck. “I thought we were going to Madi’s?” “I’m driving.” I opened the door of my car. “When you’re done getting your ass chewed out by her father you’re coming home.” “I hope he’s understanding,” he sighed. “And please don’t make it worse, Mom.” “I promised good behavior, didn’t I? Have I ever broken a promise to you?” “No, but Mr. Northman makes you say and do things you normally wouldn’t do,” he said as he got into the passenger side. “I can handle myself, Joshua.” I got behind the wheel and tried not to slam the door. I was trying to play it cool, but the truth was that I was a little pissed off at my kid. Frankly, whether or not he was using protection was pretty irrelevant since his girlfriend ended up pregnant anyway. Maybe I wouldn’t have been mad if he’d so much as mentioned that he was seeing someone. Knowing that he had pretty much been lying to me for the last five months didn’t sit well with me. Given that she was Eric Northman’s daughter I could figure out why he hadn’t told me, but I couldn’t hold it against her that her father was who he was. As long as she was good to my son, that was all I cared about. I started the car and backed out of the driveway. “Shit, did you let Opie outside?” I asked. I had no idea how long he had been home before I got there. “Yeah. I fed him too.” “Thank you. I fed him when I stopped home after the news this morning, but you know how he gets if he doesn’t get to potty every few hours.” The good thing about running my own business was being able to work from home or just run back to the house anytime I wanted, assuming Opie wasn’t on the road with me. “He’s fine. I even threw the ball for him a bit.” Josh was looking out the window instead of at me. No doubt he had a lot on his mind. I was sure Josh had no intention of getting his girlfriend pregnant. Being a daddy before he graduated from high school wasn’t in his life plan, at least not that I was aware of. I believed that it was unintentional. I wanted to be supportive in a way that my parents weren’t, but I was going to need a little time to let the whole thing sink in. Josh directed me to Madi’s house. I noticed Eric’s Buick parked alongside the house. They had some weird ass sculpture in their front yard. Straight away from the outside, I didn’t care for the house, but I kept it to myself. I could be as snarky as I wanted to in my head. As long as nothing but sweetness passed my lips, that was all that mattered, right? I parked behind the Buick. “Whoa, hang on a second,” I said when Josh started to open the door. “Look, before you go into the lion’s den there are two things I need you to know. First, I love you. No matter what. I can’t lie and say I’m not upset right now because I am, but I’ll get over it. I’m always in your corner. Second, I’m proud of you for being a man right now. That girl’s gonna need you to be there for her in ways you don’t know anything about yet. Let her be there for you too. It’ll make your relationship better.” Josh nodded and said, “Believe it or not I learned from yours and Ben’s mistakes… mostly.” “Good. Then you don’t marry her unless you’re doing it because you can’t imagine your life without her and not because you think it’s what a baby needs,” I said. I really hoped he hadn’t already put a ring on her finger. “I know, Mother,” he chuckled humorlessly. All things considered, I thought I took the news pretty well. Way better than my parents did. I walked to the front door with as level a head as I could manage. God help Eric if he threatened my son. I was just unstable enough at the moment to make his life a living hell. 9 thoughts on “Chapter 3: Genesis” ljhjelm says: Oh my god this is so good. mindyb781 says: I’m amazed that Josh told Sookie right away. I have a admit I’m worried for Josh and Madi, I think Eric and Sookie are going to explode . GAH! You had to end it right there, didn’t you? I’m dying to read what happens when Eric finds out that it’s Sookie’s son his daughter is seeing…and never mind finding out about the baby! justwanderingneverlost says: Good on Sook for taking things so well. I have a feeling Eric isn’t gonna be nearly as calm, lol. The Daddies never are. Can’t wait for more! Cue the indoor fireworks! Sookie did take the news pretty well but then again she knows what not to do since her dad’s reaction still hurts after so many years. It’s a shame that neither child felt comfortable telling their parent that had found someone. I’m sure Eric is more bark than bite with his girls but no father wants this information when he didn’t even know his daughter was dating. I wonder who will go off the rails first? Sookie took the news well, but now Eric’s reaction is the wild card. Hopefully Eric’s mouth won’t get away from him tonight. Can’t for this explosion about to happen. ap630julianne says: Just coming face to face with each other I’d going to be enough….let alone throwing in a pregnancy. Great story luvvamps says: Great chapter! I’m not surprised that Josh told Sookie, nor am I surprised at her reaction. Josh & Madi seem to be handling the situation well so far, and accidents still happen. Still, now that they’ve arrived at Eric’s, the shit’s gonna hit the fan! Great chapter! Leave a Reply to mindyb781 Cancel reply

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511863

__label__wiki

Tiera~ “Love You for That” (Brand New Song Q&A)!!! Tiera is only 20 years old and she is already conquering the country music world with a rich, young and fiery voice. Filling in the void for African Americans within country music, Tiera has made an natural honest fan-base and mixed social media attendance of 30k followers, over 2k subscribers on YouTube and over 250 views on YouTube videos. While performance in crowds with over 3k people, media markets such as “The Daily Country Review,” and “Queens of Country” named her one of the Top 10 Country Singers to Watch in 2018. Her style and voice have started to have a great impact on the country music scene. On November 2, 2018, Tiera debut her brand new song “Love You for That.” The song is available on Spotify and iTunes. If you would like to know more about Tiera then check out at https://tieramusic.com. 1. Hi Tiera, how have you grown as country musician in the past year? Since moving to Nashville, I’ve written with a lot of different writers and have learned so much from them. Everyone’s style is so different, so it’s awesome getting to learn from them. 2. How did you come up with the name “Love You For That” for your new single? This title seemed to perfectly sum up what we wanted the song to be about. We actually went through a couple different variations for the title. I think one of them was “Love You For Loving That” haha but eventually we ended up on “Love You For That”. 3. What is the background story behind your new song? I wrote “Love You For That” with Hannah May Allison and John Miller. I think we all get a little annoyed by our significant other sometimes but we still love them! That’s what this song is about. I know I annoy my boyfriend so much haha, but he still loves me anyway. 4. Is there something you wish your fans would take away from this tune? I’ve gotten a lot of messages about how “Love You For That” describes their relationship with their significant other so I hope this song can be the theme song to a lot of my fans relationships. 5. Was there any other artists/producers that helped to create this song? I wrote this song with Hannah May Allison and John Miller who are both staff writers at Dan Hodges Music. Grady Saxman produced this song for me and he perfectly captured what I wanted for this song. 6. Is there anything else coming up with your music in 2018? I have more music that is going to be released in 2019 that I’m very excited about. I’ve really started to hone into who I am as an artist and I’m so excited to share that with everyone. On November 13th I’ll be on the new music show, Real Country, on USA Network premiering at 10/9c! I was invited to the show by Shania Twain and I got to work with some other amazing artists on the show as well! Social Media Accounts: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TieraMusic/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TieraMusic Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tieramusic/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkyTifbLIm0tEnCB6xp0LRA

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511864

__label__cc

Star Wars: Episode VIII: The Last Jedi 2017 PG-13 2h 32m Blu-ray / DVD Luke Skywalker's peaceful and solitary existence gets upended when he encounters Rey, a young woman who shows strong signs of the Force. Her desire to learn the ways of the Jedi forces Luke to make a decision that changes their lives forever. Meanwhile, Kylo Ren and General Hux lead the First Order in an all-out assault against Leia and the Resistance for supremacy of the galaxy. Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Adam Driver, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Andy Serkis, Lupita Nyong'o, Domhnall Gleeson, Anthony Daniels, Gwendoline Christie, Kelly Marie Tran, Laura Dern, Benicio Del Toro, Warwick Davis, Noah Segan Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Sci-Fi Adventure, Action Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Blockbusters Imaginative, Exciting Blu-ray• DVD English SDH, Spanish (Neutral), French English: Dolby Digital 5.1, English: DVS - Descriptive Video Service, Spanish (Neutral): Dolby Digital 5.1, French: Dolby Digital 5.1 English: Dolby Digital 5.1, Spanish (Neutral): Dolby Digital 5.1, French: Dolby Digital 5.1

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511867

__label__wiki

The Regulation on Public Documents (Regulation 2016/1191), which was adopted on 6 July 2016 and applies in all EU countries as from 16 February 2019, simplifies the circulation of certain public documents. Citizens living in an EU country other than their own often need to present a public document to the authorities of the EU country where they live. Such public documents can be, for example, a birth certificate to get married, or a certificate on the absence of a criminal record to get a job. The Regulation on Public Documents ( Regulation 2016/1191), which applies from 16 February 2019, aims at cutting red tape and costs for citizens when they need to present in an EU country a public document issued in another EU country. Prior to the Regulation, citizens that needed to present a public document in another EU country had to obtain an authenticity stamp (the so-called apostille) to prove that their public document was authentic. Citizens were often also required to present a certified copy and a translation of their public document. The Regulation puts an end to a number of bureaucratic procedures: Public documents (for example, a birth certificate, a marriage notarial act, a judgment) and their certified copies issued by the authorities of an EU country must be accepted as authentic by the authorities of another EU country without the need of an authenticity stamp (i.e. the apostille); The Regulation abolishes the obligation for citizens to provide at the same time both an original public document and its certified copy. Where an EU country permits the presentation of a certified copy of a public document instead of the original, the authorities of that EU country must accept a certified copy made in the EU country where the public document was issued; The Regulation abolishes the obligation for citizens to provide a translation of their public document. If the public document is not in one of the official languages of the EU country requesting the document, citizens can ask for a multilingual standard form, available in all EU languages, from the authorities of the EU country which issued the public document. This form can be attached to the public document to avoid translation requirements. When a citizen presents a public document together with a multilingual standard form, the receiving authority can only require a translation of the public document in exceptional circumstances. As not all multilingual standard forms are issued in all EU countries, citizens can check which forms are issued in their EU country here; If the authorities of the receiving EU country require a certified translation of the public document presented by the citizen, they must accept a certified translation made in any EU country. The Regulation also introduces safeguards against fraudulent public documents: if a receiving authority has a reasonable doubt about the authenticity of a public document presented to it, it will be able to check its authenticity with the issuing authority of the other EU country through an existing IT platform, the Internal Market Information System or IMI. The Regulation deals with the authenticity of public documents but not with the recognition of their legal effects in another EU country. The recognition of the legal effects of a public document is still governed by the national law of the EU country where the citizen presents the document. However, in applying their national law, EU countries must respect European Union law, including the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, on the free movement of citizens within the European Union. Public documents means documents issued by a public authority, such as: documents emanating from a court or a court official; administrative documents; notarial acts; official certificates placed on private documents; diplomatic and consular documents. The Regulation covers public documents issued in the following areas: a person being alive marriage, including capacity to marry and marital status divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment registered partnership, including capacity to enter into a registered partnership and registered partnership status dissolution of a registered partnership, legal separation or annulment of a registered partnership domicile and/or residence absence of a criminal record the right to vote and stand as a candidate in municipal elections and elections to the European Parliament. The multilingual standard forms to be attached as translation aids to public documents can be requested in the following areas: absence of a criminal record. Multilingual standard forms Click here to see the multilingual standard forms issued by authorities in each EU country. Information communicated by EU countries (pursuant to Article 24 of the Regulation) Click here to see the information provided by EU countries on the implementation of the Regulation, in particular: the language(s) in which a public document can be presented the list of public documents to which a multilingual standard form can be attached a list of certified translators the authorities that can make certified copies the features of certified translations and certified copies Repository of public documents Click here to see examples of public documents issued in each EU country. This page is maintained by the European Commission. The information on this page does not necessarily reflect the official position of the European Commission. The Commission accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever with regard to any information or data contained or referred to in this document. Please refer to the legal notice with regard to copyright rules for European pages.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511868

__label__cc

“If you don’t have a strong supply of well-prepared teachers, nothing else in education can work” Education Policy | School Leadership | Teaching Stanford GSE professor emerita Linda Darling-Hammond talks about educating teachers for the 21st century. Linda Darling-Hammond, professor emerita at Stanford Graduate School of Education, has spent decades studying teacher education programs and practices and is widely considered one of the most important voices in the field. She founded the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education and led former President Barack Obama’s education policy transition team in 2008. Now president and CEO of the Learning Policy Institute (LPI), she was recently appointed president of the California State Board of Education, which oversees academic standards, curriculum, assessments and accountability for K-12 schools throughout the state. In a new book, Preparing Teachers for Deeper Learning, she and UCLA Professor Jeannie Oakes, with LPI colleagues, profile seven groundbreaking teacher education programs in the United States, detailing the practices that set them apart. We spoke with her about what 21st-century teacher preparation looks like. You write that teachers entering the field today need to be prepared for “deeper learning.” What do you mean by that? There’s a lot of conversation right now about how the knowledge and skills young people need to survive and succeed are changing. Students need to be able to find knowledge, put it together in new ways, think critically, problem-solve and collaborate with others. Deeper learning reflects the capacity to use these skills, which are essential for 21st-century societies and economies. Knowledge is expanding very rapidly. A few years ago researchers at UC Berkeley found there was more new knowledge created between 1999 and 2003 than in the entire history of the world preceding that. It’s impossible for schools now to say, ‘Here are the facts you need to know.’ Two-thirds of today’s young people will work in careers that don’t even exist yet, using technologies that haven’t been invented yet, to solve massive problems that our generation has not managed to solve. What would you say to teachers who want to teach this way but find themselves working in a school where it’s not encouraged? What can they do? Linda Darling-Hammond (Photo: Linda A. Cicero) This is a perennial problem in teacher preparation, and in every profession: Do you prepare teachers for schools as they are, or do you prepare them for schools as they need to become? There are a lot of pressures on schools to rethink the way they’re teaching and learning. Most states have adopted new student learning standards that are more focused on higher-order thinking skills, and there is a related move to change assessments—the College Board is even changing some of its Advanced Placement courses and exams to be much more focused on project-based learning. For most teachers, we’re in a moment where it’s much more likely that this is what their school is trying to do, even if they’re not successful yet. We need to prepare teachers to be change agents if they go into a school that has not yet begun to move in this direction. We also need to help them learn to collaborate and problem-solve with each other, so when they go into their new school, they’re able to find like-minded teachers to work with—not only on classroom practice but also on school practice. You began your career as a public school teacher in the 1970s. What are some of the changes you’ve seen over the years in the kind of preparation teachers undergo? There were probably some very good programs when I came into teaching, but I didn’t experience any of them. I came in during a time of teacher shortage, through an alternate pathway—I took a couple of classes and did some summer school teaching and then I was on my own. I had very little support, very little guidance. There was then, and still is now, a too-common belief that if you just had a good undergraduate education, you could go and teach. But there’s so much more to learn. I quickly became aware of how much there is to learn to effectively teach diverse students, and I’ve spent a lot of my career trying to help organize that knowledge base in a way that teachers can get access to it. What made the programs in the book stand out? Today there are many more programs that educate teachers well—where you’re learning from a master teacher who’s an excellent example of what you’re trying to learn, where the coursework is wrapped around clinical experience in a productive way, where you’re learning to plan curriculum that meets the kids’ needs and the demands of the standards, where you’re learning how to create a classroom community and how to teach students with a wide range of needs. Teachers who’ve gone through the programs we study in the book will tell you they felt very well prepared, and they end up moving very quickly into leadership roles and into careers that make a big difference in the profession. What can we do to make teacher preparation programs more accessible? For one thing, we need to underwrite the cost of teacher education. If you were to become a teacher in Finland, Singapore or a number of other high-achieving countries, your education would be completely free, and you would earn a salary or a stipend while you’re training to teach. Everybody gets access to a high-quality program, and everybody can afford to do it because they’re not trying to figure out how to go without a salary for a period of time and go into significant debt. The student debt crisis in the Unites States is a particular crisis for people becoming teachers because these salaries are about 30 percent lower than those of other college graduates. This shapes the careers people choose, because many are afraid to go into debt and know that they won’t have the resources to pay that debt back. In this country, we need to pay for teachers’ education. That should be true for everyone in the field, but at minimum it should be true for people who go into shortage fields and high-need locations. We also need to strengthen the accreditation and licensing process for teacher education programs, to make sure everybody knows about best practices and will be expected to incorporate them into their work. And we need to invest in innovation in teacher education, as we do in medicine, with grants from federal and state governments to learn and then share what we discover about best practices for preparing teachers. We have all kinds of educational reforms underway in the United States—curriculum reforms, governance reforms and so on—but at the end of the day, if you don’t have a strong supply of well-prepared teachers, nothing else in education can work. “There was then, and still is now, a too-common belief that if you just had a good undergraduate education, you could go and teach. But there’s so much more to learn.” Linda Darling-Hammond, Professor Emerita, Stanford Graduate School of Education It’s been about five months since Gov. Gavin Newsom appointed you as president of the California State Board of Education. What kind of changes do you hope to see? California is in the middle of an educational renaissance, and that’s one of the reasons I agreed to take on this challenge. My predecessor [Mike Kirst, also professor emeritus at Stanford GSE] and Gov. Jerry Brown did some phenomenal things for the state: They turned around a fiscal crisis, put in place a more equitable funding system, adopted new standards and assessments, created a new accountability system and have pointed the state in a very positive direction. But we have a long way to go to take advantage of those changes. Countries and states that have really made strong gains in education have had 15 to 20 years of continuous work on an agenda for improvement. I appreciate what has been accomplished in California, and I also see what we need to do to build on those things—including developing a system of support for teachers and school leaders as they come into the profession, and ongoing support for their learning about the new practices that public education requires in this century. I’m pleased that Gov. Newsom put almost $90 million on the table for forgivable loans and service scholarships to underwrite preparation for teachers who come in and teach in high-need locations and fields. He allocated another $35 million for professional development for teachers and leaders, so that we can start putting together professional learning resources that will create a system of support. My goal would be that any teacher in the state of California who wants to get better at an aspect of their practice will be able to find high-quality professional learning opportunities, including intensive institutes and coaching—whether that’s to help them develop stronger content teaching skills, skills for supporting social-emotional learning, skills for teaching English learners or skills for teaching students with learning differences. Teachers and school leaders should never again have to go looking under rocks to find nuggets of knowledge. They should be supported in their learning so that they can be effective with children. Last year Linda Darling-Hammond joined GSE Dean Dan Schwartz and Senior Lecturer Denise Pope in the studio for a conversation about transforming education on “School’s In,” a half-hour radio show that airs weekly on SiriusXM Insight Channel 121. Listen from the link below and find other past episodes of the show on our website. Neonbrand/Unsplash Faculty mentioned in this article: Linda Darling-Hammond When it comes to teaching science, culture and language matter, Stanford education scholar says Curriculum and Instruction | Diversity and Identity | Science and Math Education Stanford researchers investigate how the brain changes with different learning experiences Brain and Learning Sciences | Learning Differences | Research and Practice

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511882

__label__wiki

Nominee Director and Nominee Shareholders for a Company You are here: Home / Nominee Director and Nominee Shareholders for a Company Our company offers assistance with locating and finding nominee services worldwide (we don’t not act as nominees) The company’s director is whose responsibility it is to delineate the company’s policies and overlook its activity. The director is meant to strengthen the public trust in the company in the capital market as to bring about a rise in the company’s share price or administer the business direction in which the company is going. In most jurisdictions around the world the directors are those who are publicly listed on behalf of the company when the company owners want to remain discreet, appointing nominee directors for a company is an excellent solution for confidentiality and guarantees a high level of privacy. The nominee director abroad is also meant to supervise the goings on in the company even if he is nominated by the company shareholders. The nominated shareholders may be used in assisting in the decision-making of the company; however in most cases the object of having nominated shareholders it to retain confidentiality and in some cases to prove locality of the business and not to delineate its business operations. The Director’s Role The role of the director is twofold: to be part of delineating the company’s policies as well as supervising its operations. Such that the director carries the responsibilities of the failures and successes of the company. The director must be someone who is trained for the role so that he can fulfill the role to maximum responsibility. The director should have multiple skills and experience in similar positions as he should have expert knowledge on business and understand complex structures and processes. According to the new standards set in company law, formal qualifications are required for the role of director. It is up to the tax authorities to review the director’s qualifications whether they are in accordance with the law as well as the capability of the candidate’s deep understanding of the responsibility laid out for him. According to the law, the role of the director is to delineate policies of the company and to supervise management. It is up to every director, including a nominee director abroad, to fulfill the role adequately as the only point that should be of his concern is the welfare of the company and its investors. When a director is not fulfilling his role as he should, the management can exploit his lack of knowledge or experience in the subject and pass on the decisions that are incompatible with the interest of the public or the investors. The controlling shareholders of the company who finance the nominee director may impede on the director’s job due to the dual loyalty to the controlling shareholders and the other shareholders of the company. According to the law it doesn’t matter to whom the director’s loyalty stands, his only obligation is to do what is best for the company and its investors and not to serve his own personal interests or those of the controlling shareholders. A nominee director must also insist on attaining all information regarding certain decisions and not be used as a rubber stamp by the owners of the company. A director must take an active interest in the matters of the company and go into depth of the business decisions that he is asked to agree to. A nominee director and nominee shareholders must be completely loyal to the company even if it is traded abroad, they must keep the company’s interest in consideration at all times.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511884

__label__cc

Fire Brigade of Roche, Basel Roche fire brigade: cleaning masks quickly The respiratory protective equipment workshop is on the fast track to hygiene The pharmaceutical company Roche is a worldwide leader in the industry and a large employer at its headquarters in Basel. More than 11,400 employees work in the Swiss border city for the globally operating group. The move to the new service building coincided with an upgrade to the latest technology for the respiratory protective workshop of the Roche fire brigade. But for Niklaus Lerch, group leader of the fire brigade, the move to adopt the Top Clean M mask cleaning machine from MEIKO was no coincidence. This was the cleaning and disinfection machine he had long been looking for. He was looking for a professional solution to clean his firefighters' respirator masks, one that saved time and was, above all, state-of-the-art: "I made it very clear in explaining why nothing else would do in our respiratory protective workshop. Top Clean M from MEIKO manages to clean four masks in just six minutes – that was the deciding factor." Making the switch was a no-brainer. Using the previous device, an instrument washing machine, he needed 42 minutes to clean the same number of masks and another three-quarters of an hour for the drying process. Niklaus Lerch is happy to say that, "Now the masks are coming out of the Top Clean M so hot that they're almost dry." 1 from / 1 The Roche team has 21 professional firefighters. In addition to 20 chemical protection suits, around 100 respirator masks, including overpressure, filter and radio masks, are provided for the crew's personal protective equipment. "We are supplementing these with 300 building masks at all crucial locations on the company premises. They are used in the event of a substance release", says Niklaus Lerch. The Roche fire brigade's capacity to clean masks much more quickly is not the only benefit that is highly appreciated by company management in Basel. Hygiene is a precious asset in pharmacy. And product safety can mean the difference between life and death. The Top Clean M mask cleaning machine also excels when it comes to hygiene, a factor no less important than speed: "After use, the masks are pre-decontaminated as best we can on site. When we unscrew the filter during machine maintenance, we're always amazed by what is still in there." Firefighters who wear respiratory protective equipment such as breathing apparatus sets and masks already face enough risks in their line of work, so it's important to get their gear hygienically clean as quickly as possible. The TopClean M from MEIKO is a truly pioneering solution in this field.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511885

__label__wiki

For other uses, see Sundarbans (disambiguation). This article is about the Bangladeshi part. For the Indian part, see Sundarbans National Park. The world's largest mangrove forest in the delta of Ganges, Meghna and Brahmaputra rivers Sun in the Sundarbans Location of Sunderbans, spanning across Bangladesh-India border Khulna Division, Bangladesh and South 24 Parganas & North 24 Parganas districts, West Bengal, India Khulna, Satkhira, Bagerhat 21°57′N 89°11′E / 21.950°N 89.183°E / 21.950; 89.183Coordinates: 21°57′N 89°11′E / 21.950°N 89.183°E / 21.950; 89.183 Government of Bangladesh and Government of India The Sundarbans Sundarbans West Wildlife Sanctuary Sundarbans South Sanctuary Sundarbans East Sanctuary Natural: (ix)(x) 139,500 ha (539 sq mi) Ramsar Wetland Sundarbans Reserved Forest Sundarban Wetland The Sundarbans is a mangrove area in the delta formed by the confluence of Ganges, Brahmaputra and Meghna Rivers in the Bay of Bengal. It spans from the Hooghly River in India's state of West Bengal to the Baleswar River in Bangladesh. It comprises closed and open mangrove forests, agriculturally used land, mudflats and barren land, and is intersected by multiple tidal streams and channels. Four protected areas in the Sundarbans are enlisted as UNESCO World Heritage Sites, viz Sundarbans National Park, Sundarbans West, Sundarbans South and Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuaries.[3] The Sundarbans mangrove forest covers an area of about 10,000 km2 (3,900 sq mi), of which forests in Bangladesh's Khulna Division extend over 6,017 km2 (2,323 sq mi) and in West Bengal, they extend over 4,260 km2 (1,640 sq mi) across the South 24 Parganas and North 24 Parganas districts.[4] The most abundant tree species are sundri (Heritiera fomes) and gewa (Excoecaria agallocha). The forests provide habitat to 453 faunal wildlife, including 290 bird, 120 fish, 42 mammal, 35 reptile and eight amphibian species.[5] Despite a total ban on all killing or capture of wildlife other than fish and some invertebrates, it appears that there is a consistent pattern of depleted biodiversity or loss of species in the 20th century, and that the ecological quality of the forest is declining.[6] The Directorate of Forest is responsible for the administration and management of Sundarban National Park in West Bengal. In Bangladesh, a Forest Circle was created in 1993 to preserve the forest, and Chief Conservators of Forests have been posted since. Despite preservation commitments from both Governments, the Sunderbans are under threat from both natural and human-made causes. In 2007, the landfall of Cyclone Sidr damaged around 40% of the Sundarbans. The forest is also suffering from increased salinity due to rising sea levels and reduced freshwater supply. Again in May 2009 Cyclone Aila devastated Sundarban with massive casualties. At least 100,000 people were affected by this cyclone.[7][8] The proposed coal-fired Rampal power station situated 14 km (8.7 mi) north of the Sundarbans at Rampal Upazila of Bagerhat District in Khulna, Bangladesh, is anticipated to further damage this unique mangrove forest according to a 2016 report by UNESCO.[9] 4 Physiography 5 Ecoregions 5.1 Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests 5.2 Sundarbans Mangroves 5.3 Ecological succession 7.1 Mammals 7.2 Avifauna 7.3 Reptiles and fish 8 Endangered and extinct species 9 Climate change impact 10 Hazards 10.1 Natural hazards 10.2 Man made hazards 11.1 Agriculture 11.2 Habitation 12 Administration 12.1 Protection 12.1.1 Sundarban National Park 12.1.2 Sundarbans West Wildlife Sanctuary 12.1.3 Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuary 12.1.4 Sundarbans South Wildlife Sanctuary 12.1.5 Sajnakhali Wildlife Sanctuary 13 In popular culture 15 Footnotes and references 16 Sources The Bengali name Sundarban Bengali: সুন্দরবন means "beautiful forest."[10][11] It may have been derived from the word Sundari or Sundri, the local name of the mangrove species Heritiera fomes. Alternatively, it has been proposed that the name is a corruption of Samudraban, Shomudrobôn ("Sea Forest"), or Chandra-bandhe, the name of a tribe.[12] Village in a clearing of Sundarbans. Drawing by Frederic Peter Layard after an original sketch of 1839 Farm among paddy fields in the Sundarbans, 2010 The history of the area can be traced back to 200–300 AD. A ruin of a city built by Chand Sadagar has been found in the Baghmara Forest Block. During the Mughal period, the Mughal Kings leased the forests of the Sundarbans to nearby residents. Many criminals took refuge in the Sundarbans from the advancing armies of Emperor Akbar. Many have been known to be attacked by tigers.[13] Many of the buildings which were built by them later fell to hands of Portuguese pirates, salt smugglers and dacoits in the 17th century. Evidence of the fact can be traced from the ruins at Netidhopani and other places scattered all over Sundarbans.[14] The legal status of the forests underwent a series of changes, including the distinction of being the first mangrove forest in the world to be brought under scientific management. The area was mapped first in Persian, by the Surveyor General as early as 1769 following soon after proprietary rights were obtained from the Mughal Emperor Alamgir II by the British East India Company in 1757. Systematic management of this forest tract started in the 1860s after the establishment of a Forest Department in the Province of Bengal, in British India. The management was entirely designed to extract whatever treasures were available, but labour and lower management mostly were staffed by locals, as the British had no expertise or adaptation experience in mangrove forests.[15] The first Forest Management Division to have jurisdiction over the Sundarbans was established in 1869. In 1875 a large portion of the mangrove forests was declared as reserved forests under the Forest Act, 1865 (Act VIII of 1865). The remaining portions of the forests were declared a reserve forest the following year and the forest, which was so far administered by the civil administration district, was placed under the control of the Forest Department. A Forest Division, which is the basic forest management and administration unit, was created in 1879 with the headquarters in Khulna, Bangladesh. The first management plan was written for the period 1893–98.[16][17] In 1911, it was described as a tract of waste country which had never been surveyed nor had the census been extended to it. It then stretched for about 266 kilometres (165 mi) from the mouth of the Hooghly River to the mouth of the Meghna river and was bordered inland by the three settled districts of the 24 Parganas, Khulna and Bakerganj. The total area (including water) was estimated at 16,900 square kilometres (6,526 sq mi). It was a water-logged jungle, in which tigers and other wild beasts abounded. Attempts at reclamation had not been very successful. The Sundarbans were intersected by river channels and creeks, some of which afforded water communication throughout the Bengal region both for steamboats and ships.[citation needed] This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Sundarbans" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (November 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Geography view of sundarbans The Sundarban forest lies in the vast delta on the Bay of Bengal formed by the super confluence of the Ganges, Hooghly, Padma, Brahmaputra and Meghna rivers across southern Bangladesh. The seasonally flooded Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests lie inland from the mangrove forests on the coastal fringe. The forest covers 10,000 km2 (3,900 sq mi) of which about 6,000 km2 (2,300 sq mi) are in Bangladesh. It became inscribed as a UNESCO world heritage site in [1987]. The Indian part of Sundarbans is estimated to be about 4,110 km2 (1,590 sq mi), of which about 1,700 km2 (660 sq mi) is occupied by water bodies in the forms of river, canals and creeks of width varying from a few metres to several kilometres. The Sundarbans is intersected by a complex network of tidal waterways, mudflats and small islands of salt-tolerant mangrove forests. The interconnected network of waterways makes almost every corner of the forest accessible by boat. The area is known for the Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris), as well as numerous fauna including species of birds, spotted deer, crocodiles and snakes. The fertile soils of the delta have been subject to intensive human use for centuries, and the ecoregion has been mostly converted to intensive agriculture, with few enclaves of forest remaining. The remaining forests, taken together with the Sundarbans mangroves, are important habitat for the endangered tiger. Additionally, the Sundarbans serves a crucial function as a protective barrier for the millions of inhabitants in and around Khulna and Mongla against the floods that result from the cyclones. The Sundarbans has also been enlisted among the finalists in the New7Wonders of Nature. Physiography[edit] SPOT satellite image of Sundarbans, released by CNES Landsat 7 image of Sundarbans, released by NASA Earth Observatory The mangrove-dominated Ganges Delta – the Sundarbans – is a complex ecosystem comprising one of the three largest single tracts of mangrove forests of the world. Larger part is situated in Bangladesh, a smaller portion of it lies in India. The Indian part of the forest is estimated to be about 40 percent, while the Bangladeshi part is 60 percent. To the south the forest meets the Bay of Bengal; to the east it is bordered by the Baleswar River and to the north there is a sharp interface with intensively cultivated land. The natural drainage in the upstream areas, other than the main river channels, is everywhere impeded by extensive embankments and polders. The Sundarbans was originally measured (about 200 years ago) to be of about 16,700 square kilometres (6,400 sq mi). Now it has dwindled into about 1/3 of the original size. The total land area today is 4,143 square kilometres (1,600 sq mi), including exposed sandbars with a total area of 42 square kilometres (16 sq mi); the remaining water area of 1,874 square kilometres (724 sq mi) encompasses rivers, small streams and canals. Rivers in the Sundarbans are meeting places of salt water and freshwater. Thus, it is a region of transition between the freshwater of the rivers originating from the Ganges and the saline water of the Bay of Bengal.[18] The Sundarbans along the Bay of Bengal has evolved over the millennia through natural deposition of upstream sediments accompanied by intertidal segregation. The physiography is dominated by deltaic formations that include innumerable drainage lines associated with surface and subaqueous levees, splays and tidal flats. There are also marginal marshes above mean tide level, tidal sandbars and islands with their networks of tidal channels, subaqueous distal bars and proto-delta clays and silt sediments. The Sundarbans' floor varies from 0.9 to 2.11 metres (3.0 to 6.9 ft) above sea level.[19] Biotic factors here play a significant role in physical coastal evolution, and for wildlife a variety of habitats have developed which include beaches, estuaries, permanent and semi-permanent swamps, tidal flats, tidal creeks, coastal dunes, back dunes and levees. The mangrove vegetation itself assists in the formation of new landmass and the intertidal vegetation plays a significant role in swamp morphology. The activities of mangrove fauna in the intertidal mudflats develop micromorphological features that trap and hold sediments to create a substratum for mangrove seeds. The morphology and evolution of the eolian dunes is controlled by an abundance of xerophytic and halophytic plants. Creepers, grasses and sedges stabilise sand dunes and uncompacted sediments. The Sunderbans mudflats (Banerjee, 1998) are found at the estuary and on the deltaic islands where low velocity of river and tidal current occurs. The flats are exposed in low tides and submerged in high tides, thus being changed morphologically even in one tidal cycle. The tides are so large that approximately one third of the land disappears and reappears every day.[20] The interior parts of the mudflats serve as a perfect home for mangroves. See also: List of rivers of Sundarbans Ecoregions[edit] Sundarbans features two ecoregions — "Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests" (IM0162) and "Sundarbans mangroves" (IM1406).[21] Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests[edit] The Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests are a tropical moist broadleaf forest ecoregion of Bangladesh. It represents the brackish swamp forests that lie behind the Sundarbans Mangroves, where the salinity is more pronounced. The freshwater ecoregion is an area where the water is only slightly brackish and becomes quite fresh during the rainy season, when the freshwater plumes from the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers push the intruding salt water out and bring a deposit of silt. It covers 14,600 square kilometres (5,600 sq mi) of the vast Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta, extending from the northern part of Khulna District and finishing at the mouth of the Bay of Bengal with scattered portions extending into India's West Bengal state. The Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests lie between the upland Lower Gangetic plains moist deciduous forests and the brackish-water Sundarbans mangroves bordering the Bay of Bengal.[22] A victim of large-scale clearing and settlement to support one of the densest human populations in Asia, this ecoregion is under a great threat of extinction. Hundreds of years of habitation and exploitation have exacted a heavy toll on this ecoregion's habitat and biodiversity. There are two protected areas – Narendrapur (110 km2) and Ata Danga Baor (20 km2) that cover a mere 130 km2 of the ecoregion. Habitat loss in this ecoregion is so extensive, and the remaining habitat is so fragmented, that it is difficult to ascertain the composition of the original vegetation of this ecoregion. According to Champion and Seth (1968), the freshwater swamp forests are characterised by Heritiera minor, Xylocarpus molluccensis, Bruguiera conjugata, Sonneratia apetala, Avicennia officinalis, and Sonneratia caseolaris, with Pandanus tectorius, Hibiscus tiliaceus, and Nipa fruticans along the fringing banks.[22] Sundarbans Mangroves[edit] See also: Mangrove Ecoregion IM406, also known as the Sundarbans Mangroves ecoregion The Sundarbans Mangroves ecoregion on the coast forms the seaward fringe of the delta and is the world's largest mangrove ecosystem, with 20,400 square kilometres (7,900 sq mi) of an area covered. The dominant mangrove species Heritiera fomes is locally known as sundri or sundari. Mangrove forests are not home to a great variety of plants. They have a thick canopy, and the undergrowth is mostly seedlings of the mangrove trees. Besides the sundari, other tree species in the forest include Avicennia, Xylocarpus mekongensis, Xylocarpus granatum, Sonneratia apetala, Bruguiera gymnorhiza, Ceriops decandra, Aegiceras corniculatum, Rhizophora mucronata, and Nypa fruticans palms.[23] Twenty-six of the fifty broad mangrove species found in the world grow well in the Sundarbans. The commonly identifiable vegetation types in the dense Sundarbans mangrove forests are salt water mixed forest, mangrove scrub, brackish water mixed forest, littoral forest, wet forest and wet alluvial grass forests. The Bangladesh mangrove vegetation of the Sundarbans differs greatly from other non-deltaic coastal mangrove forests and upland forests associations. Unlike the former, the Rhizophoraceae are of minor importance.[24] Ecological succession[edit] Ecological succession is generally defined as the successive occupation of a site by different plant communities.[25] In an accreting mudflats the outer community along the sequence represents the pioneer community which is gradually replaced by the next community representing the seral stages and finally by a climax community typical of the climatic zone.[26] Robert Scott Troup suggested that succession began in the newly accreted land created by fresh deposits of eroded soil. The pioneer vegetation on these newly accreted sites is Sonneratia, followed by Avicennia and Nypa. As the ground is elevated as a result of soil deposition, other trees make their appearance. The most prevalent, though one of the late species to appear, is Excoecaria. As the level of land rises through accretion and the land is only occasionally flooded by tides, Heritiera fomes begins to appear.[27] Flora[edit] Sundari tree (Heritiera littoralis) Golpata (Nypa fruticans) A total 245 genera and 334 plant species were recorded by David Prain in 1903.[28] While most of the mangroves in other parts of the world are characterised by members of the Rhizophoraceae, Avicenneaceae or Combretaceae, the mangroves of Bangladesh are dominated by the Malvaceae and Euphorbiaceae.[16] The Sundarbans flora is characterised by the abundance of sundari (Heritiera fomes), gewa (Excoecaria agallocha), goran (Ceriops decandra) and keora (Sonneratia apetala) all of which occur prominently throughout the area. The characteristic tree of the forest is the sundari (Heritiera littoralis), from which the name of the forest had probably been derived. It yields a hard wood, used for building houses and making boats, furniture and other things. New forest accretions is often conspicuously dominated by keora (Sonneratia apetala) and tidal forests. It is an indicator species for newly accreted mudbanks and is an important species for wildlife, especially spotted deer (Axis axis). There is abundance of dhundul or passur (Xylocarpus granatum) and kankra (Bruguiera gymnorhiza) though distribution is discontinuous. Among palms, Poresia coaractata, Myriostachya wightiana and golpata (Nypa fruticans), and among grasses spear grass (Imperata cylindrica) and khagra (Phragmites karka) are well distributed. The varieties of the forests that exist in Sundarbans include mangrove scrub, littoral forest, saltwater mixed forest, brackish water mixed forest and swamp forest. Besides the forest, there are extensive areas of brackish water and freshwater marshes, intertidal mudflats, sandflats, sand dunes with typical dune vegetation, open grassland on sandy soils and raised areas supporting a variety of terrestrial shrubs and trees. Since Prain's report there have been considerable changes in the status of various mangrove species and taxonomic revision of the man-grove flora.[29] However, very little exploration of the botanical nature of the Sundarbans has been made to keep up with these changes. Differences in vegetation have been explained in terms of freshwater and low salinity influences in the Northeast and variations in drainage and siltation. The Sundarbans has been classified as a moist tropical forest demonstrating a whole mosaic of seres, comprising primary colonisation on new accretions to more mature beach forests. Historically vegetation types have been recognised in broad correlation with varying degrees of water salinity, freshwater flushing and physiography. Fauna[edit] A Bengal tiger in the Sundarbans Chital deer A rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) A grey-headed fish eagle A blue-eared kingfisher sighted in the Sundarbans A saltwater crocodile in the Sundarban Crocodile Breeding Center A largetooth sawfish A mudskipper The Sundarbans provides a unique ecosystem and a rich wildlife habitat. According to the 2015 tiger census in Bangladesh, and the 2011 tiger census in India, the Sundarbans have about 180 tigers (106 in Bangladesh and 74 in India). Earlier estimates, based on counting unique pugmarks, were much higher. The more recent counts have used camera traps, an improved methodology that yields more accurate results.[30][31][32] Tiger attacks are frequent in the Sundarbans, with up to 50 people being killed each year.[citation needed] There is much more wildlife there than just the endangered Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris). Most importantly, mangroves are a transition from the marine to freshwater and terrestrial systems, and provide critical habitat for numerous species of small fish, crabs, shrimps and other crustaceans that adapt to feed and shelter, and reproduce among the tangled mass of roots, known as pneumatophores, which grow upward from the anaerobic mud to get the supply of oxygen. Fishing cats, macaques, wild boars, common grey mongooses, foxes, jungle cats, flying foxes, pangolins, and spotted deer are also found in abundance in the Sundarbans. A 1991 study has revealed that the Indian part of the Sundarbans supports diverse biological resources including at least 150 species of commercially important fish, 270 species of birds, 42 species of mammals, 35 reptiles and 8 amphibian species, although new ones are being discovered. This represents a significant proportion of the species present in Bangladesh (i.e. about 30% of the reptiles, 37% the birds and 34% of the mammals) and includes many species which are now extinct elsewhere in the country.[33] Two amphibians, 14 reptiles, 25 aves and five mammals are endangered.[34] The Sundarbans is an important wintering area for migrant water birds[35] and is an area suitable for watching and studying avifauna.[36] The management of wildlife is restricted to, firstly, the protection of fauna from poaching, and, secondly, designation of some areas as wildlife sanctuaries where no extraction of forest produce is allowed and where the wildlife face few disturbances. Although the fauna of Bangladesh have diminished in recent times[16] and the Sundarbans has not been spared from this decline, the mangrove forest retains several good wildlife habitats and their associated fauna. Of these, the tiger and dolphin are target species for planning wildlife management and tourism development. There are high profile and vulnerable mammals living in two contrasting environments, and their statuses and management are strong indicators of the general condition and management of wildlife. Some species are protected by legislation, notably by the Bangladesh Wildlife (Preservation) Order, 1973 (P.O. 23 of 1973).[37] Mammals[edit] The fertile soils of the delta have been subject to intensive human use for centuries, and the ecoregion has been mostly converted to intensive agriculture, with few enclaves of forest remaining. The remaining forests, together with the Sundarbans mangroves, are important habitats for the Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris).[38] The forest also provides habitat for small wild cats such as the jungle cat (Felis chaus), fishing cat (Prionailurus viverrinus), and leopard cat (P. bengalensis).[39] Several predators dwell in the labyrinth of channels, branches and roots that poke up into the air. This is the only mangrove ecoregion that harbours the Indo-Pacific region's largest terrestrial predator, the Bengal tiger. Unlike in other habitats, tigers live here and swim among the mangrove islands, where they hunt scarce prey such as the chital deer (Axis axis), Indian muntjacs (Muntiacus muntjak), wild boar (Sus scrofa), and rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). It is estimated that there are now 180 Bengal tigers[30] and about 30,000 spotted deer in the area. The tigers regularly attack and kill humans who venture into the forest, human deaths ranging from 30–100 per year.[40] Avifauna[edit] The forest is also rich in bird life, with 286 species including the endemic brown-winged kingfishers (Pelargopsis amauroptera) and the globally threatened lesser adjutants (Leptoptilos javanicus) and masked finfoots (Heliopais personata) and birds of prey such as the ospreys (Pandion haliaetus), white-bellied sea eagles (Haliaeetus leucogaster) and grey-headed fish eagles (Ichthyophaga ichthyaetus). The Bangladeshi portion of Sundarbans was designated a Ramsar site on 21 May 1992,[1] and the Indian portion on 30 January 2019.[2] Some more popular birds found in this region are open billed storks, black-headed ibis, water hens, coots, pheasant-tailed jacanas, pariah kites, brahminy kites, marsh harriers, swamp partridges, red junglefowls, spotted doves, common mynahs, jungle crows, jungle babblers, cotton teals, herring gulls, Caspian terns, gray herons, brahminy ducks, spot-billed pelicans, great egrets, night herons, common snipes, wood sandpipers, green pigeons, rose-ringed parakeets, paradise flycatchers, cormorants, white-bellied sea eagles, seagulls, common kingfishers, peregrine falcons, woodpeckers, whimbrels, black-tailed godwits, little stints, eastern knots, curlews, golden plovers, pintails, white-eyed pochards and lesser whistling ducks. Reptiles and fish[edit] The Sundarbans National Park is home to olive ridley turtle, hawksbill turtle, green turtle, sea snake, dog-faced water snake, estuarine crocodile, chameleon, king cobra, Russell's viper, house gecko, monitor lizard, pythons, common krait, green vine snake, checkered keelback and rat snake. The river terrapin, Indian flap-shelled turtle (Lissemys punctata), peacock soft-shelled turtle (Trionyx hurum), yellow monitor, Asian water monitor, and Indian python. Fish and amphibians found in the Sundarbans include sawfish, butter fish, electric ray, common carp, silver carp, barb, river eels, starfish, king crab, fiddler crab, hermit crab, prawn, shrimps, Gangetic dolphins, skipper frogs, common toads and tree frogs. One particularly interesting fish is the mudskipper, a gobioid that climbs out of the water into mudflats and even climbs trees.[citation needed] Endangered and extinct species[edit] Extinct Indian Javan rhinoceros of Sunderbans, drawing from 1877 Gangetic dolphin, drawing from 1894 Forest inventories reveal a decline in standing volume of the two main commercial mangrove species – sundari (Heritiera spp.) and gewa (Excoecaria agallocha) — by 40% and 45% respectively between 1959 and 1983.[41][42] Despite a total ban on all killing or capture of wildlife other than fish and some invertebrates, it appears that there is a consistent pattern of depleted biodiversity or loss of species (notably at least six mammals and one important reptile) in the 20th century, and that the "ecological quality of the original mangrove forest is declining".[16] The endangered species that live within the Sundarbans and extinct species that used to be include the royal Bengal tigers, estuarine crocodile, northern river terrapins (Batagur baska), olive ridley sea turtles, Gangetic dolphin, ground turtles, hawksbill sea turtles and king crabs (horse shoe). Some species such as hog deer (Axis porcinus), water buffalos (Bubalus bubalis), barasingha or swamp deer (Cervus duvauceli), Javan rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus), single horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) and the mugger crocodiles or marsh crocodiles (Crocodylus palustris) started to become extinct in the Sundarbans towards the middle of the 20th century, because of extensive poaching and man hunting by the British.[34] There are other threatened mammal species, such as the capped langurs (Semnopithecus pileatus), smooth-coated otters (Lutrogale perspicillata), Oriental small-clawed otters (Aonyx cinerea), and great Bengal civets (Viverra zibetha). Climate change impact[edit] Sundarbans a few months after Cyclone Sidr Mudflats in Sundarbans The physical development processes along the coast are influenced by a multitude of factors, comprising wave motions, micro and macro-tidal cycles and long shore currents typical to the coastal tract. The shore currents vary greatly along with the monsoon. These are also affected by cyclonic action. Erosion and accretion through these forces maintains varying levels, as yet not properly measured, of physiographic change whilst the mangrove vegetation itself provides a remarkable stability to the entire system. During each monsoon season almost all the Bengal Delta is submerged, much of it for half a year. The sediment of the lower delta plain is primarily advected inland by monsoonal coastal setup and cyclonic events. One of the greatest challenges people living on the Ganges Delta may face in coming years is the threat of rising sea levels caused mostly by subsidence in the region and partly by climate change. In many of the Bangladesh's mangrove wetlands, freshwater reaching the mangroves was considerably reduced from the 1970s because of diversion of freshwater in the upstream area by neighbouring India through the use of the Farakka Barrage bordering Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Also, the Bengal Basin is slowly tilting towards the east because of neo-tectonic movement, forcing greater freshwater input to the Bangladesh Sundarbans. As a result, the salinity of the Bangladesh Sundarbans is much lower than that of the Indian side. A 1990 study noted that there "is no evidence that environmental degradation in the Himalayas or a 'greenhouse' induced rise in sea level have aggravated floods in Bangladesh"; however, a 2007 report by UNESCO, "Case Studies on Climate Change and World Heritage" has stated that an anthropogenic 45-centimetre (18 in) rise in sea level (likely by the end of the 21st century, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), combined with other forms of anthropogenic stress on the Sundarbans, could lead to the destruction of 75 percent of the Sundarbans mangroves.[43] Already, Lohachara Island and New Moore Island/South Talpatti Island have disappeared under the sea, and Ghoramara Island is half submerged.[44] In a study conducted in 2012, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) found out that the Sunderban coast was retreating up to 200 metres (660 ft) in a year. Agricultural activities had destroyed around 17,179 hectares (42,450 acres) of mangroves within three decades (1975–2010). Shrimp cultivation had destroyed another 7,554 hectares (18,670 acres). Researches from the School of Oceanographic Studies, Jadavpur University, estimated the annual rise in sea level to be 8 millimetres (0.31 in) in 2010. It had doubled from 3.14 millimetres (0.124 in) recorded in 2000. The rising sea levels had also submerged around 7,500 hectares (19,000 acres) of forest areas. This, coupled with an around 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) rise in surface water temperatures and increased levels of salinity have posed a problem for the survival of the indigenous flora and fauna. The Sundari trees are exceptionally sensitive to salinity and are being threatened with extinction. Loss of the mangrove forest will result in the loss of the protective biological shield against cyclones and tsunamis. This may put the surrounding coastal communities at high risk. Moreover, the submergence of land mass have rendered up to 6,000 families homeless and around 70,000 people are immediately threatened with the same.[45][self-published source?][46][self-published source?][47] This is causing the flight of human capital to the mainland, about 13% in the decade of 2000–2010.[48] A 2015 ethnographic study, conducted by a team of researchers from Heiderberg university in Germany, found a crisis brewing in the Sunderbans. The study contended that poor planning on the part of the India and Bangladesh governments coupled with natural ecological changes were forcing the flight of human capital from the region [48][49] Hazards[edit] Natural hazards[edit] According to a report created by UNESCO, the landfall of Cyclone Sidr damaged around 40% of Sundarbans in 2007.[50] Man made hazards[edit] Further information: Rampal Power Station and 2014 Sundarbans oil spill In August 2010, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) and India's state-owned National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) where they designated to implement the coal-fired Rampal power station by 2016.[51][52] The proposed project, on an area of over 1,834 acres of land, is situated 14 kilometres (8.7 mi) north of the Sundarbans.[53] This project violates the environmental impact assessment guidelines for coal-based thermal power plants.[54] Environmental activists contend that the proposed location of the Rampal Station would violate provisions of the Ramsar Convention.[55][56] The government of Bangladesh rejected the allegations that the coal-based power plant would adversely affect the world's largest mangrove forest.[57] On 9 December 2014 an oil-tanker named Southern Star VII,[58] carrying 358,000 litres (79,000 imp gal; 95,000 US gal) of furnace oil,[59][60] was sunk in the Sela river[61] of Sundarbans after it had been hit by a cargo vessel.[58][60] The oil spread over 350 km2 (140 sq mi) area after the clash, as of 17 December.[62] The slick spread to a second river and a network of canals in the Sundarbans and blackened the shoreline.[63] The event was very threatening to trees, plankton, vast populations of small fishes and dolphins.[64] The event occurred at a protected Sundarbans mangrove area, home to rare Irrawaddy and Ganges dolphins.[65] Until 15 December 2014 only 50,000 litres (11,000 imp gal; 13,000 US gal) of oil from the area were cleaned up by local residents, Bangladesh Navy and the government of Bangladesh.[59][66] Some reports indicated that the event killed some wildlife.[61] On 13 December 2014, a dead Irrawaddy dolphin was seen floating on the Harintana-Tembulbunia channel of the Sela River.[67] Fishing boat in Sundarbans Logging boat in the Sundarbans Ferry boat in the Sundarbans The Sundarbans plays an important role in the economy of the southwestern region of Bangladesh as well as in the national economy. It is the single largest source of forest produce in the country. The forest provides raw materials for wood-based industries. In addition to traditional forest produce like timber, fuelwood, pulpwood etc., large-scale harvest of non-wood forest products such as thatching materials, honey, beeswax, fish, crustacean and mollusc resources of the forest takes place regularly. The vegetated tidal lands of the Sundarbans function as an essential habitat, produces nutrients and purifies water. The forest also traps nutrient and sediment, acts as a storm barrier, shore stabiliser and energy storage unit. Last but not the least, the Sunderbans provides an aesthetic attraction for local and foreign tourists. The forest has immense protective and productive functions. Constituting 51% of the total reserved forest estate of Bangladesh, it contributes about 41% of total forest revenue and accounts for about 45% of all timber and fuel wood output of the country.[68] A number of industries (e.g., newsprint mill, match factory, hardboard, boat building, furniture making) are based on raw materials obtained from the Sundarbans ecosystem. Non-timber forest products and plantations help generate considerable employment and income opportunities for at least half a million poor coastal people. It provides natural protection to life and properties of the coastal population in cyclone-prone Bangladesh. Agriculture[edit] During monsoon the paddy fields in the Sunderbans are entirely flooded. Part of the Sundarbans is shielded from tidal inflow by leaves and there one finds villages and agriculture. During the monsoon season, the low lying agricultural lands are waterlogged and the summer crop (kharif crop) is therefore mainly deepwater rice or floating rice. In the dry winter season the land is normally uncropped and used for cattle grazing. However, the lands near the villages are irrigated from ponds that were filled up during monsoon, and vegetable crops (Rabi crops) can be grown here.[69] Habitation[edit] The Sundarbans has a population of over 4 million[70] but much of it is mostly free of permanent human habitation. Despite human habitations and a century of economic exploitation of the forest well into the late 1940s, the Sundarbans retained a forest closure of about 70% according to the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) of the United Kingdom in 1979. Administration[edit] Police Boat Patrolling in Sundarban National Park, West Bengal The Sundarbans area is one of the most densely populated areas in the world, and the population is increasing.[citation needed] As a result, half of this ecoregion's mangrove forests have been cut down to supply fuelwood and other natural resources. Despite the intense and large-scale exploitation, this still is one of the largest contiguous areas of mangroves in the world. Another threat comes from deforestation and water diversion from the rivers inland, which causes far more silt to be brought to the estuary, clogging up the waterways. The Directorate of Forest is responsible for the administration and management of Sundarban National Park in West Bengal. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF), Wildlife & Bio-Diversity & ex-officio Chief Wildlife Warden, West Bengal is the senior most executive officer looking over the administration of the park. The Chief Conservator of Forests (South) & Director, Sundarban Biosphere Reserve is the administrative head of the park at the local level and is assisted by a Deputy Field Director and an Assistant Field Director. The park area is divided into two ranges, overseen by range forest officers. Each range is further sub-divided into beats. The park also has floating watch stations and camps to protect the property from poachers. The park receives financial aid from the State Government as well as the Ministry of Environment and Forests under various Plan and Non-Plan Budgets. Additional funding is received under the Project Tiger from the Central Government. In 2001, a grant of US$20,000 was received as a preparatory assistance for promotion between India and Bangladesh from the World Heritage Fund. A new Khulna Forest Circle was created in Bangladesh back in 1993 to preserve the forest, and Chief Conservators of Forests have been posted since. The direct administrative head of the Division is the Divisional Forest Officer, based at Khulna, who has a number of professional, subprofessional and support staff and logistic supports for the implementation of necessary management and administrative activities. The basic unit of management is the compartment. There are 55 compartments in four Forest Ranges and these are clearly demarcated mainly by natural features such as rivers, canals and creeks. Protection[edit] A map of the protected areas of the Indian Sunderbans, showing the boundaries of the tiger reserve, the national park and the three wildlife sanctuaries, conservation and lodging centres, subsistence towns, and access points. The entire forested (dark green) area constitutes the Biosphere Reserve, with the remaining forests outside the national park and wildlife sanctuaries being given the status of a reserve forest. The Bangladesh part of the forest lies under two forest divisions, and four administrative ranges viz Chandpai (Khulna District), Sarankhola (Khulna), and Burigoalini (Satkhira District) and has sixteen forest stations. It is further divided into fifty-five compartments and nine blocks.[12] There are three wildlife sanctuaries established in 1977 under the Bangladesh Wildlife (Preservation) Order, 1973 (P.O. 23 of 1973). The West Bengal part of the forest lies under the district of South & North 24 Parganas. Protected areas cover 15% of the Sundarbans mangroves including Sundarbans National Park and Sajnakhali Wildlife Sanctuary, in West Bengal, Sundarbans East, Sundarbans South and Sundarbans West Wildlife Sanctuaries in Bangladesh.[23] In May 2019, the local authorities in Bangladesh killed 4 tiger poachers in a shootout in the Sunderbans mangrove area where currently 114 tigers dwell. Sundarban National Park[edit] Main article: Sundarbans National Park The Sundarban National Park is a National Park, Tiger Reserve, and a Biosphere Reserve in West Bengal, India. It is part of the Sundarbans on the Ganges Delta, and adjacent to the Sundarbans Reserve Forest in Bangladesh. The delta is densely covered by mangrove forests, and is one of the largest reserves for the Bengal tiger. It is also home to a variety of bird, reptile and invertebrate species, including the salt-water crocodile. The present Sundarbans National Park was declared as the core area of Sundarbans Tiger Reserve in 1973 and a wildlife sanctuary in 1977. On 4 May 1984 it was declared a National Park. Sundarbans West Wildlife Sanctuary[edit] Main article: Sundarbans West Wildlife Sanctuary Sundarbans West Wildlife Sanctuary is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The region supports mangroves, including: sparse stands of Gewa (Excoecaria agallocha) and dense stands of Goran (Ceriops tagal), with discontinuous patches of Hantal palm (Phoenix paludosa) on drier ground, river banks and levees. The fauna of the sanctuary is very diverse with some 40 species of mammals, 260 species of birds and 35 species of reptiles. The greatest of these being the Bengal tiger of which an estimated 350 remain in the Bangladesh Sundarbans. Other large mammals are wild boar, chital horin (spotted deer), Indian otter and macaque monkey. Five species of marine turtles frequent the coastal zone and two endangered reptiles are present – the estuarine crocodile and the Indian python.[71] Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuary[edit] Main article: Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuary Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuary extends over an area of 31,227 hectares (77,160 acres). Sundari trees (Heritiera fomes) dominate the flora, interspersed with Gewa (Excoecaria agallocha) and Passur (Xylocarpus mekongensis) with Kankra (Bruguiera gymnorhiza) occurring in areas subject to more frequent flooding. There is an understory of Shingra (Cynometra ramiflora) where, soils are drier and Amur (Aglaia cucullata) in wetter areas and Goran (Ceriops decandra) in more saline places. Nypa palm (Nypa fruticans) is widespread along drainage lines. Sundarbans South Wildlife Sanctuary[edit] Main article: Sundarbans South Wildlife Sanctuary Sundarbans South Wildlife Sanctuary extends over an area of 36,970 hectares (91,400 acres). There is evidently the greatest seasonal variation in salinity levels and possibly represents an area of relatively longer duration of moderate salinity where Gewa (Excoecaria agallocha) is the dominant woody species. It is often mixed with Sundri, which is able to displace in circumstances such as artificially opened canopies where Sundri does not regenerate as effectively. It is also frequently associated with a dense understory of Goran (Ceriops tagal) and sometimes Passur. Sajnakhali Wildlife Sanctuary[edit] Main article: Sajnakhali Wildlife Sanctuary Sajnakhali Wildlife Sanctuary is a 362-square-kilometre (140 sq mi) area in the northern part of the Sundarbans delta in South 24 Parganas district, West Bengal, India. It is mainly mangrove scrub, forest and swamp. It was set up as a sanctuary in 1976. It is home to a rich population of different species of wildlife, such as water fowl, heron, pelican, spotted deer, rhesus macaques, wild boar, tigers, water monitor lizards, fishing cats, otters, olive ridley turtles, crocodiles, batagur terrapins, and migratory birds. In popular culture[edit] Idol of Manasa, the deity of snakes Bonbibi, the goddess of Sundarbans The Sundarbans is celebrated through numerous Bengali folk songs and dances, often centred around the folk heroes, gods and goddesses specific to the Sunderbans (like Bonbibi and Dakshin Rai) and to the Lower Gangetic Delta (like Manasa and Chand Sadagar). The Bengali folk epic Manasamangal mentions Netidhopani and has some passages set in the Sundarbans during the heroine Behula's quest to bring her husband Lakhindar back to life. The area provides the setting for several novels by Emilio Salgari, (e.g. The Mystery of the Black Jungle). Sundarbaney Arjan Sardar, a novel by Shibshankar Mitra, and Padma Nadir Majhi, a novel by Manik Bandopadhyay, are based on the rigors of lives of villagers and fishermen living in the Sunderbans region, and are woven into the Bengali psyche to a great extent. Part of the plot of Salman Rushdie's Booker Prize winning novel, Midnight's Children is set in the Sundarbans. This forest is adopted as the setting of Kunal Basu's short story "The Japanese Wife" and the subsequent film adaptation. Most of the plot of an internationally acclaimed novelist, Amitav Ghosh's 2004 novel, The Hungry Tide, is set in the Sundarbans. The plot centres on a headstrong American cetologist who arrives to study a rare species of river dolphin, enlisting a local fisherman and translator to aid her. The book also mentions two accounts of the Bonbibi story of "Dukhey's Redemption".[72] Manik Bandopadhyay's Padma Nadir Majhi was made into a movie by Goutam Ghose. The Sunderbans has been the subject of a detailed and well-researched scholarly work on Bonbibi (a 'forest goddess' venerated by Hindus), on the relation between the islanders and tigers and on conservation and how it is perceived by the inhabitants of the Sundarbans,[73] as well as numerous non-fiction books, including The Man-Eating Tigers of Sundarbans by Sy Montegomery for a young audience, which was shortlisted for the Dorothy Canfield Fisher Children's Book Award. In Up The Country, Emily Eden discusses her travels through the Sunderbans.[74] Numerous documentary movies have been made about the Sunderbans, including the 2003 IMAX production Shining Bright about the Bengal tiger. The acclaimed BBC TV series Ganges documents the lives of villagers, especially honey collectors, in the Sundarbans. Ecology portal Sundarbans Tiger Project Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education Sangu Wildlife Sanctuary Environmental impact of development in the Sundarbans Footnotes and references[edit] ^ a b "Sundarbans Reserved Forest". Ramsar Sites Information Service. Retrieved 14 February 2019. ^ a b "Sundarban Wetland". Ramsar Sites Information Service. Retrieved 14 February 2019. ^ Giri, C.; Pengra, B.; Zhu, Z.; Singh, A.; Tieszen, L. L. (2007). "Monitoring mangrove forest dynamics of the Sundarbans in Bangladesh and India using multi-temporal satellite data from 1973 to 2000". Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 73 (1−2): 91−100. Bibcode:2007ECSS...73...91G. doi:10.1016/j.ecss.2006.12.019. ^ Pani, D. R.; Sarangi, S. K.; Subudhi, H. N.; Misra, R. C.; Bhandari, D. C. (2013). "Exploration, evaluation and conservation of salt tolerant rice genetic resources from Sundarbans region of West Bengal" (PDF). Journal of the Indian Society of Coastal Agricultural Research. 30 (1): 45–53. ^ Iftekhar, M. S.; Islam, M. R. (2004). "Managing mangroves in Bangladesh: A strategy analysis" (PDF). Journal of Coastal Conservation. 10 (1): 139–146. doi:10.1652/1400-0350(2004)010[0139:MMIBAS]2.0.CO;2. ^ Manna, S.; Chaudhuri, K.; Bhattacharyya, S.; Bhattacharyya, M. (2010). "Dynamics of Sundarban estuarine ecosystem: Eutrophication induced threat to mangroves". Saline Systems. 6: 8. doi:10.1186/1746-1448-6-8. PMC 2928246. PMID 20699005. ^ "23 dead, 1 lakh affected as Cyclone Aila hits Bengal". The Times of India. ^ "Cyclone Aila". 2009. ^ Iftekhar, M. (2016). "Unesco calls for shelving Rampal project". Prothom Alo. Retrieved 13 October 2016. ^ Biswas, S. (2000). "সুন্দর". Samsad Bengali-English dictionary. Calcutta: Sahitya Samsad. p. 1017. ^ Biswas, S. (2000). "বন". Samsad Bengali-English dictionary. Calcutta: Sahitya Samsad. p. 717. ^ a b Siddiqui, N. A. (2012). "Sundarbans, The". In Islam, S.; Jamal, A. A. (eds.). Banglapedia: National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh (Second ed.). Asiatic Society of Bangladesh. ^ "Sunderban Mangroves". Geological Survey of India. Archived from the original on 10 December 2009. Retrieved 21 January 2010. ^ "Sunderbans" (PDF). Protected areas and World Heritage sites. United Nations Environmental Programme. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 February 2010. Retrieved 21 January 2010. ^ Laskar Muqsudur, Rahman. "The Sundarbans: A Unique Wilderness of the World" (PDF). Wilderness.net. Retrieved 21 January 2010. ^ a b c d Hussain, Z.; Acharya, G., eds. (1994). Mangroves of the Sundarbans. Volume 2, Bangladesh. Bangkok: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. OCLC 773534471. ^ UNDP (1998). Integrated resource development of the Sundarbans Reserved Forests, Bangladesh. Volume I Project BGD/84/056, United Nations Development Programme, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Dhaka, The People's Republic of Bangladesh. ^ Wahid, S.M., Alam, M.J. and Rahman, A. (2002). "Mathematical river modelling to support ecological monitoring of the largest mangrove forest of the world – the Sundarbans". Proceedings of First Asia-Pacific DHI software conference, 17–18 June 2002. ^ Katebi, M.N.A. and Habib, M.G. (1987). Sundarbans and Forestry in Coastal Area Resource Development and Management Part II, BRAC Printers, Dhaka, Bangladesh. ^ Shapiro, Ari (20 May 2016). "Rising Tides Force Thousands To Leave Islands Of Eastern India". NPR. Retrieved 22 May 2016. ^ Ecoregions: Indo-Malayan Archived 28 June 2009 at the Wayback Machine, World Wildlife Fund ^ a b "Sundarbans freshwater swamp forests". Terrestrial Ecoregions. World Wildlife Fund. ^ a b "Sundarbans Mangroves". Terrestrial Ecoregions. World Wildlife Fund. ^ Rahman, MR; Asaduzzaman, M (16 April 2013). "Ecology of Sundarban, Bangladesh". Journal of Science Foundation. 8 (1–2): 35–47. doi:10.3329/jsf.v8i1-2.14618. ISSN 1728-7855. ^ Weaver, J. E.; Clements, F. E. (1938). Plant Ecology (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Company. OCLC 502944133. ^ Watson, J.G. (1928). "Mangrove swamps of the Malayan peninsula". Malayan Forest Records. 6: 1–275. ^ Troup, R. S. (1921). The Silviculture of Indian Trees. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 155. On newly formed islands, flooded by every tide, Sonneratia usually springs up first, followed by Avicennia and the palm Nipa fruticans. As the ground rises other trees make their appearance, the most prevalent, though one of the later species to appear, being Exaecaria Agallocha. As the level rises by accretion, and the land is only occasionally flooded by the tide, the sundri makes its appearance. ^ Prain, David (1903). "Flora of the Sundribuns". Records of the Botanical Survey of India. Volume II. Calcutta: Allied Book Centre. p. 251. ^ Khatun, B.M.R.; Hafiz, Syed (1987). "Taxonomic studies in the genus Avicennia L. from Bangladesh". Bangladesh J. Bot. 16 (1): 39–44. ^ a b "Only 100 tigers left in Bangladesh's famed Sundarbans forest". The Guardian. Agence France-Presse. 27 July 2015. ^ "India wild tiger census shows population rise". BBC News. 28 March 2011. Retrieved 31 March 2011. ^ "Joint Tiger census-2004 in Sundarban Reserved Forests". Bangladesh Forest Department. Ministry of Environment and Forest. Archived from the original on 7 December 2004. Retrieved 6 May 2012. ^ Scott, D. A. (1991). "Asia and the Middle East in". In Finlayson, C. M.; Moser, M. (eds.). Wetlands. Oxford. pp. 151–178. ISBN 978-0-8160-2556-5. ^ a b Sarker, S.U. 1993. Ecology of Wildlife UNDP/FAO/BGD/85/011. Field Document N. 50 Institute of Forestry and Environmental Sciences. Chittagong, Bangladesh. ^ Zöckler, C.; Balachandran, S.; Bunting, G.C.; Fanck, M.; Kashiwagi, M.; Lappo, E.G.; Maheswaran, G.; Sharma, A.; Syroechkovski, E.E.; Webb, K. (2005). "The Indian Sunderbans: an important wintering site for Siberian waders" (PDF). Wader Study Group Bulletin. 108: 42–46. ^ Habib, M.G. (1999). Message In: Nuruzzaman, M., I.U. Ahmed and H. Banik (eds.). The Sundarbans world heritage site: an introduction, Forest Department, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh. ^ THE ORIGINAL BANGLADESH WILDLIFE PRESERVATION ORDER 1973 THE DRAFT. nishorgo.org ^ Khan, M. M. H. (2004). Ecology and conservation of the Bengal tiger in the Sundarbans Mangrove forest of Bangladesh. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge. ^ Khan, M. M. H. (2004). Food habit of the Leopard Cat Prionailurus bengalensis (Kerr, 1792) in the Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuary, Bangladesh. Zoos’ Print Journal 19 (5): 1475−1476. ^ Goodrich, J.; Lynam, A.; Miquelle, D.; Wibisono, H.; Kawanishi, K.; Pattanavibool, A.; Htun, S.; Tempa, T.; Karki, J.; Jhala, Y. & Karanth, U. (2015). "Panthera tigris". The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN. 2015: e.T15955A50659951. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.RLTS.T15955A50659951.en. CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) ^ Forestal (1960). Forest Inventory 1958–59 Sundarbans Forests. Oregon: Forestal Forestry and Engineering International Ltd, Canada. ^ Chaffey, D. R.; Miller, F. R. and Sandom, J. H. (1985) A forest inventory of the Sundarbans, Bangladesh. Main Report. Land Resources Development Centre, Surbiton, England. ^ Case Studies of Climate Change, UNESCO, 2007 ^ George, Nirmala (24 March 2010). "Disputed isle in Bay of Bengal disappears into sea". Yahoo News. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 29 March 2010. Retrieved 24 March 2010. ^ "Mangrove forests threatened by Climate Change in the Sundarbans of Bangladesh and India". 12 January 2013. ^ "Global Warming: Rising Seas creates 70,000 Climate Refugees". 27 December 2006. ^ Cornforth, William A.; Fatoyinbo, Temilola E.; Freemantle, Terri P.; Pettorelli, Nathalie (2013). "Advanced Land Observing Satellite Phased Array Type L-Band SAR (ALOS PALSAR) to Inform the Conservation of Mangroves: Sundarbans as a Case Study". Remote Sensing. 5 (1): 224–237. Bibcode:2013RemS....5..224C. doi:10.3390/rs5010224. ^ a b Foundation, Thomson. "'Everyday disasters' driving flight from Sundarbans". trust.org. Retrieved 5 June 2015. ^ Foundation, Thomson. "Poor planning, climate shifts devastating India's Sundarbans". trust.org. Retrieved 5 June 2015. ^ "Cyclone Sidr damaged 40% of Sundarbans: UNESCO". ibnlive.in. Retrieved 21 February 2015. ^ New Age | Newspaper ^ Final report on environmental impact assessment of 2x (500-660) MW coal-based thermal power plant to be constructed at the location of Khulna - India Environment Portal ^ Rahman, Khalilur (24 February 2013). "Demand for Rampal power plant relocation". The Financial Express. Dhaka. ^ Kumar, Chaitanya (24 September 2013). "Bangladesh Power Plant Struggle Calls for International Solidarity". The World Post. ^ "The Roar of Disapproval". Dhaka Courier. 29 September 2013. Retrieved 29 November 2015 – via HighBeam Research. ^ "Rampal plant won't hamper environ". The New Nation. 27 October 2015. Retrieved 29 November 2015. ^ Habib, Haroon (27 September 2013). "Bangladesh begins import of power from India". The Hindu. ^ a b Krishnendu Mukherjee, Rakhi Chakrabarty. "350-tonne oil spill by Bangladeshi ship threatens Sunderbans". The Times of India. Retrieved 15 December 2014. ^ a b "India on alert after Sunderbans oil spill in Bangladesh". BBC News. Retrieved 16 December 2014. ^ a b Phillips, Tom (13 December 2014). "Fears for rare wildlife as oil 'catastrophe' strikes Bangladesh". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 15 December 2014. ^ a b "Massive Oil Spill Threatens Bangladesh's Sundarbans". Global Voices Online. Retrieved 15 December 2014. ^ "Assessing the oil spill's impact on Bangladesh's Sundarbans forest". Deutsche Welle. 17 December 2014. ^ "Bangladesh launches campaign to clean up Sunderbans oil spill". The Hindu. Retrieved 15 December 2014. ^ "Bangladesh begins oil clean-up after spill". Al Jazeera. 12 December 2014. Retrieved 15 December 2014. ^ "Bangladesh oil spill threatens rare dolphins". Al Jazeera. 11 December 2014. Retrieved 15 December 2014. ^ "No capacity to tackle oil spills". The Daily Star. 16 December 2014. Retrieved 16 December 2014. ^ Siddique, Abu Bakar (14 December 2014). "First dead dolphin spotted". Dhaka Tribune. Retrieved 18 December 2014. ^ Integrated Resource Management Plan of the Sundarbans Reserved Forest – Final Report. FAO Project BGD/84/056. FAO, Rome, Italy (1995). ^ H.S.Sen, 1992. Research on water management in the Sundarbans, West Bengal, India. Published in the Annual Report 1992 of the International Institute for Land Reclamation and improvement, Wageningen, the Netherlands. On line:[1] ^ Subir Bhaumik (15 September 2003). "Fears rise for sinking Sundarbans". BBC News. ^ UNESCO World Heritage Nomination, 1997 ^ Ghosh, Amitav (2005). The Hungry Tide: A Novel., Boston: Houghton Mifflin, pp. 84–88, 292–97 ISBN 0-14-301556-7. ^ Jalais, Annu. (2010). Forest of Tigers: People, Politics and Environment in the Sundarbans, Routledge: New Delhi, London, New York, ISBN 0-415-69046-3. ^ Eden, Emily (1867). 'Up the country': letters written to her sister from the upper provinces of India. R. Bentley. Sources[edit] This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Sundarbans". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. Laskar Muqsudur Rahman, The Sundarbans: A Unique Wilderness of the World; at USDA Forest Reserve; McCool, Stephen F.; Cole, David N.; Borrie, William T.; O'Loughlin, Jennifer, comps. 2000. Wilderness science in a time of change conference, Volume 2: Wilderness within the context of larger systems; 1999 May 23–27; Missoula, MT. Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL-2. Ogden, UT: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Terminal Report, Integrated Resource Development of the Sundarbans Reserved Forest: Project Findings and Recommendations, Food and Agriculture Organization (acting as executing agency for the United Nations Development Programme), United Nations, Rome, 1998 (prepared for the Government of Bangladesh) Blasco, F. (1975). The Mangroves of India. Institut Francis de Pondichéry, Travaux de las Section Scientifique et Technique, Tome XIV, Facicule 1. Pondicherry, India. Jalais, Annu. (2005). "Dwelling on Morichjhanpi: When Tigers Became 'Citizens', Refugees 'Tiger-Food'"; Economic and Political Weekly, 23 April 2005, pp. 1757 – 1762. Jalais, Annu. (2007). "The Sundarbans: Whose World Heritage Site?", Conservation and Society, (vol. 5, no. 4). Jalais, Annu. (2008). "Unmasking the Cosmopolitan Tiger", Nature and Culture, (vol. 3, no. 1), pp. 25–40. Jalais, Annu. (2008). "Bonbibi: Bridging Worlds", Indian Folklore, serial no. 28, Jan 2008. Jalais, Annu. (2009). "Confronting Authority, Negotiating Morality: tiger prawn seed collection in the Sundarbans", International Collective in Support of Fishworkers, Yemaya, 32, Nov. [2]; Also in French: http://base.d-p-h.info/en/fiches/dph/fiche-dph-8148.html Jalais, Annu. (2010). "Braving Crocodiles with Kali: Being a prawn-seed collector and a modern woman in the 21st century Sundarbans", Socio-Legal Review, Vol. 6. Montgomery, Sy (1995). Spell of the Tiger: The Man-Eaters of Sundarbans. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York. Rivers of Life: Living with Floods in Bangladesh. M. Q. Zaman. Asian Survey, Vol. 33, No. 10 (October 1993), pp. 985–996 Allison, M. A.; Kepple, E. B. (September 2001). "Modern sediment supply to the lower delta plain of the Ganges-Brahmaputra River in Bangladesh". Geo-Marine Letters. 21 (2): 66. Bibcode:2001GML....21...66M. doi:10.1007/s003670100069. Sundarbans on United Nations Environment Programme Brammer, H. (July 1990). "Floods in Bangladesh: II. Flood Mitigation and Environmental Aspects". The Geographical Journal. 156 (2): 158–165. doi:10.2307/635323. JSTOR 635323. Environmental classification of mangrove wetlands of India. V. Selvam. Current Science, Vol. 84, No. 6, 25 March 2003. Green, M.J.B.; Centre, W.C.M.; Parks, I.C.o.N.; Areas, P. (1990). Iucn Directory of South Asian Protected Areas. IUCN-The World Conservation Union. ISBN 978-2-8317-0030-4. Wikimedia Commons has media related to Sundarbans. Sundarbans travel guide from Wikivoyage UNESCO World Heritage Centre: The Sundarbans UNESCO: Sundarban Biosphere Reserve Information World Heritage Site: The Sundarbans United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre Protected Areas Programme: The Sundarbans The Sundarban of Bangladesh: A Rich Biodiversity of the World's Largest Mangrove Ecosystem Greenpeace: Sinking Sundarbans – Climate voices Tiger Conservation Project in the Bangladeshi Sundarbans Research on water management and control in the Sunderbans, West Bengal, India Finfishes of Sundarbans Nasa images: set 01 and set 2 Bong Blogger: Sundarban Tour with SHER World Heritage Sites in Bangladesh Historic Mosque City of Bagerhat Ruins of the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur Sundarbans Reserve Forest World Heritage Sites in India Khajuraho Group of Monuments Kalka-Shimla Railway Nanda Devi and Valley of Flowers National Parks Qutub Minar and its Monuments Red Fort Complex Darjeeling Himalayan Railway Mahabodhi Temple Complex Khangchendzonga National Park Great Living Chola Temples Group of Monuments at Hampi Group of Monuments at Mahabalipuram Group of Monuments at Pattadakal Nilgiri Mountain Railway Historic City of Ahmadabad Rock Shelters of Bhimbetka Champaner-Pavagadh Archaeological Park Churches and convents of Goa Ellora Caves Hill Forts of Rajasthan Jantar Mantar of Jaipur Buddhist Monuments at Sanchi The Victorian and Art Deco Ensemble of Mumbai National parks of India Protected areas of India Ministry of Environment and Forests (India) Andaman & Nicobar Islands Campbell Bay Middle Button Island Mt. Harriet Island North Button Island Rani Jhansi Saddle Peak South Button Island Sri Venkateswara Papikonda Mouling Namdapha Dibru-Saikhowa Nameri Valmiki Kanger Ghati Mollem Gulf of Kutch Vansda Kalesar Great Himalayan Pin Valley Khirganga Dachigam Betla Bannerghatta Anamudi Shola Eravikulam Mathikettan Shola Pampadam Shola Silent Valley Satpura Van Vihar Chandoli Gilbert Hill Gugamal Navegaon Sanjay Gandhi Tadoba Keibul Lamjao Balphakram Nokrek Murlen Phawngpui Dampa Tiger Reserve Intangki Bhitarkanika Simlipal Keoladeo Khangchendzonga Guindy Gulf of Mannar Anamalai Mudumalai Mukurthi Palani Hills Kasu Brahmananda Reddy Mahavir Harina Vanasthali Mrugavani Dudhwa Govind Pashu Vihar Rajaji Buxa Gorumara Neora Valley Singalila Jaldapara Protected forests of Bangladesh Altadighi Baroiyadhala Bhawal Birgonj Himchari Kadigarh Kaptai Khadimnagar Kuakata Lawachara Medhakachhapia Nababgonj Nijhum Dweep Satchari Chadpai Char Kukri-Mukri Chunati Dhangmari Dudhmukhi Dudpukuria-Dhopachari Fashiakhali Hajarikhil Pablakhali Rema-Kalenga Sonarchar Sundarbans (East / West / South) Teknaf Game Reserve Tengragiri Other protected areas Gardens & eco-parks National Botanical Garden Baldha Garden Banshkhali Eco-Park Madhabkunda Eco-Park Sitakunda Botanical Garden and Eco-park Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Safari Park Dulahazara Safari Park Forestry in Bangladesh Ministry of Environment and Forestry (Departments: Bangladesh Forest Department / Bangladesh Forest Research Institute) Ramsar sites in India Ramsar Sites Ashtamudi Wetland Bhitarkanika Mangroves Bhoj Wetland Chandra Taal Deepor Beel East Kolkata Wetlands Harike Wetland Hokera Wetland Kanjli Wetland Kolleru Lake Loktak Lake Mansar Lake Nalsarovar Point Calimere Wildlife and Bird Sanctuary Pong Dam Lake Renuka Lake Ropar Wetland Rudrasagar Lake Sasthamkotta Lake Tsomoriri Vembanad-Kol Wetland Wular Lake Bangladesh articles Vedic period Pundra Suhma Kingdom Magadha Pradyota Shaishunaga Gangaridai Maurya Empire Shunga Empire Kanva dynasty Gupta Empire Classical and Medieval Classical Empires: Sultanates: Islamic rulers Khalji dynasty Bengal Sultanate Sur Empire Baro-Bhuyan Mughal period: Bengal Subah Nawabs of Bengal Battle of Plassey Colonial and Pakistan era Portuguese Bengala British Bengal: Sepoy Rebellion Bengali Renaissance Partition of Bengal (1905) Prime Minister of Bengal Direct Action Day East Pakistan: Language Movement Legislative election in 1954 Six point movement 1969 Uprising General election in 1970 Proclamation of Independence Bangladesh Liberation War: Republic Bangladesh Military coups Political crisis in 2006–08 Bangladesh Rifles revolt Sub-districts Nature: Bengal Fan Chittagong Hill Tracts Cox's Bazar Ganges Basin Ganges Delta Hatirjheel Jat Area Executive: Jatiya Sangsad (parliament): Local government: City Corporations Upazila Parishads Union councils Law: High Court Division Human rights: Military and Enforcement Armed Forces: DGFI Paramilitary: Border Guard Ansar Village Defence Party President Guard Regiment International Crimes Tribunal Special Branch Special Security Force Industries: Finance Sectors: Bangladesh Bank (central bank) Bangladeshi taka (currency) Stock Exchange: 2011 scam Energy and Resources: Natural gas and petroleum Export Processing Zones National Economic Council Bangladeshis Bengalization Bengal studies Amar Shonar Bangla Bangamata Bengal fire Government Seal Ilish National Emblem National Martyrs’ Memorial Notuner Gaan Oriental magpie-robin India topics Mahajanapadas Mauryas Middle kingdoms Hoysala Kakatiya Vijayanagara Mughals European trade Plassey 1857 rebellion Zamindari Political reforms Partition of Bengal 1943 famine Non-Aligned Movement Five-Year Plans Sino-Indian War Indo-Pakistani wars White Revolution Naxal Insurgency Space programme The Emergency Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) Economic liberalisation Pokhran-II Biosphere reserves Indo-Gangetic Eastern coastal Western coastal Autonomous administrative divisions States and union territories Union Council of Ministers State legislatures State legislative assemblies State legislative councils Governors, Lieutenant Governors and Administrators Chief Ministers Chief Secretaries Fundamental rights, principles and duties Border Security Force (BSF) Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) National Security Guard (NSG) Railway Protection Force (RPF) Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) Special Protection Group (SPG) Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D) Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) National Investigation Agency (NIA) Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) Scheduled groups CNX Nifty Government-owned companies Commerce ministers Finance Commission Economic Advisory Council Central Statistical Office Securities and Exchange Board of India Industrial licensing Voluntary guidelines Historical exchange rates data of the Indian rupee India Government Mint Multi Commodity Exchange Licence Raj Numbering system Socio-economic issues Geography of South Asia Mountains and plateaus Eastern Ghats Aravalli Range Vindhya Range Satpura Range Garo Hills Shivalik Hills Mahabharat Range Khasi Hills Anaimalai Hills Cardamom Hills Sulaiman Mountains Toba Kakar Range Deccan Plateau Thar Desert Makran Chota Nagpur Naga Hills Mysore Plateau Ladakh Plateau Gandhamardan Hills Lushai Hills Lowlands and islands Indo-Gangetic plain Doab Indus River Delta Terai Atolls of the Maldives Greater Rann of Kutch Little Rann of Kutch Protected areas in Tamil Nadu Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sundarbans&oldid=936711006" Geography of South 24 Parganas district Protected areas of Bangladesh Protected areas of West Bengal Indomalaya ecoregions Mangrove ecoregions Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forests Ecoregions of Bangladesh Ecoregions of India Natural regions Environment of West Bengal Forests of Bangladesh Forests of India Forests of West Bengal Ramsar sites in Bangladesh Wetlands of India Tourist attractions in Bangladesh Tourist attractions in West Bengal EngvarB from September 2013 Use dmy dates from September 2013 Articles containing Bengali-language text Articles needing additional references from November 2018 Articles with unsourced statements from February 2018 All articles with self-published sources Articles with self-published sources from September 2016

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511886

__label__wiki

(person) by lakeid Tue Jun 20 2000 at 20:09:29 Neil Peart grew up in a small town in Ontario. His parents first got him his drum set when he was around 5 years old. He loved to drum and when he was old enough, he moved to England to see if he could join a band during the heyday of progressive rock. He didn't find anything that suited him so he returned. When drummer John Rutsey of Rush felt that he wanted to focus on other things, such as body building and other forms of rock other that Rush, he left, leaving a position in the band open. Neil auditioned and he quickly formed a musical kinship with bassist Geddy Lee, both being the rhythmically oriented players of the band. A close relationship with Alex Lifeson soon followed and the band became as tightly knit as their complex, musical rhythms. His arrival gave their new album Fly by Night, a strong rhythmic base. Neil uses drumsticks by hitting with the handle end and not the regular end, resulting in a very deep, strong sound. He is known to hit the drums incredibly hard and incredibly accurately. A roadie testifies that his snare drum has only one small, quarter sized area of pock marks. He is very fill-oriented, playing a very complicated fill between nearly every measure. For their next album Caress of Steel, Peart showed a new aspect to his talents by writing some lyrics. They were very Tolkien-based and showed off his knowledge of literature. For their next album, Peart helped to write an epic song based on Ayn Rand's novel Anthem. The song 2112 featured his readings in Rand's objectivism, although he has said he is not a fanatic believer of her philosophy. He has gone on to write songs based on science fiction and fantasy such as Xanadu and Cygnus X-1. He continues to tour and record music with Rush today. Other projects include a tribute album to jazz drummer Buddy Rich and a video on the art of drumming. (person) by PMD Sun Dec 31 2000 at 3:10:36 Neil Peart is considered one of the most influential drummers in modern rock. His exact style of drumming tends to appeal to those drummers that can't stand the seeming randomity of someone like Keith Moon. Before his Rush days, Peart himself longed to play in a band that would allow him to drum like Keith Moon; however, when he was finally given this opportunity he discover he prefered his own, exact style. Peart is not revered only by geeky Rush fans. He has won the following awards from Modern Drummer: Hall of Fame: 1983 Best Rock Drummer: 1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985 Best Multi-Percussionist: 1983,1984,1985,1986 Best Percussion Instrumentalist: 1982 Most Promising New Drummer: 1980 Best All Around: 1986 Best Recorded Performance: 1981: Moving Pictures 1982: Exit... Stage Left 1983: Signals 1985: Grace Under Pressure 1986: Power Windows 1988: Hold Your Fire 1989: A Show of Hands 1990: Presto 1992: Roll The Bones 1994: Counterparts 1986 Honor Roll: Rock Drummer, Multi-Percussion As a member of the Honor Roll Neil is no longer eligible for votes in these categories. (person) by Rancid_Pickle Fri Jan 10 2020 at 22:53:10 Well, damn. I'm sitting here a few hours after hearing that my drumming idol, Neil Peart, has passed away today (January 10, 2020) due to glioblastoma, or brain cancer. I'm actually writing this with blurry eyes because he made more of an impact on my life than my father did. Besides writing lyrics for Rush, Neil also wrote books and had a blog about riding his motorcycle between gigs for the band. Instead of taking the tour bus, many times he would let folks know when and where to meet up and ride along. A lifelong science fiction fan, he and Kevin J. Anderson co-wrote the book version of his Clockwork Angels lyrics. I've had the opportunity to see Rush three times and something always prevented me from going. I felt like it was a curse until Kevin and his lovely wife (and fellow author), Rebecca Moesta, invited me to see the Clockwork Angels tour when it hit Denver, Colorado. I'll just say it was worth the wait. Neil was an exceptionally skilled drummer who loved to learn more. After three decades with the band he was still taking lessons with older professionals to increase his already awesome skills. The epitome of professionalism and humbleness. He and Clem Burke (of Blondie fame) were my contemporary idols when I played drums for years. Neil was preceded in death by his first wife and one of his daughters, who passed away while driving back to attend college. Vic Salazar and Peter Erskine wrote a nice history and memorial: Neil Peart (pronounced "Peert" not "Pert") Devastated by the news of the passing of legendary drummer and one of my biggest influences, Neil Peart. Neil died on Tuesday in Santa Monica after succumbing to brain cancer. He is survived by his wife Carrie and daughter, Olivia Louise. Born in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, since 1974, Neil Peart was the drummer and principal lyricist for the Canadian progressive rock band RUSH. Neil grew up in Port Dalhousie, Ontario (now part of St. Catharines). He was interested in music early on and had a penchant for drumming on various objects around the house with a pair of chopsticks. On his 13th birthday, his parents bought him a pair of drumsticks, a practice drum and some lessons, with the promise that if he stuck with it for a year, they would buy him a kit. True to their promise, his parents bought him a drum kit for his 14th birthday. During adolescence, Neil floated between regional bands in pursuit of a career as a full-time drummer. At the age of 18 after struggling to achieve success as a drummer in Canada, Neil travelled to London, England, hoping to further his career as a professional musician. After eighteen months of dead-end musical gigs, and disillusioned by his lack of progress in the music business, Neil placed his aspiration of becoming a professional musician on hold and returned to Canada to work for his father selling tractor parts at a farm machinery dealer. After returning to Canada, a mutual acquaintance convinced Neil to audition for the Toronto-based band, Rush, who needed a replacement for their original drummer John Rutsey. Bassist/vocalist/keyboardist Geddy Lee and guitartist Alex Lifeson oversaw the audition. His future bandmates describe his arrival that day as somewhat humorous, as he arrived in shorts, driving a battered old Ford Pinto with his drums stored in trashcans. Said Geddy, "My first impression was that he was kinda goofy." Alex had a similar assessment: "I remember thinking, 'God, he’s not nearly cool enough to be in this band.'" Despite Geddy's and Alex's lack of initial enthusiasm, their preconceived notions of Neil soon changed once he sat down behind his kit to play. Said Alex, "And then he started playing, and he pounded the crap out of those drums. He played like Keith Moon and John Bonham at the same time." According to Geddy, “On the day that Neil auditioned, we had five guys in – three before Neil and one after. The last guy had come a long way, a two-hour drive, and it was a very uncomfortable situation having him audition after Neil, because Neil was so fucking good. This poor guy had written charts and was playing our songs to charts. We were going through the motions. It was really awkward. I’m looking at Alex and Alex is looking at me. We were embarrassed for this guy because we were both so excited by Neil’s playing. There was no denying that Neil was the man.” Interestingly, Neil thought his audition didn't go that well. Neil officially joined Rush on July 29, 1974, two weeks before the group's first U.S. tour. Neil played his first gig with the band, opening for Uriah Heep and Manfred Mann, in front of over 11,000 people at the Civic Arena in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on August 14, 1974. In December of the same year, Neil and his bandmates entered the studio to record Rush's second studio album (and Neil's first with the band), "Fly By Night." At this point, Neil also became the band's main lyricist. After Rush completed their "Test for Echo Tour" in July 1997, the group entered a five-year hiatus following the personal tragedies in Neil's life, losing his daughter Selena in August 1997 and wife Jackie in June 1998. During this hiatus, Neil used the time to mourn and reflect while he traveled extensively throughout North and Central America on his BMW motorcycle, covering 55,000 miles. Eventually he decided to return to the band and wrote the book, "Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road," as a chronicle of his geographical and emotional journey. In 2015 to celebrate their 40 years together, Neil and Rush embarked on their "R40 LIVE Tour" highlighting four decades of the band’s music. The band visited 34 cities throughout North America beginning May 8th in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and finishing August 1st in Los Angeles, California. Rush was a band completely removed from the mainstream music scene yet remain one of the most popular and influential rock bands in the world. It is a dichotomy that has fueled the group from the very beginning and has placed them in a very special class of their own. Rush's sales position them third behind The Beatles and The Rolling Stones for the most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums by a rock band. Since 1978, they had been playing arena sized venues. Since 1996, Rush had not toured with (nor needed) an opening act, choosing to bill their shows as "An Evening With Rush." In 2013, Neil and Rush were (FINALLY!) inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. In addition to being a musician, Neil wrote seven non-fiction books, "The Masked Rider: Traveling in West Africa", "Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road", "Traveling Music: The Soundtrack to My Life and Times", "Roadshow: Landscape With Drums: A Concert Tour by Motorcycle", "Far and Away: A Prize Every Time", "Far and Near: On Days Like These", and "Far and Wide: Bring That Horizon to Me!" "Ghost Rider" was nominated for a Canadian Literary award in 2003. In all, his books have sold over 100,000 copies. He had also written many articles for Modern Drummer Magazine and other periodicals. In his spare time, Neil rode BMW motorcycles, drove fast cars, snowshoed, bird watched, and hiked. His favorite drink after a concert or a long day on the road was The Macallan. A couple of Neil's nicknames were "Pratt" and "The Professor." Like Buddy Rich and The Beatles' Ringo Starr, Neil Peart is one of the most influential drummers in history. His contributions to his band made him so integral, he was literally irreplaceable. Without Neil, there could be no Rush. In 2014, Neil Peart was voted one of "The 50 Greatest Drummers of All Time" by the readers of Modern Drummer Magazine coming in #3 behind Led Zeppelin's John Bonham and the legendary Buddy Rich. In 2016, he also made Rolling Stone's list of the "100 Greatest Drummers of All Time." I still have fond memories of seeing Rush perform here in Chicago during there "Permanent Waves" tour back on April 4, 1980 at The International Amphitheatre on South Halsted Street. It was my first time seeing Neil and the band live. I've since seen them on every subsequent tour, including their last show in Chicago on June 12, 2015. Neil Peart played Drum Workshop Inc. (DW Drums) Drums, Pedals & Hardware, SABIAN Cymbals, Promark Drumsticks, Drumheads consisting of "an ever changing variety of DW and Remo’s", GON BOPS Cowbells, Roland Electronic Pads mounted in DW shells, an Alternate Mode Inc. malletKAT Express, Century Mallet Orchestra Chimes, and a custom-built Dauz Drums trigger pad with a tricolor target head painted as a reference to the band The Who. Other than his throne base, all of Neil's cymbal and snare drum stands did not utilize a tripod base. Instead they simply screwed right into his drum riser for an ultra clutter-free look. Neil had been "tripod-less" since Rush's 1984 "Grace Under Pressure" tour. "What is a master but a master student? And if that's true, then there's a responsibility on you to keep getting better and to explore avenues of your profession." - Neil Peart "It is with broken hearts and the deepest sadness that we must share the terrible news that on Tuesday our friend, soul brother and band mate of over 45 years, Neil, has lost his incredibly brave three and a half year battle with brain cancer (Glioblastoma). We ask that friends, fans, and media alike understandably respect the family’s need for privacy and peace at this extremely painful and difficult time. Those wishing to express their condolences can choose a cancer research group or charity of their choice and make a donation in Neil Peart's name. Rest in peace brother." Rush Lars Ulrich Pratt Keith Moon Geddy Lee Xanadu mark of a percussionist The good musicians play music that idiots listen to Mike Portnoy Caress of Steel Alive Creedence Clearwater Revival Moon Fly by Night Anthem Science fiction crotales Modern Drummer Moving Pictures Dharma John Bonham fill Palo Alto, California Right wing talk radio Grateful Dead lyrics When having sex in Germany

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511891

__label__wiki

Art And Power Carol Taaffe The Noise of Time, by Julian Barnes, Jonathan Cape, 192 pp, £9.99, ISBN: 978-1910702604 When Lenin returned from exile to Petrograd’s Finland station in April 1917, Dmitri Shostakovich and his school friends rushed to see the revolutionary. It was a story the composer told many times over the years. But it seems unlikely that a delicate, overprotected ten-year-old child would have been allowed to go to the station alone. Perhaps he had really gone in the care of his old Bolshevik uncle, Maxim Laventryevich. He often told that version of the story too. But in Julian Barnes’s account of the composer’s life, the middle-aged Shostakovich is unsure whether he even went to the station at all. Perhaps he had really taken a school friend’s story as his own. He is a man filled with doubt, distrustful of his own memory: “he lies like an eyewitness, as the saying goes”. In The Noise of Time, Julian Barnes gives three glimpses into the life of Dmitri Shostakovich – three points on the path to his disputed reputation as either Soviet propagandist or hidden dissident. In 1936, as Stalin’s Great Terror is just beginning, his music is publicly condemned for the first time by the Soviet regime. 1948 shows him caught in a game of cat and mouse: the composer publicly apologising for his lapse into “formalism” before being hastily rehabilitated to serve as a cultural ambassador for Soviet Russia. The third act takes place in 1960, as the middle-aged artist uneasily enters the insecure comfort of the Khrushchev years. They are three glimpses into the collision of art with power. And in this fragmentary account of a contested life, Shostakovich himself weighs the balance of courage and cowardice in his actions over the years: To be a hero, you only had to be brave for a moment – when you took out the gun, threw the bomb … But to be a coward was to embark on a career that lasted a lifetime. You couldn’t ever relax. You had to anticipate the next occasion when you would have to make excuses for yourself, dither, cringe … Being a coward required pertinacity, persistence, a refusal to change – which made it, in a way, a kind of courage. He smiled to himself and lit another cigarette. The pleasures of irony had not yet deserted him. This is a man who has become “a technique for survival”. Some suspected Shostakovich of attempting, in later life, to rewrite the record of his collusion with the Soviet regime. But if memory is unreliable, so too is the written record. In his later years, Pravda would regularly publish articles under his name: essays that he had never seen. He made public speeches that accorded with Soviet ideology, but he did so with debatable sincerity. As a Soviet delegate to the 1949 Congress for World Peace in New York, he publicly supported the denunciation of his idol, Igor Stravinsky. It was a moment of supreme humiliation ‑ even more so as he was a man who understood intimately the consequences of such words. Only a year previously he had publicly apologised for his “formalist” music when it was denounced by the cultural commissar Andrei Zhdanov. He had achieved success and fame early in life, and that, perhaps, had made him particularly vulnerable. He had been one of the most prominent artists in Russia all through the worst years of Stalin’s rule. The consequence was a life lived in fear. In Barnes’s fictional account, Shostakovich is a man who lives with deep, abiding shame ‑ and with coruscating doubt. Did he make wise and practical compromises with the regime, or was he a coward who too easily capitulated to its demands? In the Khrushchev era, when he was again celebrated by the Soviet elite, the composer would add his name to public condemnations of Andrei Sakharov and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. In 1960 he became a party member in order to accept leadership of the Union of Soviet Composers. He dutifully attended every meeting of the Supreme Soviet, and on one occasion applauded when the secretary of the Union of Soviet Composers violently criticised him. Was he being ironic, a friend asked. No. He had simply stopped listening. “One to hear,” Barnes writes in his epigraph. “One to remember. And one to drink.” Shostakovich is the man who hears, but it is not the noise of time – all the troubling rush of history ‑ that he is listening for. He is, firstly, a composer. He was only twenty when the premiere of his First Symphony in 1926 announced him as a prodigious talent. There were ten years in which to enjoy success, small controversies and official approval before the night in August 1936 when Stalin attended a performance of his celebrated opera Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District. Two days later the opera was sensationally denounced in Pravda. This was “Muddle Instead of Music”, the author wrote: it “quacks and grunts and howls”, it was “coarse, primitive and vulgar”. The criticism was echoed by many musicologists and critics who had previously praised the opera. Lady Macbeth would not be heard again in the Soviet Union for thirty years. Just as Stalin’s Great Terror was beginning, Shostakovich was suddenly and publicly vulnerable. His first response was silence. The premiere of his Fourth Symphony was planned for December 1936; he withdrew it from public notice just before its first performance. There was nothing in this strange music that could placate the champions of socialist realism. But the composer’s rehabilitation would begin in 1937 with the first performance of his Fifth Symphony. More conservative in style than its predecessors, this new direction was heralded as a “Soviet artist’s response to just criticism”. Had the composer compromised himself with this work, or was he making an ironic show of conformity? In either case, it was made clear to the public that if the party could condemn, the party could also forgive. This was a cat and mouse game – one that was terrifying to play. Just months before that successful premiere, the composer’s friend and mentor, Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky, was shot for his suspected involvement in an imaginary conspiracy. Shostakovich had also been brought in for questioning to the dreaded NKVD building on Liteiny Prospekt. But he never suffered a second round of interrogation. He was strangely lucky ‑ his investigator simply disappeared one day, as so many did. No other policeman showed an interest in pursuing his close association with Tukhachevsky. But like so many others in the late 1930s, he continued to live in fear. Other composers and musicologists around him were shot; his brother-in-law was arrested; his wife’s family suffered too. The relationship with power was a dangerous one. But when he was again in favour, Dmitri Shostakovich could be a powerful asset in the state’s cultural propaganda. In his lifetime it earned him a reputation in the West as a Soviet propagandist. With the publication of Solomon Volkov’s Testimony in 1979 ‑ purporting to be a dictated version of the composer’s memoirs ‑ that reputation was turned on its head. Now he was reinvented as a veiled dissident, entirely anti-Soviet in his beliefs; his music, he said, was veined with irony. But that image of Shostakovich is still a matter of controversy. The Fifth Symphony – the musical turning point that rehabilitated his reputation after “Muddle Instead of Music” ‑ is taken as evidence by both sides. Famously, it received a rapturous reception at its Leningrad premiere in 1937. Some wept at its mournful Largo, an inescapable reminder of loss in a city where more and more families were being touched by executions, disappearances and exile. The audience answered its bombastic and triumphalist finale with a thirty-minute ovation. It was implied, at the time, to be a portrayal of Stalin. But were these people listening to a celebration of Stalin’s Russia or a subtle mockery of it? For The New Yorker’s music critic, Alex Ross, the question is moot. The debate over Shostakovich’s reputation – whether he was really a tool of the regime or a noble victim of it ‑ has itself become “muddle instead of music”, he suggests. The artist who was once condemned in the West is now “canonized as a moral subversive, a conscientious ironist, a ‘holy fool’”: The ending of the Fifth Symphony, which was once described as a paean to Stalin’s Russia, is now described as a sub-rosa denunciation of it … [but] the arbitrariness of the change ‑ the music is still said to represent Stalin but, now, critically ‑ suggests that the new interpretation may be no more valid than the old one. The Fifth has become a hall of musical mirrors in which our own unmusical obsessions are reflected. As the noise of time changes, so does the music that is heard through it. Perhaps Shostakovich was neither a hero nor a coward, but simply a “fearful, accommodating figure”, as one scholar depicted him. The music itself, Ross implies, is simply music. Art serves its own purposes. Or perhaps, as Shostakovich muses here, it is “the whisper of history, heard above the noise of time”. In this novel the composer is certain of his music, and certain of little else. He does not know what to make of his life. Was it courage that saved him through all the years of Stalin’s Great Terror, when so many others were killed? Or was it cowardice? Did he serve his talent, writing great symphonies while churning out music palatable to the Soviet authorities, or did he leave too much work undone? He has lived through the revolutionary years, the Great Patriotic War and the Stalinist terror; he is undoubtedly a survivor. But he survives with a deep, abiding shame, and with a deep sense of doubt. Every twelve years they come for him, he reflects; every twelve years he has a conversation with power. And every twelve years Barnes finds him in a different place, though they are all really the same. He is a man standing with a suitcase on a landing, a traveller suffering through a transatlantic flight, a passenger sitting uneasily in a chauffeured car. This is a man caught between places, and nowhere at home. As the novel opens, it is 1936 and he is standing by the lift in his apartment building night after night. He is waiting there so the police do not disturb his young family when they come to take him: He did not want to make himself into a dramatic character. But sometimes, as his mind skittered in the small hours, he thought: so this is what history has come to. All that striving and idealism and hope and progress and science and art and conscience, and it all ends like this, with a man standing by a lift, at his feet a small case containing cigarettes, underwear and tooth powder; standing there and waiting to be taken away. It was the poet Osip Mandelstam who wrote in his 1925 memoirs of “the noise of time”. By 1938 he had become a victim of Stalin’s prison camps. In contrast, Shostakovich was an artist for whom the police never came, in the end. But the “noise of time” ‑ all that striving and idealism and hope and progress ‑ could still drown out the man as well as the artist. By returning to him every twelve years, Barnes depicts an individual who is slowly enveloped by the regime. There is the man whom terror forces into silence, the man pressured into speaking, and the man allowed to live too long. Which was the worst time: living in terror or surviving in shame? It is a mark of the subtlety of this novel that the question is largely left unanswered. Carol Taaffe is the author of Ireland Through the Looking-Glass (Cork, 2008), a study of Flann O'Brien.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511895

__label__cc

Category Archives: understanding the horse dealer’s daughter d.h. lawrence January 21, 2019 by Dr. Joseph Suglia - 10 Comments The Horse Dealer’s Daughter (D.H. Lawrence): An Analysis from England, My England (1922) “My God, what a clumsy olla putrida James Joyce is! Nothing but old fags and cabbage-stumps of quotations from the Bible and the rest… what old and hard-worked staleness, masquerading as the all new!” —D.H. Lawrence on James Joyce “James Joyce bores me stiff—too terribly would-be and done-on-purpose, utterly without spontaneity or real life.” “[D.H. Lawrence] is a propagandist and a very bad writer.” —James Joyce on D.H. Lawrence From the third paragraph of “The Horse Dealer’s Daughter” by D.H. Lawrence is the following sentence: There was a strange air of ineffectuality about the three men, as they sprawled at table, smoking and reflecting vaguely on their own condition. The word sprawl is used for the first time here (it will be used twice more in the text). To sprawl is to spread oneself out irregularly and unevenly. The three Pervin brothers—Joe, Fred Henry, and Malcolm—are positioned perversely around the table, positioned in a way that suggests their collective stupidity; they are asprawl. Sprawled makes them appear insensate, callous, obtuse, stolid. They are doing what rather careless people carelessly call “manspreading”—a fuzz word that has to do with sitting on a New York subway with one’s legs splayed frog-like. Sprawling denotes a mindless subhuman inactivity (I will return to the motif of subhumanity below). Stupidity is the inability to grasp even basic concepts, and in that sense, all three brothers are stupid. They are not even individual entities (they are not “alone” in the sense that Mabel is “alone”); they form an undifferentiated “ineffectual conclave.” They cannot apprehend that their sister is geared toward the absence of all relations which is death–self-imposed death. Safe in their stupidity, the brothers are sprawlingly looking forward to their eviction from their father’s house, whereas the youngest (?) daughter in the family, Mabel Pervin, is hyper-conscious of, and sensitively sensitive to the loss of her dignity, to the loss of her status, and to the curtailing of her possibilities. The men in the story propose that she might become a nurse, she might become a skivvy, or, worst of all, she might become someone’s wife. It is important to stress that she wants to become none of these things. Mabel is not sprawling around the table: Unlike her brothers, who are only able to reflect “vaguely,” her external “impassive fixity” masquerades a hive of conscious activity (I will return to the “impassiveness” of Mabel’s exterior below). The great draught-horses swung past. The word swing comes into play for the first time here (it will be deployed four times altogether in the text). Swung: This connotes a mechanical back-and-forth movement. Motion without any consciousness. The idiocy of the boys’ sprawling is correlated with the idiocy of the horses’ swinging. The horses are swinging their great rounded haunches sumptuously (in a manner that pleases the senses, but not the intellect). Their movement shows a massive, slumbrous strength (the intellect is asleep). They rock behind the hedges in a motionlike sleep (they only seem to be kinetic; they are mindlessly static). Draught-horse: a large horse that is used for bearing heavy loads. Joe watched with glazed hopeless eyes. The horses were almost like his own body to him… He would marry and go into harness. His life was over, he would be a subject animal now. D.H. Lawrence gets himself into some trouble here. He tells too much (which is unlike him) and shows too little (which is unlike him). I can write without fear of repudiation or of exaggeration that this is the weakest passage in the story. The writing of this passage is didactic / propagandistic (to refer to the Joycean epigraph above). It is far too explicit and spells out what should have been left to the reader to decode: Joe is looking forward to an engagement to a woman as old as himself and therefore to financial safety, and this “safety” is the safety of a kept animal. A domesticated animal. Marriage will reduce him to subjection. He will lose his vitality. He will lose his human spontaneity. [W]ith foolish restlessness, [Joe] reached for the scraps of bacon-rind from the plates, and making a faint whistling sound, flung them to the terrier that lay against the fender. He watched the dog swallow them, and waited till the creature looked into his eyes. And what is in those doggy eyes other than the nullity of animal stupidity, a stupidity that reflects his own stupidity? What is in those eyes other than the likeness of his own animal insensibility? The flinging of the bacon corresponds to the swinging of the horses. The word swing, etymologically, means “to fling”—the Old High German word swingan means “to rush” or “to fling.” The idiocy of the mechanical movement of swinging corresponds the idiocy of the mechanical movement of flinging. The etymology of swing further establishes a metaphorical connection between Joe and the animals of the story (the dog, the horses). The equine and canine metaphors bestialize all of the brothers. (Joe, in particular, is described as straddling his knees “in real horsy fashion”; he seems “to have his tail between his legs,” etc.) They are all dull, dim beasts, animals that will soon be subjected to the yoke of marriage and of other forms of servitude (labor, etc.). As all domestic beasts, they will become subject to human authority. To be an animal, according to the metaphorics of the text, means to be subjected to human power. As mentioned above, Joe will soon be subordinated to the bestial subjection of marriage. To draw out one the implications of the text: A married couple resembles two animals yoked together. The face of the young woman darkened, but she sat on immutable. Mabel, on the other hand, is described as seeming immutable (once) and impassive (four times): not incapable of emotion or without affectability, but inscrutable, as withholding herself from expression, from saying and speaking. Impassivity, here, means not the absence of emotion, but rather, inexpressiveness. Expression will become important in the third and final act of the story. ‘I’ll be seeing you tonight, shall I?’ he said to his friend. ‘Ay—where’s it to be? Are we going over to Jessdale?’ ‘I don’t know. I’ve got such a cold on me. I’ll come round to the Moon and Stars, anyway.’ ‘Let Lizzie and May miss their night for once, eh?’ ‘That’s it—if I feel as I do now.’ No one appears to know what “Jessdale” refers to—whether it is the name of a fabricated city or the name of an inn or a bar–-but I suspect that it is the name of a bordello and that Lizzie and May are prostitutes therein. If I am correct about this (and I am), Jack Fergusson is (initially) a rogue and a roué, someone who isn’t the least interested in marriage. What, then, draws Mabel to him in the first place? Could it be his relative freedom from convention and from the constraints of bourgeois society? But so long as there was money, the girl felt herself established, and brutally proud, reserved. Her father was once a well-off horse dealer. No more. Now comes the shame that is killing her. She would follow her own way just the same. She would always hold the keys of her own situation. Mindless and persistent, she endured from day to day. Why should she think? Why should she answer anybody? It was enough that this was the end, and there was no way out. She need not pass any more darkly along the main street of the small town, avoiding every eye. She need not demean herself any more, going into the shops and buying the cheapest food. This was at an end. She thought of nobody, not even of herself. Mindless and persistent, she seemed in a sort of ecstasy to be coming nearer to her fulfilment, her own glorification, approaching her dead mother, who was glorified. Suicide would be an authentically superhuman act, elevating her to the status of godhood. Self-drowning would be an act of freedom that would propel her beyond human-animal subjection. An act of radical individualism. Would it not be divine for her to take her own life? Unhappily, Jack Fergusson will (try to) take away her godlike freedom and subjugate her to the conjugal yoke. It was a grey, wintry day, with saddened, dark-green fields and an atmosphere blackened by the smoke of foundries not far off. As Martin Amis reminds us, D.H. Lawrence never took a breath without pain. Lawrence died of emphysema at the age of forty-four. He knew too well the colliers of Northampton, near where this story takes place. Could it be that the smoke from the foundries that are blackening the sky also blackened Lawrence’s lungs? Are the black billows that Mabel sees the same black billows that killed her creator? It gave [Mabel] sincere satisfaction to [tidy her mother’s grave]. She felt in immediate contact with the world of her mother. She took minute pains, went through the park in a state bordering on pure happiness, as if in performing this task she came into a subtle, intimate connexion with her mother. For the life she followed here in the world was far less real than the world of death she inherited from her mother. Here, I would like to make the rather obvious point that suicide, not merely the tiding of her mother’s grave, would bring Mabel into a subtle and intimate connection with her mother. [Fergusson] slowly ventured into the pond. The bottom was deep, soft clay, he sank in, and the water clasped dead cold round his legs. As he stirred he could smell the cold, rotten clay that fouled up into the water. It was objectionable in his lungs. Still, repelled and yet not heeding, he moved deeper into the pond. The cold water rose over his thighs, over his loins, upon his abdomen. The lower part of his body was all sunk in the hideous cold element. And the bottom was so deeply soft and uncertain, he was afraid of pitching with his mouth underneath. He could not swim, and was afraid. It is as if Jack Fergusson’s body were being liquefied, as if his body were being fluidified in the aqueous deeps of the pond. Or is his body being softened into clay? The clay suggests, perhaps, the amorphous clay of the golem. In Jewish mysticism, the golem is a clay figure that comes alive once a magical combination of letters is inscribed on its forehead: emeth (“truth” in Hebrew). If you erase the aleph from the word emeth, the golem will collapse into dust (meth means “dead”). (See Gershom Scholem’s seminal book On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism, Chapter Five.) And so doing he lost his balance and went under, horribly, suffocating in the foul earthy water, struggling madly for a few moments. At last, after what seemed an eternity, he got his footing, rose again into the air and looked around. He gasped, and knew he was in the world. Then he looked at the water. She had risen near him. He grasped her clothing, and drawing her nearer, turned to take his way to land again. He went very slowly, carefully, absorbed in the slow progress. He rose higher, climbing out of the pond. The water was now only about his legs; he was thankful, full of relief to be out of the clutches of the pond. He lifted her and staggered on to the bank, out of the horror of wet, grey clay. He laid her down on the bank. She was quite unconscious and running with water. He made the water come from her mouth, he worked to restore her. He did not have to work very long before he could feel the breathing begin again in her; she was breathing naturally. He worked a little longer. He could feel her live beneath his hands; she was coming back. The pond is the uterine vessel through which Mabel undergoes her palingenesis, her renaissance, her second birth. It is as if some tellurian current were transferred within her. She dies in the pond and is brought back to the life upon the bank. Her body has been revived, and yet her consciousness is still slumbering. Her total revivification will take place in the house, now desolate, upon the hearthrug, by the fireplace. Who dwells within the house? Consider the following: Mabel’s father has died. Her three brothers have evacuated the house. Her sister is long gone. The dog and the horses are gone. No one is alive in the house except for the spirit of her dead mother. ‘Do you love me then?’ she asked. He only stood and stared at her, fascinated. His soul seemed to melt. She shuffled forward on her knees, and put her arms round him, round his legs, as he stood there, pressing her breasts against his knees and thighs, clutching him with strange, convulsive certainty, pressing his thighs against her, drawing him to her face, her throat, as she looked up at him with flaring, humble eyes, of transfiguration, triumphant in first possession. Emerging from the pond an amorphous mass of clay, Jack will now be resculpted by Mabel into her own creature. He will be completely reconstructed. His body was already likened to clay when it was immersed in the pond. Now his soul, too, is melting into the shapeless stuff of the pond-clay. Note that Mabel’s eyes are “of transfiguration”: It is she who is transfiguring Jack into her own effigy. She is the creator; he is the golem. He had never thought of loving her. He had never wanted to love her. When he rescued her and restored her, he was a doctor, and she was a patient. He had had no single personal thought of her. Nay, this introduction of the personal element was very distasteful to him, a violation of his professional honour. It was horrible to have her there embracing his knees. It was horrible. He revolted from it, violently. And yet—and yet—he had not the power to break away. There is indeed something horrible going on in this passage, given that Jack is powerlessly being shaped, rounded, molded into something that is not of his own making. ‘You love me,’ she repeated, in a murmur of deep, rhapsodic assurance. ‘You love me.’ Her hands were drawing him, drawing him down to her. He was afraid, even a little horrified. For he had, really, no intention of loving her. Yet her hands were drawing him towards her. I only want to underline something in the text: She is drawing him toward her. Repeatedly, it is emphasized that Jack is being reconstructed against his own will into something that is not of his own creation. The assertion “You love me” is a performative speech act. But is it an illocutionary or perlocutionary speech act? If it were an illocutionary speech act, “You love me” would be a description of what is being done, such as, “I now pronounce you man and wife” or “I move that we adjourn the meeting.” And yet Mabel is not saying, “I seduce you” or “I make you love me.” It is, rather, a perlocutionary speech act: that is, a speech act that is designed to have an effect on someone’s thoughts, feelings, or actions. Every human being you meet will want to impress one’s fingerprints upon you, as if you were a ball of clay. A perlocutionary speech act is the attempt to mold someone else’s thoughts, feelings, or actions through words. ‘You love me?’ she said, rather faltering. ‘Yes.’ The word cost him a painful effort. Not because it wasn’t true. But because it was too newly true, the saying seemed to tear open again his newly-torn heart. And he hardly wanted it to be true, even now. D.H. Lawrence has been called a “misogynist” for over a century now, most recently on Wikipedia. (Thankfully, the sensationalist accusation of misogyny has been redacted.) I don’t think that the paper Lawrence is misogynistic at all, except in his titanic, uncomfortable novel The Plumed Serpent. However, there might be a kind of misogyny in this passage. There is a kind of love-violation going on, a tearing-open of the heart, a violation of interiority. Here we have a woman who is metaphorically violating a man. Much in the way that letters inscribed on the forehead of the statue bring to life the golem, the words “You love me” form a perlocutionary performative speech act that gives Jack Fergusson a second birth. Mabel Pervin has destroyed and recreated him. ‘And my hair smells so horrible,’ she murmured in distraction. ‘And I’m so awful, I’m so awful! Oh, no, I’m too awful.’ And she broke into bitter, heart-broken sobbing. ‘You can’t want to love me, I’m horrible.’ ‘Don’t be silly, don’t be silly,’ he said, trying to comfort her, kissing her, holding her in his arms. ‘I want you, I want to marry you, we’re going to be married, quickly, quickly—to-morrow if I can.’ But she only sobbed terribly, and cried: ‘I feel awful. I feel awful. I feel I’m horrible to you.’ ‘No, I want you, I want you,’ was all he answered, blindly, with that terrible intonation which frightened her almost more than her horror lest he should not want her. There are two “horrors” intimated in these words, the final words of the story. The first horror is the horrified apprehension that Mabel will become her mother. That is to say, Mabel is horrified that she will be mired in the same soul-deadening stupidity in which her mother was steeped and in which her brothers are steeped. We return, then, to the opening moments of the text: to the image of the yoked horses (which figures marriage as subordination and subjection to the will of another). The second horror is that she will be undesired or no longer desired. Consider this: Mabel has created a golem that will desire her, a male Pygmalion, a Frankensteinian monster. And now, her creation desires her too much. Golem-making is dangerous, as Scholem reminds us, but the source of danger is not the golem itself, or the forces emanating from the golem, but rather the conflict that arises within the golem-maker herself. It is a conflict between the horror of being desired by one’s creature and the horror of not being desired enough by one’s creature or the horror of not being desired at all, the horror of undesirability. It is a conflict between the horror of being-desired and the horror of the absence of being-desired.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511897

__label__wiki

HomePosts tagged 'USSR' Don’t Beam Me Up Just Yet, Scotty! March 24, 2015 February 1, 2015 fasab Factoids, Unusual Adolf Hitler, airplane tickets, airport security, American soldiers, American Telephone and Telegraph Company, American women, Ancient Egyptians, ancient toothpaste, bad luck, Beam me up Scotty, beautifully bound. brief impression, bitter, bizarre hospital-themed restaurant, bleeding gums, cell phone, Champagne, China, Chinese tradition, cleaning powder, cold weather, craigslist, Daniel Defoe, Denomination of Origin, dissolved into particles, dog, Don’t judge a book by its cover, dressed as nurses, dried iris flowers, drinks, DS Music Restaurant, education, english, Entertainment, exam, fact, Fact day, factoid, factoids, facts, Ferdinand Porsche, first spacecraft to carry an animal, flavors, fluent in French, France, George Eliot, German National Prize for Art and Science, Guanajuato, Hello Girls, hospital beds, human body, humans, information, IV bottles, Jalisco, Laika, Matter, Mexican state, Mexico, Michoacan, Mint, Mr Tulliver, music, Nayarit, New York Times, Nikola Tesla, Nobel Prize, oldest-known formula for toothpaste, outward appearance, pepper, Pershing’s forces in Europe, pregnant, pregnant Chinese woman, prolong battery life, quantum physics, rock salt, Russian, salty, savory/meaty, science fiction, scientific study, shopping for baby things, side effect, sour, Soviets, space, specific receptor areas, Sputnik 1, Sputnik 2, star trek, stressing, stroller, sweet, tables, Taipei, Taiwan, Tamaulipas, telephone operators, teleporter, Tequila, test, The History of the Devil, The Mill on the Floss, tongue, transmit messages via personal devices, trivia, umami, US Army, USSR, veteran benefits, Volkswagen Beetle, waitresses, war medals, west, wireless communication devices, women, world’s first hybrid car, WWI, X-ray scans, YouTube You will get what the title is all about later. Let’s just say for now I’ll still be buying my airplane tickets and enduring the rigors of airport security for a few years longer. As for now it’s Fact Day so have a look at the current offerings. In cold weather keeping your cell phone as close to your body as you can, or in the inside pocket of an insulated base layer will help keep it warm and prolong battery life. In the West women usually start shopping for baby things as soon as they discover they’re pregnant but in China a pregnant Chinese woman will avoid getting a stroller before her baby is born because according to Chinese tradition it’s considered bad luck to have an empty stroller in the house while you’re pregnant. The world’s oldest-known formula for toothpaste was created by the ancient Egyptians who used crushed rock salt, mint, dried iris flowers, and pepper and mixed them to create a cleaning powder. Research suggests this ancient toothpaste was more effective than formulas used as recently as a century ago, although it did have the unfortunate side effect of causing bleeding gums. A scientific study has suggested that if you are stressing over an important test or exam, writing down your feelings on a piece of paper before an exam will allow you to achieve higher scores. Contrary to many theories, the tongue does not have specific receptor areas for bitter, sour, salty, and sweet flavors. In fact, there is a fifth taste (umami, for savory/meaty flavors) and all zones of the tongue can sense all flavors. After banning the Nobel Prize, Adolf Hitler developed his own version – the German National Prize for Art and Science. Ferdinand Porsche was one of the awardees for being the man behind the world’s first hybrid car and for the Volkswagen Beetle. In a statement he gave to the New York Times in 1909, Nikola Tesla predicted that it would soon be possible to transmit messages via personal devices. Today, we have wireless communication devices that we bring with us anywhere we go. A month after the USSR sent Sputnik 1 into space, they sent Sputnik 2, which was the first spacecraft to carry an animal (a dog named Laika) into space. However, despite the Soviets initially claiming that Laika had survived in orbit for a week, decades later official Russian sources revealed that Laika lived only a few hours before dying from overheating. Brave little doggie though. During WWI “Hello Girls,” as American soldiers called them, were American women who served as telephone operators for Pershing’s forces in Europe. The women were fluent in French and English and were specially trained by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company. In 1979, the U.S. Army finally gave war medals and veteran benefits to the few Hello Girls who were still alive. In its early days YouTube’s founders used Craigslist to try to popularize the site by offering $100 to attractive girls who would post ten or more videos of themselves. Unfortunately, they didn’t get a single response. The phrase ‘Don’t judge a book by its cover’ goes back to at least the mid-nineteenth century as found in George Eliot’s ‘The Mill on the Floss’ (1860), where Mr. Tulliver uses the phrase in discussing Daniel Defoe’s ‘The History of the Devil’, saying how it was beautifully bound. Its general meaning today, of course, is that we shouldn’t judge or make a decision about someone or something based on a brief impression or outward appearance. Wise advice. Just as true champagne must hail from France, tequila has Denomination of Origin, meaning that it has to be produced in Mexico, mainly in the western Mexican state of Jalisco. The states of Guanajuato, Michoacan, Nayarit, and Tamaulipas are also acceptable. Located in the city of Taipei in Taiwan, the D.S. Music Restaurant has nothing to do with music at all. In fact, it is a bizarre hospital-themed restaurant where waitresses are all dressed as nurses, tables are made from metal hospital beds, drinks are served in IV bottles and walls are decorated with X-ray scans. Remember the teleporter Star Trek? Well, it’s no longer science fiction because now matter can be dissolved into particles, transported and reassembled at another location. However, it won’t be available for use on humans in the near future because at the moment, whilst it is indeed possible to scan every molecule in the human body and reassemble it in another area, according to Quantum physics, scanning and reassembling changes the entire object. You can’t make an exact copy. So don’t beam me up just yet, Scotty! Further Fun Facts For January. January 13, 2015 January 2, 2015 fasab Factoids, Unusual Albert Einstein, alien life, ancient Egypt, Burt Reynolds, caramel color, Chad Hurley, clear bottle, clear Coca-Cola, Clint Eastwood, clocks, coca cola, coffee, come out and play, Dear Prudence, dogs, drive a truck 20 miles, driving to the moon and back, education, Egyptian pyramids, Einstein, energy, Entertainment, fact, factoid, factoids, facts, founders, Fun Facts, gone down with the ship, Google, Google stock, gradient, grandmother’s name, heart, hibernate, higher IQ, humanoid, image, information, intestine, J K Rowling, Japanese survivor from the Titanic, Jawed Karim, Joanne Rowling, Kathleen, keep gambling, Las Vegas casinos, legal name, Liam Neeson, lose track of time, Make the grade, Marilyn Monroe, Mia, Mia Farrow's sister, muscle contractions, nineteenth-century America, optical illusion, people that drink coffee, polar bear, Prudence, railroad construction, Random, real name, religious retreat in India, restroom, returned to Japan, rock formation’s shadow, role of James Bond, Russia, scent of lung cancer, shamed, Soviet Union, steep gradients, Steven Chen, symbol of American imperialism, symptoms develop, The Beatles, the Moon, three pyramids in Giza Necropolis, to appeal to male readers, trained, USSR, YouTube Another round of fun facts, not just for January, but for whenever you feel like it really. As random a mixture as ever. Las Vegas casinos don’t have any clocks in them because the owners prefer that players lose track of time and keep gambling. Clear Coca-Cola was created for the USSR in the 1940s because Coca-Cola was regarded in the Soviet Union as a symbol of American imperialism. A chemist satisfied the request by removing the soda’s caramel color and the company put the drink in a clear bottle with a white cap and a red star and sent 50 cases to Russia. Dogs can be trained to detect the scent of lung cancer long before symptoms develop. This image of what appears to be a humanoid on the Moon is believed to be an optical illusion created by a rock formation’s shadow. Certainly not proof of alien life, or is it! Liam Neeson was once offered the role of James Bond, as were Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds, but they all turned it down. The three pyramids in Giza Necropolis are the most famous Egyptian pyramids but in fact, as many as about 140 pyramids in total have been discovered in Ancient Egypt. In October 2006, Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion in stocks, only eighteen months after it was created. The three founders received big rewards, Jawed Karim getting $66 million in Google stock, Steven Chen $310 million, and Chad Hurley $334 million. A Japanese survivor from the Titanic disaster was shamed when he returned to Japan, he was told he should have gone down with the ship. The term ‘Make the grade’ originates from the world of railroad construction in nineteenth-century America. The word ‘grade’ is short for ‘gradient’ as calculations had to be carefully made to ensure engines did not encounter sudden steep gradients. The polar bear is the only bear species that does not hibernate; they are active all year round. Coffee can cause muscle contractions along the final part of your intestine, which can jumpstart your need to use the restroom. This happens to about 50% of people that drink coffee. Every day, the heart creates enough energy to drive a truck 20 miles. In a lifetime, that is equivalent to driving to the moon and back. J K Rowling’s publisher suggested she use initials rather than her real name, ‘Joanne Rowling’, in order to appeal to male readers. She chose ‘J.K.’ borrowing the ‘K’ from her grandmother’s name, Kathleen, although neither ‘Kathleen’ nor ‘K’ are part of her legal name. Marilyn Monroe had a bigger IQ than Albert Einstein. Monroe’s IQ was 163, 3 points higher than Einstein. She also had bigger … never mind … The Beatles song “Dear Prudence” was written about Mia Farrow’s sister, Prudence, when she wouldn’t come out and play with Mia and the Beatles at a religious retreat in India. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Last Day Of The Month, First Quiz Of The Week. March 31, 2014 March 30, 2014 fasab Questions, Tests Abominable Snowman, actor, aliases, americans, Antony Perkins, Aragorn, Arthur, artist, Ava Gardner, beautiful, books, capital, cut off an ear, Dickens, director, education, Elvis, Elvis Presley, England, Entertainment, Equador, federal bureau of investigation, flooded, founder, Fred Astaire, general knowledge, Geography, Greek, Gregory Peck, Hannibal Hayes, history, hit single, Idi Amin, island country, Jacqueline Lee Bouvier, Kid Curry, Latin, literature, magician, Mongol Empire, Mount Ruapahu, movie, movies, Mr Wonderful, music, mythology, Name, number one, Oscar, politicians, politics, post apocalyptic, postage stamps, questions, quiz, quizzes, registered births or deaths, river, Russians, science, September 3rd 1752, television, test, tests, The Once and Future King, The Shark Tank, Tibetan Plateau, Togariro National park, True Grit, USA, USSR, Vincent Van Gogh, volcanoes, western, western China Welcome to another start of the week quiz. Another twenty brain teasing questions to stimulate those old grey cells. As usual the answers can be found waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down below, but please NO cheating! Q. 1: Where would you go to look at the Abominable Snowman? Q. 2: Who was Jacqueline Lee Bouvier’s second husband? Q. 3: Where were Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner, Fred Astaire and Antony Perkins in the 1959 post apocalyptic movie that they starred in? Q. 4: What famous magician shares his name with an equally famous Dickens’ character? Q. 5: In which country is Togariro National park with its three volcanoes, including Mt. Ruapahu? Q. 6: Very few non Russians appeared on postage stamps in the USSR between 1922 and 1991, but two Americans did. Can you name them? (A point for each.) Q. 7: This famous actor starred in a movie being himself, who is he? Q. 8: Who was ‘The Once and Future King’? a) Elvis b) Arthur c) Idi Amin d) Aragorn Q. 9: What was the name of the first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and who is it’s current chief? (A point for each correct answer.) Q. 10: What is the name of the river that rises on the Tibetan Plateau of western China and has flooded more often and killed more people than any other? Q. 11: Why were there no registered births or deaths in England on September 3rd 1752? Q. 12: The name of which form of literature stems from a Greek word meaning ‘making’? Q. 13: Which actor won his only Oscar for his role in the western ‘True Grit’? Q. 14: The old name for which island country stems from the Latin word for beautiful? Q. 15: What is the real name of The Shark Tank’s ‘Mr Wonderful’? Q. 16: What is the capital of Equador? Q. 17: Vincent van Gogh is not only a very famous artist with his works now commanding millions of dollars, but he is also well known for an incident in which he cut off an ear. Which one? (Go on, you have a 50:50 chance on this one!) Q. 18: What aliases did Hannibal Hayes and Kid Curry use in the long running television series? Q. 19: Who was hailed as the founder of the Mongol Empire? Q. 20: What was Elvis Presley’s first number one hit single in the USA? A. 1: The Himalayas. A. 2: Greek shipping magnate, Aristotle Onassis. A. 3: On The Beach. A. 4: David Copperfield. A. 5: New Zealand. A. 6: They were Benjamin Franklin and Mark Twain. A. 7: He is John Malkovich, who starred in the movie ‘Being John Malkovich’. A. 8: b) Arthur. A. 9: J Edgar Hoover was the first, the current director is James Comey. A. 10: The Yellow River. A. 11: There was no September 3rd 1752. The British government adopted the Gregorian calendar. It was decreed that the day following September 2nd 1752 should be called September 14. A. 12: Poetry. A. 13: John Wayne. A. 14: Formosa (the modern name is Taiwan.) A. 15: Kevin O’Leary. A. 16: Quito. A. 17: It was his left ear. A. 18: They were ‘Alias Smith And Jones’. A. 19: Genghis Khan. A. 20: Heartbreak Hotel (in 1956). Time To Take The Brain Out For Some Exercise! January 20, 2014 January 20, 2014 fasab Questions, Tests actor, actors, animated Disney films, animated television series, answers, apple, astronomy, Aurore, Axl Rose, Backrub, baseball star, beetroot, Blaise Pascal, Blepharoplasty, body, brain, Brian Warner, cabbage, carrot, Carthaginian, Christmas present, Cogito ergo sum, company, coriander, Cosmetic surgery, difficult, dilithium crystals, Dwayne Johnson, ears, earth, easy, Edna E Mode, education, Entertainment, European country, eyelids, French philosopher, fuel, general knowledge, Geography, herb, history, horse, I think therefore I am, infantry rifle, Ivory, James Bond, Jean Paul Sarte, Kid Rock, Land of the rabbits, Little traveler, Lone Ranger, Marilyn Manson, Marilyn Monroe, married, Misc, Miscellaneous, Mornay, movie, movie series, movies, music, Name, nationality, Nicholas Cage, Oil of Lebanon, Omar Sharif, original name, philosophy, Pongo, Pumba, questions, quiz, Quiz Day, quizzes, radio, Reform, Rene Descartes, Robert, Russian, satellite, science, Sean Connery, Si & Am, sidekick, silver, Simplon Rail Tunnel, singer, solar system, space, sport, Sputnik, stage name, Star light, Switzerland, television, television series, test, tests, The Simpsons, Tonto, tv, upper arms, US Army, USSR, vegetable, White, Winston Churchill, wrestler, WWF Yes, brain exercise it is. Quiz day again folks. Another random mixture of subjects and questions, some easy, some difficult and some you know you should know. As usual the answers are given waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down below, but please NO cheating! Q. 1: What name links the standard infantry rifle of the US Army from 1873 to 1936 and the popular animated television series ‘The Simpsons’? Q. 2: ‘Backrub’ was the original name for what well known company? Q. 3: ‘Robert’, ‘Aurore’, ‘Apple’, ‘White’, ‘Mornay’, ‘Ivory’ and ‘Reform’ are all examples of what? Q. 4: What nationality was Winston Churchill’s mother? Q. 5: What does the Russian word ‘Sputnik’ mean? a. Satellite b. Little traveler c. Star light Q. 6: Brian Warner is the real name of which American singer? a) Kid Rock b) Axl Rose c) Marilyn Manson Q. 7: The Simplon Rail Tunnel links Switzerland with which country? Q. 8: In which animated Disney movies would one find the following characters? (One point for each correct answer) a) Pumba, b) Si & Am, c) Pongo, d) Edna E. Mode Q. 9: Which French philosopher is associated with the quote, “Cogito ergo sum” (I think, therefore I am)? a) Jean Paul Sarte b) Rene Descartes c) Blaise Pascal Q. 10: ‘Blepharoplasty’ is cosmetic surgery on what part of the body? a) ears b) upper arms c) eyelids Q. 11: It’s the stage name of WWF wrestler-turned-actor Dwayne Johnson and the name of a movie starring Nicholas Cage and Sean Connery, what is it? Q. 12: Which baseball star married Marilyn Monroe in 1954? Q. 13: The herb ‘coriander’ belongs to which family of vegetable? a) carrot b) beetroot c) cabbage Q. 14: Excluding television, radio and ‘unofficial’ versions, six actors have played the role of James Bond, name them. (A point for each and a bonus point if you get them in the correct chronological order.) Q. 15: The Earth’s position in the solar system gave the inspiration for what television series? Q. 16: What kind of Christmas present is ‘oil of Lebanon’? Q. 17: Who did Omar Sharif play in a famous movie set in the USSR? Q. 18: Everybody knows that the name of the Lone Ranger’s horse was ‘Silver’, but what was the name of his sidekick Tonto’s horse? Q. 19: The name of which European country ‘apparently’ stems from a Carthaginian word meaning ‘Land of the rabbits’? Q. 20: In which movie series are dilithium crystals used for fuel? Q. 1: What name links the standard infantry rifle of the US Army from 1873 to 1936 and the animated television series ‘The Simpsons’? A. 1: Springfield. A. 2: Google. A. 3: Sauces. A. 4: American, Winston Churchill’s mother was born in Brooklyn. A. 5: a. Satellite. A. 6: c) Marilyn Manson. A. 8: a) Pumba in The Lion King; b) Si & Am in The Lady & the Tramp, c) Pongo in 101 Dalmations; and, d) Edna E. Mode in The Incredibles A. 9: b) Rene Descartes. A. 10: c) eyelids. A. 11: The Rock. A. 12: Joe DiMaggio. A. 13: a) carrot. A. 14: Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig. A. 15: The very successful sitcom ‘3rd Rock from the Sun’. A. 16: Frankincense. A. 17: Zhivago. A. 18: The answer I’m looking for here is ‘Scout’, although if you answered ‘White Feller’, the name of his first horse you also get a point – 2 points if you knew both! A. 19: Spain. (Ispania from ‘Sphan’ meaning rabbit). A. 20: The ‘Star Trek’ movie series. Did You Know? – Another Random Fact Feast! September 10, 2013 September 4, 2013 fasab Factoids 17th Century, 180th meridian, 1959, 1987, Aladdin, Alaska, alcoholic variation, Aleutian Islands, America, beer, boardgame, bodybuilders, Boston, Boxing Day, byte, C-3P0, Chinese, Chinese boy, Chinese Checkers, cigarettes, civilized world, computer, conserve gas, December 26th, Did You Know, easternmost, education, Entertainment, esophagus, fact, facts, gasoline rationing, gatorade, George Howard Monks, gray, Great Gettysburg Reunion of 1913, hair, hair color, hair follicle, Halma, hatchet, helicopter pilot, hip-shaking dance, Hop ’n Gator, horse, hotel, Hydrogen gas, ice, information, invented, Japanese, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Josh Muszynski, Kevin Peter Hall, launched, least dense substance, man-made satellite, Mechta, melanin, merengue, Misc, Miscellaneous, Moon, movie, natural rubber, new york, nibble, northernmost, orbit around the Sun, patent, peace, Pi, pigment cells, predator, primary source, producers, R2-D2, Raiders of the Lost Ark, rebuilt, regiments, Second World War, Southeast Asia, state, stomach, Super Bowl trophy, surgeon, Sweden, Tales of 1001 Arabian Nights, Tiffany & Co, tires, trivia, United States, USSR, value of pi, Visa, vomit, westernmost, whisking motion Random fact feast it is. Another selection of hopefully interesting facts that you didn’t know you didn’t know. In Raiders of the Lost Ark there is a wall carving of R2-D2 and C-3P0 behind the ark Chinese Checkers is not Chinese. It was created in America to circumvent the patent for a popular boardgame called Halma, invented by a Boston surgeon named George Howard Monks. In the 17th century, the value of pi was known to 35 decimal places. Today, to 1.2411 trillion. Technically speaking, Alaska is the northernmost, westernmost, and easternmost state of the United States. Parts of the Aleutian Islands cross over the 180th meridian. The original story from “Tales of 1001 Arabian Nights” begins, “Aladdin was a little Chinese boy.” There is a hotel in Sweden built entirely out of ice; it is rebuilt every year. In 1959, the USSR launched a craft called the Mechta towards the Moon. It missed, and instead became (inadvertently) the first man-made satellite to go into orbit around the Sun. It has been calculated that in the last 3,500 years, there have only been 230 years of peace throughout the civilized world. In the 1987 movie ‘Predator’, the character of the Predator was originally set up for Jean-Claude Van Damme to play a martial-arts fighting Predator. However the producers realized much of the cast were bodybuilders over 6 feet tall (and Van Damme was clearly smaller) so they cast the enormous 7’ 21/2” Kevin Peter Hall so that the Predator could realistically physically dominate the film’s human characters. Interestingly Hall also appears in the movie as the helicopter pilot at the end. Gatorade’s inventor later created an alcoholic variation, Hop ’n Gator — essentially, lemon lime Gatorade mixed with beer. At the Great Gettysburg Reunion of 1913, two men purchased a hatchet, walked to the site where their regiments had fought, and buried it. Though it’s rarely used, the word referring to half a computer byte is a “nibble.” Because of the angle at which its esophagus enters its stomach, the horse is physically unable to vomit. The reason why hair turns gray as we age is because the pigment cells in the hair follicle start to die, which is responsible for producing “melanin” which gives the hair colour Hydrogen gas is the least dense substance in the world, at 0.08988g/cc The purpose of gasoline rationing during the Second World War was not to conserve gas, but to conserve TIRES. The primary source for natural rubber at the time was Southeast Asia, much of which was under Japanese control. The concept of Boxing Day, which is on December 26th, was to give boxes of food and clothing to the poor. It is now viewed in some countries as a time to get merchandise from stores at reduced prices Jewelers Tiffany & Co., based in New York, are responsible for making the Super Bowl trophy The world’s most expensive cigarettes. In 2009, Josh Muszynski used his Visa to buy cigarettes. Due to a Visa “glitch,” he was charged over 23 quadrillion dollars. To be exact: $23,148,855,308,184,500 The popular hip-shaking dance, the merengue, got its name from the whisking motion required to make meringue. Significant Number Factoid Friday – Today The Number Is Eighty-Four 84 March 8, 2013 fasab Factoids, Numbers, Uncategorized, Unusual 3-dimensional pyramid, 84, 84 Charing Cross Road, 84 Charlie Mopic, 84 Lumber, 84 mm recoilless rifle, 84o longitude, A J Allmendinger, AGM-84 Harpoon, Agraharam, air, Air Force, Alexander Litvinenko, Andre Rison, Anne Bancroft, Anthony Hopkins, assassin, Asteroid 84 Klio, Atlanta, atmosphere, atomic number, Atomic Weight, Baiyoke Sky Hotel, Barbary Pirates of Tripoli, baseball, Belmont Stakes, Betty Stover, bibliophilia, Book of Enoch, books, Calraith Rodgers, Canadair CL-84 Dynavert, Carl Gustav, Chapter 84, Cincinnati, CL-84, Costa Rica, CVE-84, Czechoslovak, DDG-84, de Havilland DH 84 Dragon, dominoes, Douglas DC-3, education, eighty-four, environmental toxicologist, Eugene, F-84 Thunderjet, facts, France, Frank Doel, Franklin Merell-Wolff, Fuzzy Zoeller, George Orwell, Georgia, German bolt-action Mauser M1871/84 rifles, Gewehr 71/84, Helene Hanff, Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84, helicopter squadron, hepteract, HMS Cyane, HMS Guerriere, HMS Java, HMS Levant, HMS Pictou, HSC-84, Hubble Space Telescope, hurdle, hypercube, India, infantryman, Institut de Radiophysique in Lausanne, international direct dial, Irène Joliot-Curie, Irving Fryar, Ismael Valenzuela, Israel, JAAF, Japanese Army Air Force, Japanese Imperial Army, Japanese oil tanker, Jerry Porter, John Newcombe, Judi Dench, Kaiser Wilhelm I, Ken Rosewall, Kentucky Derby, KKNX Radio 84, Knoxville, Krypton, LA Lakers, laboratory, leukemia, Lisunov Li-2, London bookseller, los angeles, Luke, M-84, M84, Magic Johnson, Marie and Pierre Curie, Marines, Mark Clayton, Marks & Co, Mars, mathematics, Mauser Gewehr 71/84, Mauser Infantry Rifle Model 71, Men's Hammer Throw, Mens Tennis, Messier object M84, Methuselah, Middlesex University, Militaria, military, Minnesota Twins, Misc, Miscellaneous, movies, murder, music, MV Guanabara, Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate, NASCAR, NBA, NBC, Nehemiah, new york, Nineteen Eighty-Four, Nirvana, No 84 Squadron, number, number 84, numbers, Oakland Raiders, Ohio, Okinawa, Olympics Gold, Oregon, P-84 Thunderjets, Pacific War, Palestinian leader, Pathways through to Space, Patrick Sheane Duncan, Philippines, physicist, Polonium, Preakness Stakes, Prof Nick Priest, professor Dror Sadeh, Prussian government, PS-84, radioactive materials, Random, Randy Moss, Red Wolves, religion, Republic Aviation Corporation, Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech, Royal Flying Corps, Russian dissident, Saab Bofors Dynamics, San Francisco 49ers, San Jose, science, sea, Sergei Litvinov, significant number factoid, Sky News, Somali pirates, space, Spanish Army, sport, St. Louis Cardinals, Star SMGs, sun, Sweden, Switzerland, T-84 Main Battle Tank, Tennessee, tetrahedral number, Thailand, the Bible, The Bomb in the Basement, The John Larroquette Show, The Last Samurai, Tim Tam, tobacco, Tommy McDonald, Toyota Camry, triangular numbers, trivia, Ukrainian, uniform #84, United States Navy Reserve, uranium ores, Uranus, US Navy, USS Bulkeley, USS Constitution, USS Shamrock Bay, USSR, Vamsadhara River, Vietnam drama, Vietnam veteran, Virginia Wade, Virgo Cluster of galaxies, Weizmann Institute, Wimbledon, Women's 100-Meters High Hurdles, Womens Tennis, writer, Yasser Arafat, Yugoslavia, Z-84, Škorpion vz. 61 Time for another significant number factoid. Today the number is 84. As usual there is a lot more to it than you might have thought. If you are into numbers, facts, trivia, or you just like the number 84 then this is for you. 84 occurs in the Bible 2 times and once as part of other numbers: — Luke, 2.37 and Nehemiah, 11.18 84th Book of Enoch describes the Dream Visions told to Methuselah. 84 is the sum of the first seven triangular numbers (making it a tetrahedral number), as well as the sum of a twin prime (41 + 43). You can count the number 84 in two different ways in this figure. There are 84 diamond-shaped tiles to make this 2-dimensional pattern. Or you can build a 3-dimensional pyramid with 84 blocks. A hepteract is a seven-dimensional hypercube with 84 penteract 5-faces. The Greek-based numeric prefix octacontatetra- means 84. The Latin-based numeric prefix quattuoroctoginta- means 84. The Roman numeral for 84 is LXXXIV. 84 is the Atomic Weight of Krypton, a noble gas and is present in the air at about 1 ppm. The atmosphere of Mars contains a little (about 0.3 ppm) of krypton. It is characterized by its brilliant green and orange spectral lines. 84 is the Atomic Number of Polonium, discovered in 1898 by Marie and Pierre Curie. It is a silvery metal, that has more isotopes than any other element, all of which are radioactive. Polonium has been found in tobacco as a contaminant and in uranium ores. Polonium has been used as an assassin’s weapon, notably, in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, a Russian dissident, in 2006. According to Prof. Nick Priest of Middlesex University, an environmental toxicologist and radiation expert, speaking on Sky News on December 2, Litvinenko was probably the first person ever to die of the acute a-radiation effects of 210Po. It has also been suggested that Irène Joliot-Curie was the first person to die from the radiation effects of polonium. She was accidentally exposed to polonium in 1946 when a sealed capsule of the element exploded on her laboratory bench. In 1956 she died from leukemia. According to the book The Bomb in the Basement, several death cases in Israel during 1957–1969 were caused by 210Po. A leak was discovered at a Weizmann Institute laboratory in 1957. Traces of 210Po were found on the hands of professor Dror Sadeh, a physicist who researched radioactive materials. Medical tests indicated no harm, but the tests did not include bone marrow. Sadeh died from cancer. One of his students died of leukemia, and two colleagues died after a few years, both from cancer. The issue was investigated secretly, and there was never any formal admission that a connection between the leak and the deaths had existed. Abnormally high concentrations of 210Po have been detected in July 2012 in clothes and personal belongings of the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, who died in 2004 of uncertain causes. However, the spokesman for the Institut de Radiophysique in Lausanne, Switzerland, where those items were analyzed, stressed that the “clinical symptoms described in Arafat’s medical reports were not consistent with polonium-210 and that conclusions could not be drawn as to whether the Palestinian leader was poisoned or not”, and that “the only way to confirm the findings would be to exhume Arafat’s body to test it for polonium-210.” On 27 November 2012 Arafat’s body was exhumed and samples were taken for separate analysis by experts from France, Switzerland and Russia. Results are expected by April 2013. Messier object M84 is situated in the heavily populated inner core of the Virgo Cluster of galaxies. It was discovered and cataloged by Charles Messier on March 18, 1781 when he also cataloged 7 more nebulous objects in the same celestial region. M84 contains a central machine which ejects two small but conspicuous jets, which can be seen in the radio light. This object was also target of a 1997 investigation of M84 by the Hubble Space Telescope, shortly after its second service mission (STS-82); it was found that the nucleus of M84 contains a massive central object of 300 million solar masses, concentrated in less than 26 light years from the galaxy’s center. M84 is 60,000 light years away from the Earth. The planet Uranus takes 84.01 years to orbit the Sun. Asteroid 84 Klio was discovered on August 25, 1865 by Robert Luther at Düsseldorf, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany. It has a period of 3 years, 230 days and diameter of 59 miles. Klio [Clio] is one of the 9 Muses of Greco-Roman mythology, daughter of Hermes & Mnemosyne, Klio is the Muse of history. Baseball’s 84th World Series (1987): Minnesota Twins defeats St. Louis Cardinals 4-3 Minnesota beats St. Louis at their Metrodome in Games 1 & 2 by scores of 10-1 & 8-4. Jerry Porter, wide receiver of the Oakland Raiders (since 2000) wears uniform #84. Started all 16 games (2004) at WR and set new career highs in receptions (68) and receiving yards (998) and tied a career high with nine touchdown catches. Jerry Porter, wide receiver of the Oakland Raiders Magic Johnson of the L.A. Lakers holds the record for the most assists made— 84, in a 6-game NBA Finals Series (1985) Magic Johnson of the L.A. Lakers Irving Fryar, Andre Rison, Mark Clayton, & Tommy McDonald are tied for 13th place with 84 career receiving touchdowns. Fryar is ranked 6th with 851 receptions & Rison 15th with 743 receptions in the NFL at the start of the 2004 season. (Receiving TDs Leaders). Randy Moss of the San Francisco 49ers wears number 84. 84th Wimbledon Mens Tennis: John Newcombe beats Ken Rosewall (5-7, 6-3, 6-2, 3-6, 6-1) on July 4, 1970. John Newcombe 84th Wimbledon Womens Tennis: Virginia Wade beats Betty Stove (4-6, 6-3, 6-1) on July 1, 1977. 84th Kentucky Derby was won by Tim Tam in 2:05 with Jockey Ismael Valenzuela aboard (May 3, 1958). 84th Preakness Stakes was won by Tim Tam in 1:57.2 with Jockey Ismael Valenzuela aboard (May 17, 1958). 84th Belmont Stakes was won by One Count in 2:30.2 with Jockey Eddie Arcaro aboard (June 7, 1952). 84th U.S. Golf Open: Fuzzy Zoeller shoots a 276 at Winged Foot Golf Course, NY (June 18, 1984) Women’s 100-Meters High Hurdles: height of the hurdle is 84 centimeters. Olympics Gold in Men’s Hammer Throw: 1988 Sergei Litvinov, USSR, 84.80 meters Nascar # 84 Toyota Camry, driven by A.J. Allmendinger. In books, music & movies 84 Charing Cross Road is a book about bibliophilia, containing 20 years of correspondences between a New York writer Helene Hanff and the London bookseller Frank Doel of Marks & Co. The book was originally published by Grossman Publishers, New York (1970) and reissued by Penguin, NY (1990) with an introduction by Anne Bancroft. A film of the same name was released in 1987 starring Anne Bancroft as Helen Hanff, with Anthony Hopkins as Frank P. Doel and Judi Dench as his wife, Mrs. Nora Doel. George Orwell wrote the classic book Nineteen Eighty-Four. The first edition of this novel was published by Secker & Warburg, London, England, in 1949. 84 Charlie Mopic is a 1989 film written & directed by Patrick Sheane Duncan. It is a low-budget Vietnam drama, shot entirely in hand-held documentary style, in which a camera team follows an Army unit in pursuit of ‘Charlie’. Duncan, a Vietnam veteran who served as an infantryman for 13 months during 1968-69, shot this film in the hills outside Los Angeles using Super 16mm film stock, which was later blown up to 35 mm for theatrical release. The movie’s producing company itself is called ’84 Charlie MoPic’. Chapter 84 of Franklin Merell-Wolff’s Pathways through to Space (1936) is a poem titled “Nirvana”. KKNX Radio 84 in Eugene, Oregon The John Larroquette Show ran on NBC from 1993 to 1996 for 84 episodes The B-Side to “Up All Night” (Take That song) In air, sea and militaria The USS Constitution is one of the first six frigates of the U.S. Navy, built by the Naval Act of 1794. These frigates were designed by Joshua Humphreys who designed them to be the major vessels of the young U.S. Navy. For this reason, the Constitution and the others were designed and built bigger, stronger and better armed than the rest of the frigates of the period. Initially she was commissioned to provide protection for merchant ships of the United States during the Quasi-War with France, and fight the Barbary Pirates of Tripoli during the War. However, the Constitution is most famous for her actions during the War of 1812 between the United States and Britain, when she captured numerous merchant ships and defeated five warships from Britain: HMS Guerriere, HMS Java, HMS Pictou, HMS Cyane and HMS Levant. In the battle with Guerriere she earned the nickname “Old Ironsides” and the public respect and affection that often saved her from being dismantled. This frigate has actively served the United States through the years, and either as flagship in the Mediterranean squadrons and Africa, sailed around the world in 1840. During the Civil War she served as a training ship for the Naval Academy. Nowadays Constitution’s mission is to promote understanding of the role of the Navy in times of war as in time of peace through educational outreach, historical demonstrations and active participation in public events. This ship is active, and as such, its crew of 60 officers and sailors members, participates in ceremonies, educational programs and special events while keeping the ship open to visitors year round offering free tours. All personnel assigned is an active member of the Navy and the allocation to this crew is considered a special duty. Traditionally, the command of the ship is assigned to a Navy commander. She is to date the oldest ship still afloat and is active worldwide. USS Bulkeley (DDG-84) USS Bulkeley (DDG-84) is an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer in the United States Navy. She was named after Vice Admiral John D. Bulkeley, who was a World War II Medal of Honor recipient. Bulkeley was laid down on 10 May 1999 by Ingalls Shipbuilding and launched on 21 June 2000 in Pascagoula, Mississippi. She was commissioned on 8 December 2001 and is currently homeported at Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. In February 2011, the Bulkeley was involved in a mission to rescue four American citizens from the yacht Quest which was attacked by Somali pirates. On 5 March 2011, Bulkeley was involved in rescuing a Japanese oil tanker, MV Guanabara, from Somali pirates while on duty with Combined Task Force 151 off the coast of Oman. Three of the pirates were tried and convicted in Japan, the fourth was turned over to juvenile authorities, as it was determined that he was a minor. On 16 May 2011 the Bulkeley responded to a mayday call from the Panamanian flagged very large crude carrier Artemis Glory by dispatching a Blackhawk helicopter to its position. Seeing that a piratical skiff carrying four men was firing upon the Artemis Glory, the Blackhawk engaged the skiff. After killing its four crewmembers, the helicopter withdrew without any casualties to its own crewmembers or that of the Artemis Glory. The ship returned to Norfolk on 15 July 2011. During its deployment, it had participated in operations which had captured 75 Somali pirates and had missile strikes by its carrier strike group against the Libyan government. USS Shamrock Bay (CVE-84) USS Shamrock Bay (CVE-84) was a Casablanca-class escort carrier of the United States Navy. She was laid down with the hull code ACV-84 on 15 March 1943 by the Kaiser Co., Vancouver, Washington, under a Maritime Commission contract (MC hull 1121); re-designated CVE-84 on 10 June 1943; launched on 4 February 1944; sponsored by Mrs. James R. Dudley; and commissioned on 15 March 1944, Captain Frank T. Ward, Jr., in command. No. 84 Squadron No. 84 Squadron of the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) was formed on 7 January 1917 and moved to France in September 1917. It flew the SE.5 over the Western front, at one time based in Bertangles, France until it returned to the UK in August 1919. The squadron was disbanded on 30 January 1920. Its aces included Walter A. Southey. The squadron was reformed on 13 August 1920 at Baghdad in Iraq, moving to Shaibah in September, where it remained for the next 20 years. Its initial equipment was DH.9As (until January 1929) and these were replaced by Wapitis (beginning October 1928), Vincents (December 1934) and Blenheims Mk.Is ( February 1939), before moving to Egypt in September 1940. It later operated in Greece, Iraq, and the Western Desert before moving briefly to the Far East. No. 84 Squadron flew the Vultee Vengeance dive bomber from Assam in North-East India but, contrary to some reports, not the Commonwealth Boomerang fighter from New Guinea during World War II (this was done by No. 84 Squadron RAAF). The squadron re-equipped with the Mosquito in February 1945 and in September 1945 with the Bristol Beaufighter. In 1949 No. 84 Squadron flew Bristol Brigands during Operation Firedog. The squadron was disbanded again on 20 February 1953, but 204 Squadron was renumbered to No. 84 Squadron on the same day. The squadron was the transport squadron for the RAF in the Middle East till 1971. Its Vickers Valetta flight was detached to become No. 233 Squadron RAF on 1 September 1960 at RAF Khormaksar to provide general transport for the British Army in the Aden Protectorate. The squadron was disbanded yet again at Muharraq on 31 October 1971. The squadron was reformed on 17 January 1972 from 1563 Flt and a detachment from 230Sqn with Westland Whirlwind HAR.10s at RAF Akrotiri to aid UN operations and operate search and rescue. It later (March 1982) replaced the Whirlwind with the Westland Wessex HC.2 and later still (June 1984) with the Westland Wessex HU.5C. It was the last squadron to use the Westland Wessex. Since January 2003 the squadron has been assigned to British Forces Cyprus at RAF Akrotiri in the search and rescue role using the Bell Griffin HAR2. The helicopters are leased from and maintained by a civilian company. 84 Squadron aircraft are also used for UN duties in maintaining the buffer zone separating Cypriot and Turkish forces. In recognition of this role the aircraft are always unarmed and carry a light blue band around their tail, matching the blue berets of UN peacekeepers. 84 Squadron is the only serving squadron never to have been based in the United Kingdom. Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate The Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate was the result of the Imperial Japanese Army Air Service’s search for an aircraft that was a combination of their own agile Ki-43 Hayabusa and their fast Ki-44 Shoki that could compete with newest allied designs. The Ki-84 Hayate (“Gale”) or the Army Type 4 Fighter which was it’s official IJA designation. Hayate was capable of matching the best allied aircraft in the Pacific theater and with its powerful armament to bring down any allied bomber. It was numerically the most important fighter serving with the Japanese Army Air Force (JAAF) during the last year of the Pacific War, and was probably the best Japanese fighter aircraft to see large-scale operation during this period of the war. The Hayate was fully the equal of even the most advanced Allied fighters which opposed it, and was often their superior in many important respects. It was well armed and armoured, was fast, and was very manoeuvrable. Although it was generally outnumbered by Allied fighters which opposed it, it nevertheless gave a good account of itself in battles over the Philippines, over Okinawa, and over the Japanese home islands. The Lisunov Li-2, originally designated PS-84 (NATO reporting name “Cab”), was a license-built version of the Douglas DC-3. It was produced by Factory #84 in Moscow-Khimki and, after evacuation in 1941, at TAPO in Tashkent. The project was directed by aeronautical engineer Boris Pavlovich Lisunov. Original passenger airliner, equipped with 14-28 seats. Somewhat smaller span and higher empty weight, and it was also equipped with lower-powered engines compared to the DC-3. The cargo door was also transposed to the right side of the fuselage. de Havilland Dragon The de Havilland DH.84 Dragon was a successful small commercial aircraft designed and built by the de Havilland company. DH.84M Dragon : Military transport version. The DH.84M was armed with two machine guns, and it could carry up to sixteen 20 lb (9 kg) bombs. Exported to Denmark, Iraq and Portugal. F-84 “Thunderjet” Republic Aviation Corporation, Long Island, New York, built P-84 Thunderjets in the 1940s. The Thunderjets were the last of the subsonic straight-wing fighter-bombers to see operational service. They were the aircraft with which flight-refueling techniques for fighters were developed. The first fifteen P-84 production aircraft were fitted with Allison J35A-15 engines and designated YF-84As. F-84 “Thunderjet” was the USAF’s first post-war fighter, making its initial flight on February 26, 1946. Gaining its greatest renown during the Korean War, it was used primarily for low-level interdiction missions. The F-84 attacked enemy railroads, bridges, supply depots and troop concentrations with bombs, rockets and napalm. Its maximum speed was 620 mph. Republic XF-84H The Republic XF-84H “Thunderscreech” was an experimental turboprop aircraft derived from the F-84F Thunderstreak. Powered by a turbine engine that was mated to a supersonic propeller, the XF-84H had the potential of setting the unofficial air speed record for propeller-driven aircraft, but was unable to overcome teething aerodynamic deficiencies, resulting in the cancellation of the program. Canadair CL-84 “Dynavert” The Canadair CL-84 “Dynavert”, designated by the Canadian Forces as the CX-131, was a V/STOL turbine tiltwing monoplane designed and manufactured by Canadair between 1964 and 1972. Only four of these experimental aircraft were built with three entering flight testing. Two of the CL-84s crashed due to mechanical failures, but no loss of life occurred as a result of these accidents. Despite the fact that the CL-84 was very successful in the experimental and operational trials carried out between 1972 and 1974, no production contracts resulted. Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 (HSC-84) Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 84 (HSC-84) “Red Wolves” is a helicopter squadron of the United States Navy Reserve. Along with the “Firehawks” of HSC-85, the “Red Wolves” are one of only two squadrons in the U.S. Navy dedicated to supporting Navy SEAL and SWCC Teams, and Combat Search & Rescue. They currently operate eight HH-60H Rescue Hawks organized into four independent, two aircraft detachments that can deploy anywhere in the world within 72 hours of notice. Calraith Rodgers Calraith Rodgers (1879-1912) was the first pilot to make the flight across the continental United States in 84 days. He purchased a Wright Model EX biplane, christened it the Vin Fiz, and on Sept. 17, 1911, he took off from Sheepshead Bay on Long Island, New York. Despite mechanical problems and dozens of minor incidents, Rodgers landed at Long Beach, California on Dec. 10, 1911 after flying 4231 miles in 84 days. A crowd of 50,000 cheered him when he landed. AGM-84 Harpoon AGM-84 Harpoon is a U.S. Air-to-surface anti-ship missile. It provides the Air Force & Navy with a common missile for air, ship, and submarine launches. Built by Boeing in 1977, it has a range of 60 nautical miles with speed of 855 km/hr. T-84 Main Battle Tank The T-84 Main Battle Tank is a Ukrainian development of the Soviet T-80 main battle tank, first built in 1993. Length= 9.72 m, Width=3.56 m, Weight= 48 tons, Speed= 70 km/hr. This main battle tank’s development works started in Charkov Machine-Building Plant’s Design Bureau in the late 80-ties. The T-84 is an improved modification of the T-80UD Main Battle Tank. After the breakup of the Soviet Union designers faced technical and supply problems. However by the help of Ukrainian Ministry of Machine-Building and Military-Production corpse there were made great preparation works to produce all parts of the new tank indigenously. The T-84 Main Battle Tank was publicly presented in United Arabian Emirates in 1995 during international armament exhibition. The new tank called interest in the Pakistan Army and after a long negotiations there was made an agreement to sell 320 T-84 Main Battle Tanks for Pakistan. The M-84 is a main battle tank from the former Yugoslavia . In the 1970s, the Yugoslav army decided to develop its own battle tanks and produce. Due to lack of experience of the Yugoslav military industry in tank, it was decided to use the time very advanced Soviet tank T-72 as a base. The rights of the licensed acquired in 1979 by the Soviet Union. Codenamed Kapela was in the armor wrought Ðuro Ðakovic in Slavonski Brod (Croatia) started production. The first prototype was completed in 1983, and mass production began 1984. Until the outbreak of war in Yugoslavia over 500 pieces for the Yugoslav army were produced. The battle tank M-84 presented a significant improvement of the overall T-72 represents in the following years made more combat performance upgrades and modernizations in different versions. The Z-84 again replaced the previous Star SMGs in service, starting in the mid 1980s. The theory was to acquire a gun in 9 mm Parabellum, to match their pistols (and the NATO countries finally). It was offered on the commercial market in 9 mm Largo, but none seem to have been made. The Spanish Army, Air Force and Marines supposedly mostly got out of issuing SMGs around the time this emerged — much like the rest of the world — due to the prevalence of lightweight, select-fire rifles. Unlike the previous replacement cycles, therefore, the Z-70B is still in widespread service for those who are issued SMGs (see the sailors at the top of the page). The Z84 is employed by some Guardia, Police and Military units. Aside from general use (such as the boarding party sailors below), in a recent Small Arms Review article, Julio Montes says: An interesting weapon in the hands of these naval commandos [the UEBC and UOE] is the locally made Star Z-84… It has proved very efficient and reliable even after being submerged and beat up for longer periods of time. The ever-present MP5 is also found. Mauser Gewehr 71/84 On December 2, 1871, the Mauser Infantry Rifle Model 71, was officially adopted by the Prussian government, thus becoming the first bolt-action metallic cartridge rifle to enter German military service. The original design single-shot was updated in 1884, refinements including an 8-round tubular magazine designed by Alfred von Kropatschek, making this Germany’s first repeating rifle. This version was designated the Gewehr 71/84 and was officially adopted by the army of Kaiser Wilhelm I on January 31, 1884. In the film The Last Samurai the Japanese Imperial Army carries German bolt-action Mauser M1871/84 rifles, in spite of the fact they were supposedly being armed by the U.S. The 1884 models were altered in appearance by film makers to resemble the more period accurate 1871 models. Carl Gustav Recoiles Rifle The Carl Gustav (also Carl-Gustaf and M2CG; pronounced “Carl Gustaf”) is the common name for the 84 mm man-portable reusable multi-role recoilless rifle produced by Saab Bofors Dynamics (formerly Bofors Anti-Armour AB) in Sweden. The first prototype of the Carl Gustaf was produced in 1946, and while similar weapons of the era have generally disappeared, the Carl Gustaf remains in widespread use today. British troops refer to it as the Charlie G, while Canadian troops often refer to it as the 84, Carl G or Carlo. In U.S. military service it is known as the M3 Multi-role Anti-armor Anti-tank Weapon System (MAAWS) or Ranger Antitank Weapons System (RAWS), but is often called the Gustav or the Goose or simply the Carl Johnson by U.S. soldiers. In Australia it is irreverently known as Charlie Gusto or Charlie Gutsache (guts ache, slang for stomach pain). In its country of origin it is officially named Grg m/48 (Granatgevär or grenade rifle, model 48). In recent years, the weapon has found new life in a variety of roles. The British Special Air Service, United States Special Forces and United States Army Rangers use M3s in bunker-busting and anti-vehicle roles, while the German Bundeswehr maintains a small number of M2s for battlefield illumination. Many armies continue to use it as a viable anti-armor weapon, especially against 1950s- and 1960s-era tanks and other armored vehicles still in use worldwide. In a well-documented incident during the Falklands War, a Royal Marine attacked an Argentinian corvette (ARA Guerrico) using a Carl Gustav. The Carl Gustav was used against Taliban defensive fortifications by soldiers of Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry in operations in Afghanistan. They developed a new system for firing at night in which a spotter with a night-scope fires tracer ammunition to mark the target for the Carl Gustav gunner.[citation needed] Carl Gustav launchers were used by Free Libyan Army during the Libyan civil war in 2011; the weapons being used were either captured or provided by defecting members of the Libyan Army. M84 Škorpion vz. 61 The Škorpion vz. 61 is a Czechoslovak 7.65 mm submachine gun developed in 1959 by Miroslav Rybár (1924–1970) and produced under the official designation Samopal vzor 61 (“submachine gun model 1961”) by the Ceská zbrojovka arms factory in Uherský Brod. Although it was developed for use with security forces and special forces, the weapon was also accepted into service with the Czechoslovak Army, as a personal sidearm for lower-ranking army staff, vehicle drivers, armored vehicle personnel and special forces. Currently the weapon is in use with the armed forces of several countries as a sidearm. The Škorpion was also license-built in Yugoslavia, designated M84. It features a synthetic pistol grip compared to the original version. A civilian, semi-automatic version was also produced, known as the M84A, also available in .380 ACP (9×17mm Short). Cities located at 84o longitude: Atlanta, Georgia; Cincinnati, Ohio; Knoxville, Tennessee; Agraharam, India; Vamsadhara River, India; San Jose, Costa Rica 84 is the code for international direct dial phone calls to Vietnam. 84 is used as the country ISBN code for books from the Spain. Baiyoke Sky Hotel, at 84 stories high is the tallest building in Thailand. The number of the French department Vaucluse The town of Eighty Four, Pennsylvania A variation of the game 42 played with two sets of dominoes. The company 84 Lumber . =================== . Significant Number Factoid Friday – Today Number Forty 40 December 14, 2012 December 14, 2012 fasab Factoids, Numbers, Politics, Sport, Uncategorized, Unusual 1947 Taft–Hartley Act, 40, 40 Carats, 40 Days and Nights, 40 lashes, 40th state to join the Union, 41st flight, a Thousand and One Nights, Acts, Aimo Lahti, air traffic controllers, Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves, Allied powers, American Top 40, archangel Gabriel, Arizona Cardinals, Armenia, armored vehicles crews, ascended, assassin, atomic number, Austrian, baseball, Bible, Bill Laimbeer, books, British Commonwealth, buffalo, Bursa, Byron Beck, Caleb, Canadian hip-hop, Celsius, Chicago Bears, children of Israel, Christian practice, Christians, Col Bryan D O'Connor, Col Sidney M Gutierrez, Columbia, commander, Crush 40, Curtiss P-40 Warhawk, Curtiss-Wright Corporation, Danny Murtaugh, David, Denver Nuggets, Detroit Pistons, deuce, disciples, Don Wilson, Donovan Berlin, Easter, Egypt, Eli, Erfurter Maschinenfabrik Gmbh, Erma, European armies, exodus, factoid, Fahrenheit, federal law, Fedor Degtyarov, Finland, Finnish, first serving U.S. President to survive being shot, football, fortieth President of the United States of America, forty, forty below, forty days and forty nights, Forty Shades of Green, forty winks, Francis Andrew Gaffney, Franz Ferdinand, Friday, Gale Sayers, Genesis, George H W Bush, Goliath, Governor of California, great flood, Great Patriotic War, Greece, Hall of Famer, hebrew, Heckler & Koch, Heereswaffenamt, Hindu God, Hinduism, HK-UMP40, Houston Astros, Husqvarna M/40, India, Interstate 40, Isaac, Islamic belief, Israelite, Italy, James P Bagian, jersey number 40, Jesus, Jews, Joe Morrison, John Hinckley Jr, Johnny Cash, Joshua, Judges, Kerala, Kittyhawk, land of Canaan, Law of the Sinai Covenant, Lent, Leviticus, Life begins at forty, Lincoln, Luke, Madrid, Major League Baseball, Mandal kal, Margaret Rhea Seddon, Mark, Masih ad-Dajjal, Matthew, Messier object M40, Mike Haynes, Militaria, military, Millie Hughes-Fulford, minus forty, monopoly, Moses, Mosin-Nagant, Mount Sinai, movies, MP-40, MP40, Muhammad, music, Muslims, Naples, NASCAR, NBA, Nebraska, negative forty, New England Patriots, New Jersey, new york, New York Giants, NFL, NKVD, Noah Shebib, Norwegian, number forty, numbers, on strike, paratroopers, Pat Tillman, PATCO, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Eagles, Philistines, phone code, Pistolet-Pulemyot Degtyarova, Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh Pirates, police officer Thomas Delahanty, politics, PPD, pregnancy, Premier League, press secretary James Brady, punishments, Qur'an, rained, Rebekah, Red Army, relegation, religion, Rick Dees, Romania, Ronald Reagan, Royal Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, Royal Canadian Air Force, Royal New Zealand Air Force, ruby wedding anniversary, Russian small arms, Russians, Salt Lake City, Samozaryadnaya Vintovka Tokareva, Sanhedrin, Saul, science, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy, Significant Number, Sinai desert, soccer, SOlomon, South Dakota, Soviet air forces, space, space shuttle, spain, spies, sport, STS-40, submachine gun, Sunday, SVT-40, Sweden, Tamara E Jernigan, Taurus MP40, tennis, The 40 Year Old Virgin, the Father, Thessaloniki, This is 40, Tokarev Self-loading rifle, Tom Brookshier, Tomahawk, Trenton, Turkey, U2, union of federal air traffic controllers, United States Army Air Forces, Universal Machinen-Pistole, Ursa Major, USSR, Utah, Venus, Vice President, Washington, Washington Hilton Hotel, WD-40, Winter War, world war ii, Yerevan, zirconium The factoid number for this Friday is forty. As usual there is more associated with it than you might think. Whatever your interest you will probably find something in here that you didn’t know about the number forty. The Number Forty 40 40 is probably the most frequently used number in the Bible and corresponds to many major events. For example, During the great flood it rained for forty days and forty nights [Genesis 7:4, 12, 17,8:6]. Isaac was forty years of age when he married Rebekah [Genesis 25:20]. Moses’ life is divided into three 40-year segments, separated by his fleeing from Egypt, and his return to lead his people out. Moses spent three consecutive periods of “forty days and forty nights” on Mount Sinai; during the forty days during which he received the Law of the Sinai Covenant [Exodus 24:18], the children of Israel were tested [Exodus 32:1]. The Hebrew people lived in the Sinai desert for “forty years”. This period of years represents the time it takes for a new generation to arise. Forty days after his birth a male child of Israel was dedicated to God at the Sanctuary [Leviticus 12:1-4]. The Israelite spies reconnoitered the land of Canaan for forty days [Numbers 13:25]; and Caleb was forty years of age when Moses sent him to reconnoiter Canaan [Joshua 14:7]. There were forty year intervals of peace in the age of the Judges (Judges 3:11; 5:31; 8:28) There were forty years of war between Israel and the Philistines. Several Jewish leaders and kings are said to have ruled for “forty years”, that is, a generation. (Examples: Eli, Saul, David, Solomon.) Goliath challenged the Israelites twice a day for forty days before David defeated him. 40 lashes is one of the punishments meted out by the Sanhedrin, though in actual practice only 39 lashes were administered. Jesus fasted in the wilderness for forty days before His temptation [Matthew 4:2; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:2]. Jesus taught His disciples for forty days after the Resurrection. On the fortieth day He ascended to the Father [Acts 1:3]. In modern Christian practice, Lent consists of the 40 days preceding Easter. In much of Western Christianity, Sundays are excluded from the count; in Eastern Christianity, Sundays are included. In Islamic belief Muhammad was forty years old when he first received the revelation delivered by the archangel Gabriel. Masih ad-Dajjal roams around the Earth in forty days, a period of time that can be as many as forty months, forty years, and so on. The Quran says that a person is only fully grown when they reach the age of 40. Some Russians believe that ghosts of the dead linger at the site of their death for forty days. In Hinduism, some popular religious prayers consist of forty shlokas or dohas (couplets, stanzas). The most common being the Hanuman Chalisa (chaalis is the Hindi term for 40). In Hindu system some of the popular fasting period consist 40 days and is called the period One ‘Mandl kal’ Kal means a period and Mandal kal means a period of 40 days. For example the devotees of ‘Swami Ayyappa’, the name of a Hindu God very popular in Kerala, India ( Sabarimala Swami Ayyappan ) strictly observed forty days fasting and visit ( Only male devotees are permitted to enter into the God’s Temple) with their holy submittance or offerings on 41st or a convenient day after a minimum 40 days practice of fasting. The offering is called ‘Kanikka’. Forty is the atomic number of zirconium. Negative forty is the unique temperature at which the Fahrenheit and Celsius scales correspond; that is, -40°F=-40°C. It is referred to as either “minus forty” or “forty below”. Negative forty -40°F=-40°C The planet Venus forms a pentagram in the night sky every eight years with it returning to its original point every 40 years with a 40 day regression (some scholars believe that this ancient information was the basis for the number 40 becoming sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims). planet Venus Messier object M40, is a magnitude 9.0 double star in the constellation Ursa Major STS-40 Although designated STS-40, this was in fact the 41st flight of the Space Shuttle and the 11th flight of Columbia. Its mission was to conduct the Spacelab Life Sciences (SLS-1) experiments, the first spacelab dedicated to life sciences research. This included experiments that explored how the heart, blood vessels, lungs, kidneys and hormone-secreting glands respond to microgravity, the causes of space sickness and changes in muscles, bones and cells during the microgravity environment of space flight and in the readjustment to gravity upon returning to Earth. Launch took place on June 5, 1991, 9:24:51 a.m. EDT. It was originally set for May 22,1991, but postponed less than 48 hours before launch when it became known that a leaking liquid hydrogen transducer in orbiter main propulsion system which was removed and replaced during a leak testing in 1990, had failed an analysis by vendor. Engineers feared that one or more of the nine liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen transducer protruding into fuel and oxidizer lines could break off and be ingested by the engine turbopumps, causing engine failure. In addition, one of orbiter five general purpose computers failed completely, along with one of the multiplexer demultiplexers that control orbiter hydraulics ordinance and orbiter maneuvering system / reaction control system functions in aft compartment. New general purpose computer and multiplexer demultiplexer were installed and tested. One liquid hydrogen and two liquid oxygen transducers were replaced upstream in propellant flow system near 17-inch disconnect area, which is protected by internal screen. Three liquid oxygen transducers replaced at engine manifold area, while three liquid hydrogen transducers here were removed and openings plugged. Launch reset for 8 a.m. EDT, June 1, but postponed again after several attempts to calibrate inertial measurement unit 2 failed. Unit was replaced and retested, and launch was rescheduled for June 5. Launch Weight: 251,970 lbs. The Commander STS-40 was Marine Corps Col. Bryan D. O’Connor. Other crew, Air Force Lt. Col. Sidney M. Gutierrez (Pilot), James P. Bagian, M.D.; Tamara E. Jernigan, Ph.D.; and Margaret Rhea Seddon, M.D. The payload specialists, Francis Andrew Gaffney, M.D., and Millie Hughes-Fulford, Ph.D. South Dakota ranks 16th in size among the 50 states. It was the 40th state to join the Union in 1889. South Dakota encompasses 77,123 square miles, averaging 10 people per square mile. South Dakota State flag Ronald Reagan, former actor and Governor of California (1967-75) was the fortieth President of the United States of America, from January 20, 1981 to January 20, 1989. His Vice President was George H. W. Bush. Ronald Reagan 40th President of the United States of America Reagan’s Presidency was notable for at least two incidents. On March 30, 1981, only 69 days into the new administration, Reagan, his press secretary James Brady, Washington police officer Thomas Delahanty, and Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy were struck by gunfire from would-be assassin John Hinckley, Jr. outside the Washington Hilton Hotel. Although “close to death” during surgery, Reagan recovered and was released from the hospital on April 11, becoming the first serving U.S. President to survive being shot in an assassination attempt. The attempt had great influence on Reagan’s popularity; polls indicated his approval rating to be around 73%. Reagan believed that God had spared his life so that he might go on to fulfill a greater purpose. A couple of videos, the first rather long but interesting in that it shows the live story of the assassination attempt developing, and the second President Reagan recounting the assassination attempt from his personal perspective. Another controversial incident involving President Reagan happened in summer of 1981 when PATCO, the union of federal air traffic controllers, went on strike, violating a federal law prohibiting government unions from striking. Reagan declared the situation an emergency as described in the 1947 Taft–Hartley Act, and stated that if the air traffic controllers “do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated”. They did not return and on August 5, Reagan fired 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored his order, and used supervisors and military controllers to handle the nation’s commercial air traffic until new controllers could be hired and trained. As a leading reference work on public administration concluded, “The firing of PATCO employees not only demonstrated a clear resolve by the president to take control of the bureaucracy, but it also sent a clear message to the private sector that unions no longer needed to be feared.” In football (soccer), forty is generally considered to be the number of points that a Premier League team (or, by extension, a team in any 20-team league with a standard home-and-away season) needs to avoid relegation. In baseball, each team in Major League Baseball is allowed to have 40 players under major-league contracts at any given time (not including players on the 60-day disabled list). From September 1 to the end of the regular season, teams are allowed to expand their game-day rosters to include the entire 40-man roster. In tennis, the number 40 represents the third point gained in a game. A score of 40-40 (three points each) is called “deuce”, at which time a player must score two consecutive points to win the game. Beginning with the 2013 season, forty cars will run each race in NASCAR’s second-level Nationwide Series. The jersey number 40 has been retired by several North American sports teams in honor of past playing greats or other key figures: In Major League Baseball: the Houston Astros, for Don Wilson; the Pittsburgh Pirates, for Danny Murtaugh, most noted as the team’s longtime manager. In the NBA: the Denver Nuggets, for Byron Beck; the Detroit Pistons, for Bill Laimbeer. Byron Beck In the NFL: the Arizona Cardinals, for Pat Tillman; the Chicago Bears, for Hall of Famer Gale Sayers; the New England Patriots, for Hall of Famer Mike Haynes; the New York Giants, for Joe Morrison; the Philadelphia Eagles, for Tom Brookshier. Curtiss P-40 Warhawk Manufactured by Curtiss-Wright Corporation of Buffalo, New York and designed by Donovan Berlin, the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk’s first flight was on 14 October 1938. Over 13,700 were built and during its twenty year life it was used by the United States Army Air Forces, the Royal Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, Royal Canadian Air Force, Royal New Zealand Air Force, and many others. A single-engine, single-seat, all-metal fighter and ground attack aircraft, it was used extensively by most Allied powers during World War II, and remained in front line service until the end of the war. The British Commonwealth and Soviet air forces used the name Tomahawk for models equivalent to the P-40B and P-40C, and the name Kittyhawk for models equivalent to the P-40D and all later variants. Curtiss P-40E Warhawk USAF PPD40 The PPD (Pistolet-Pulemyot Degtyarova) was developed by famous Russian small arms designer Fedor Degtyarov. It was formally adopted by the Red Army in 1935 and entered limited production as the PPD-34. Made in small numbers, it was mostly relegated for NKVD use, mostly for border guards. Slightly modified in 1938, it was then produced until 1939 in PPD-34/38 variation, with newly developed 71 rounds drum with long neck. After the Winter War experience (1940 war between USSR and Finland), new version of PPD has been rapidly developed, with the most visible change being the two-part stock, cut to accept new pattern of drums, which had no neck. This became the PPD-40. After the outbreak of the Great Patriotic Warin 1941, it was soon been discovered that the PPD-40 is less than ideal for wartime production, so it was quickly replaced by the more efficient and inexpensive PPSh-41, which appeared in great numbers and was widely used by Red Army. Pistolet-Pulemyot Degtyarova PPD40 One of the most famous submachine gun designs in history, the M.P. 38 submachine gun started its life under requirements from German Heereswaffenamt (HWA, Army Weapons Office), which saw the need for a compact submachine gun, suitable for use by armored vehicles crews and paratroopers. German arms-making company Erfurter Maschinenfabrik Gmbh, better known under its trade name Erma, began the development of a new weapon under HWA specifications. It was manufactured for just 2 years, when it was replaced in production by externally similar, but less expensive MP-40, which used more stamped parts instead of machined parts, found in MP-38. There also were minor variations in design of MP-38, such as shape of cocking handle etc. MP-40 was also produced in a number of variations, which differed in shape of certain parts; also, toward the end of the war, several production shortcuts were introduced to save the costs of manufacturing. probably the most interesting variation of the MP-40 were the MP-40-II and MP-40-II. These guns featured dual magazine housings which hold two magazines in a laterally sliding bracket. This increase the total ammunition capacity “in the gun” to 64 rounds, in a desperate attempt to catch up with 71-round magazine capacity of Soviet PPSh-41. The later variant, MP-40-II, was made in limited numbers, but turned out to be a failure – sliding dual-magazine housing was a constant source of jams and failures, and was very sensitive to dirt and fouling. Nevertheless, the MP-40 submachine guns were of good design, and set the pattern for so called “second generation” of submachine guns (“first generation” being represented by the wood-stocked and carefully machined MP-18, MP-28 and the like). The second generation weapons usually were of compact design, and made using mostly steel stampings and pressings, or castings. Many MP-40 that survived the WW2, continued to serve up until late 1970s or early 1980s, in few European armies such as Austrian or Norwegian. Taurus MP40 During the 1990s Taurus replaced in production its MT-12A submachine gun (licensed copy of the Beretta PM-12) with another foreign design, this time purchased from Chile. Originally known as the FAMAE SAF, in Brazil it is made in a slightly modified form as the Taurus MT-9 (in 9mm Luger) and MT-40 (in .40SW, especially for the Brazilian police forces that favor this caliber). In this case, the MT index stands for Metralhadora Taurus – Taurus Submachine gun, and the digits denote a caliber. Taurus also makes an interesting offshoot of the MT-40, the CT-40 semi-automatic carbine, which is also intended for police and security use but is restricted to semi-automatic fire and has somewhat longer barrel. SVT-40 The SVT-38 (Samozaryadnaya Vintovka Tokareva – Tokarev Self-loading rifle) was originally adopted in the 1938 after more than 20 years of the research and development, done by famous Russian arms designer Fedor Tokarev. This rifle was made in relatively large numbers (more than 1 million made prior to 1945), and was originally issued as a standard infantry rifle, replacing the obsolete Mosin-Nagant M1891/30 bolt action rifles. A few SVT-40 were also manufactured in the sniper variant, (only about 50 000) equipped with scope mounts and telescopic sights, but accuracy was not sufficient. The SVT-40 had a somewhat controversial reputation. It was highly regarded by the enemies (Finns and Germans) and it was a very sought-after war trophy, re-issued to both German and Finnish troops. On the other hand, it was often considered unreliable and over-complicated by the Soviet troops (when comparing with old Mosin-Nagant rifles), but it was more to the poor training and maintenance, than to the rifle itself. Some better trained and educated Soviet troops, such as Sea Infantry (Marines, which always were some kind of elite in the Soviet army) used the SVT-40 with great deal of success. Husqvarna M/40 The ‘Luger-like’ L-35 pistol was developed by the Finnish designer Aimo Lahti and manufactured by Finnish company VKT from 1935 until 1985 or so. It was adopted as a standard sidearm for Finnish army in 1935. In 1940, Sweden purchased a license for Lahti pistol, simplified it and began production as a Husqvarna M/40 pistol. Due to simplification and poor quality of steel used in M/40, these guns tended to crack when fired 9mm “submachinegun” ammunition, and also M/40 were less reliable than original L-35s, so in the 1980s almost all M/40s were recalled from military service and replaced by older m/07 pistol (licensed Browning M1903 pistols) as an emergency feature. HK-UMP40 The UMP (Universal Machinen-Pistole = Universal Submachine Gun) had been developed by the Heckler & Koch company of Germany in the mid- to late- 1990s and first appeared on the markets in 1999. The key idea behind the UMP was to create a lightweight and powerful submachine gun, that was also cheaper than one of the H&K’s flagships, the MP-5. UMP, being targeted primary for USA law enforcement market, first appeared in .45ACP and .40SW chamberings, and later – in 9mm. The UMP is a blowback-operated select-fire submachine gun, being fired from the closed bolt. The receiver is made from the polymer, the controls are fully ambidextrous. UMP can be fired in full-auto, in single shots, and in 2 or 3 round bursts (optional). UMP also has bolt hold-open device, which traps the bolt in the open position when the last round from magazine had been fired. UMP has side-folding buttstock and two set of picatinny rails – one on the top of the receiver, and the other – on the forend. These rails can accept wide variety of sighting and other equipment, such as red-dot sights, laser pointers, tactical grips and flashlights. The barrel has quick mount for snap-on silencer. Heckler & Koch Universal Machinen-Pistole In books, music and movies Forty Shades of Green is a visual term for rural Ireland, Johnny Cash popularised it with his 1961 song of the name. “40” is a 1983 song by U2 from their album War “40′” is the title of a song by Franz Ferdinand The American-Japanese rock band Crush 40 from Sega’s Sonic the Hedgehog video game series with Hardline vocalist Johnny Gioeli and guitarist Jun Senoue Canadian hip-hop producer Noah Shebib is known as “40”. A well known radio program is the American Top 40 Rick Dees hosts a Weekly Top 40 radio program The best known story from a Thousand and One Nights is Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves which has been made in movie and cartoon versions Movies with ’40’ in their titles include “40 Carats”, about a forty year old woman who was vacationing in Greece “40 Days and Nights”, a modern take on a Noah’s Ark tale “The 40 Year Old Virgin”, a comedy about, well, a 40 year old virgin “This is 40”, a sequel to the 2007 movie ‘Knocked Up’ about at the lives of characters Pete and Debbie a few years on. The expression “forty winks”, meaning a short sleep There is the famous Saying “Life begins at forty” Forty years of marriage is a ruby wedding anniversary The international direct dial phone code for Romania is 40 The number of weeks for an average term of pregnancy, counting from the woman’s last menstrual period is forty. There is an Arabic proverb that says, ‘To understand a people, you must live among them for 40 days.’ A regular work week in some western countries consists of forty hours. There are forty spaces in a standard Monopoly game board Last, but definitely not least, perhaps one of the greatest ever inventions also carries the ’40’ tag. It is WD-40. WD-40 is the trademark name of a penetrating oil and water-displacing spray, developed in 1953 by Norm Larsen, founder of the Rocket Chemical Company, in San Diego, California. The term ‘WD-40’, is an abbreviation of the phrase “Water Displacement, 40th formula”. Larsen was attempting to create a formula to prevent corrosion in nuclear missiles, by displacing the standing water that causes it. He claims he arrived at a successful formula, which is primarily composed of various hydrocarbons, on his 40th attempt. WD-40 was first used by Convair to protect the outer skin, and more importantly, the paper thin “balloon tanks” of the Atlas missile from rust and corrosion. WD-40 first became commercially available on store shelves in San Diego in 1958 The WD40 product range

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511901

__label__wiki

HomePosts tagged 'Western Europe' First Of June, First Quiz Of June. June 1, 2015 June 1, 2015 fasab Questions, Tests 16th and 17th centuries, 16th century, art, artists, authors, Baker Street, ball game, Birmingham, black and white bird, board game, books, Buildings, canal, Canary Current, Christopher Cockerell, city, City of Oaks, close fitting bodice, color, company, counties, country, cue ball, detective, east, education, empire, english, English city, Entertainment, equipment, famous, female bear, Finnish, first person, followers, Gävleborg, general knowledge, Geography, Golden Fleece, Gotland, Greek Mythology, Gulf Stream, herb, history, House of Representatives, idiots, India, institution, invent, Italian painter, land, language, Large Hill, largest landowner in the world, leader, leaves, line the streets, links, literature, London, Manchester, mode of transport, monopoly, movie, Name, nationality, nature, Normal Hill, North, North America, North Atlantic, North Atlantic Current, North Equatorial Current, north pole, Norwegian, oak trees, Olympic sport, on foot, original tokens, Pakistan, Pelota, People, Pica pica, places, pocket, questions, quiz, quizzes, red ball, region, ruled, science, scientific name, Shamrock, ship, shot in snooker, sit down, small vegetable growth, south, sport, star, Swedish, Taken, test, tests, United States of America, Uppsala, US Senate, voting seats, west, Western Europe, word, writer, writers Summer is beckoning but not before you try another fasab quiz. Twenty more random questions to test your knowledge. As usual if you get stuck you can find the answers waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down below, but please NO cheating! Q. 1: How many leaves are there on a shamrock? Q. 2: It is the name of a region in Western Europe, a unique language, a close fitting bodice and a common form of the ball game Pelota. What is it? Q. 3: What nationality was the first person to reach the North Pole alone and on foot? a) Finnish b) English c) Norwegian d) Swedish Q. 4: Which mode of transport did Christopher Cockerell invent in the 1950’s? Q. 5: What word links a herb or other small vegetable growth, the buildings, equipment, etc., of a company or an institution, or a shot in snooker where the cue ball hits a red ball which hits another red ball to make it go into a pocket? Q. 6: What city in the United States of America is known as the “City of Oaks” because of the many oak trees that line the streets in the heart of the city. Q. 7: What is a female bear called? Q. 8: Gävleborg, Gotland and Uppsala are among the counties of which country? Q. 9: In which Olympic sport are there ‘Normal Hill’ and ‘Large Hill’ events? Q. 10: In Greek mythology who went in search of the ‘Golden Fleece’ ? (You get a point for the name of the leader, the name given to his followers and two bonus points for the name of their ship.) Q. 11: What color originates from a famous 16th Century Italian painter and what color is it? (A point for each correct answer.) Q. 12: Which English city has more than 100 miles of canal? a) London b) Birmingham c) Manchester Q. 13: Which empire ruled most of India and Pakistan in the 16th and 17th centuries? Q. 14: What writer created the famous Baker Street detective? Q. 15: Which black and white bird has the scientific name ‘Pica pica’ ? Q. 16: What is the name given to that part of the North Atlantic bounded by the Gulf Stream on the west, the North Atlantic Current on the north, the Canary Current on the east, and the North Equatorial Current on the south. Q. 17: If you added together all the voting seats in the US Senate and House of Representatives, how many idiots could sit down? Q. 18: Name the star of the movie ‘Taken’. Q. 19: What company, still in existence, was at one time the largest landowner in the world, having 15% of the land in North America? Q. 20: Finally a chance to beef up that points score. What were the eight original tokens used in the board game ‘Monopoly’ ? (A point for each correct answer and two bonus points if you get all eight correct.) A. 1: Three (3). A. 2: Basque. A. 3: The correct answer is c) Norwegian. He was Børge Ousland and he walked there by himself in 1994. A. 4: The Hovercraft. A. 5: A ‘plant’. A. 6: Raleigh, North Carolina, is known as the “City of Oaks”. A. 7: A ‘sow’. A. 8: Sweden. A. 9: Ski jumping. A. 10: His name was ‘Jason’, his followers were the ‘Argonauts’, and the name of their ship (after which the followers were named) was the Argo. A. 11: Titian, a brownish-orange color. A. 12: The correct answer is b) Birmingham. A. 13: The Mughal Empire. A. 14: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, his creation was Sherlock Holmes. A. 15: The (Common) Magpie. A. 16: It is called the Sargasso Sea. A. 17: 535 (100 + 435). A. 18: Liam Neeson. A. 19: Hudson’s Bay Company. A. 20: Wheelbarrow, Battleship, Racecar, Thimble, Old-style shoe (or boot), Scottie dog, Top hat, Iron. Forty-Four Mouth-Watering Facts About Curry. April 8, 2015 April 6, 2015 fasab Factoids 1700BC, A Poem To Curry, Afghanistan, Asian countries, Assam, Babylon, balti, Balti Houses, bananas, Bangladesh, Bhut Jolokia Chilli Pepper, Big Jim, Biryani, Blackpool, blood clots, boost bone health, britain, british army, British government employees, Burma, Cancer Research UK Scotland, cardamom, Chicken Naga, chicken tikka masala, chili, chili peppers, chilli, chilli peppers, China, Chinese food, Chinese restaurants, coconut milk, combat heart attacks, coriander, Cornwall, cumin, curries, curry, curry Powder, curry style dishes, deer, delicacy, delicious, Dhansak, diets, Dopiaza, ease pain and inflammation, East Indian Trading Co, education, English administrators, Entertainment, Europe, extends blood coagulation times, fact, facts, Fiji, first commercial curry powder, food, foods, fresh cilantro, fried green peppers, Ghost Chilli, Ghost Pepper, Goa, Hannah Glasse’s The Art Of Cookery, health benefits, health warning, Hindustani Coffee House, hot, hot sauces, hottest pepper in the world, increase the liver’s ability to remove toxins from the body, India, Indian restaurants, Indonesia, information, Jali Indian Restaurant, Japan, karahi, kari, karil, Kitchen Melodies, Korma, lychees, Madras, Malaysia, Maldives, Manipur, masaman, Massala, measurement of the pungency, meat in a spicy sauce, medium, Mesopotamia, mild, most popular spice in the world, mouth watering, Mumbai, naan bread, Naga Jolokia, Naga pepper seeds, Nagaland, New Mexico, North Curry, Nottingham Trent University, Pakistan, Panang, Phall, Philippines, poppadum, Portman Square, Portuguese dish, Portuguese traders, prevention of cancer, protect the immune system from bacterial infections, protection against heart disease, red pepper, reduce Alzheimer’s disease symptoms, regional variations, rice, Rogan Josh, sauces, sautéed vegetables, scientists, Scoville scale, Somerset, spice, spices, spicy foods, spicy heat, squirrels, Sri Lanka, St Andrews University, strokes, sweet basil, tablets, Tamil, tasty, Thai curry, Thailand, Tim Stobbs, turmeric, United States, Vietnam, Vindaloo, West Curry, western belief, Western Europe, wife's grave, William Makepeace Thackeray I’ve done ‘peanut butter‘ and ‘chocolate‘ and ‘coffee‘ in other posts. Today it is another fasab food favorite, the curry. A curry, properly made, has to be one of the most delicious foods in the world. I have spent many happy evenings with friends enjoying this delicacy in one form or another. Personally I like it with some naan bread or sometimes with rice. Either way is socially acceptable and extremely tasty. Mouth watering already? Very good, let’s get straight to the facts. The word curry comes from a Tamil word ‘kari’ or ‘karil’, meaning spices or sautéd vegetables. The meaning changed when Portuguese traders used it for the sauces with which rice was served. Essentially, the term curry was invented by the English administrators of the East Indian Trading Co. and later continued by British government employees. The British army in India further changed the meaning as its liking for hot sauces introduced the modern idea of curries being hot. Surprisingly, the term ‘curry’ isn’t used very much in India. There are many types of curry-style dishes, which have their own characteristic regional variations. Curry Powder is a mix of spices, rather than a spice in its own right. It usually consists of turmeric, coriander, cardamom, cumin, sweet basil, and red pepper. Some of the most common types of curry are ‘Korma’, ‘Massala’, ‘Dhansak’, ‘Phall’, ‘Rogan Josh’, ‘Dopiaza’, ‘Madras’ and ‘Vindaloo’. Curry is said to have a number of valuable health benefits, including the prevention of cancer, protection against heart disease, reducing Alzheimer’s disease symptoms, easing pain and inflammation, boosting bone health, protecting the immune system from bacterial infections, and increasing the liver’s ability to remove toxins from the body. In addition to being an established and firm favorite in Britain. and increasing popular throughout Europe and the United States, curry forms a major element of the diets of several Asian countries including India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Maldives, Burma, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, China, Japan and Fiji. Chili (or Chilli) is the most popular spice in the world and can help combat heart attacks and strokes and extends blood coagulation times preventing harmful blood clots. Contrary to common western belief, curries are not always ‘hot’, they can be mild, medium and hot. The earliest known curry was made in Mesopotamia in around 1700 BC, the recipe for meat in a spicy sauce appearing on tablets found near Babylon. The Scoville scale is the measurement of the pungency (spicy heat) of chili peppers or other spicy foods. The ‘Bhut Jolokia Chilli Pepper’ (also known as the ‘Naga Jolokia’), is the hottest pepper in the world, accompanied with its own health warning! This pepper is also known as the ‘Ghost Chilli’ or ‘Ghost Pepper’, and is grown in the Indian states of Assam, Nagaland and Manipur. The first commercial curry powder appeared in about 1780. In Britain Indian food now surpasses Chinese food in popularity, with Indian restaurants outnumbering Chinese restaurants by two to one. The word ‘balti’ means bucket. Balti is more a style of cooking than one particular curry. In specialist ‘Balti Houses’ the balti is a meal in itself which contains both meat and vegetables and is eaten straight from the karahi using curled up pieces of naan bread. In standard Indian restaurants the balti is more of a stir-fried curry containing plenty of fried green peppers and fresh cilantro (also known as coriander). South Indian food is more spicy than North Indian food. The first curry recipe in English appeared in Hannah Glasse’s ‘The Art Of Cookery’ in 1747. The world’s biggest ever curry was a 13 tonne Biryani, including 187lb of chilies and 6600lb of rice. It took 60 chefs to make in New Delhi in June 2008. And required three cranes to move the container and a 3ft high furnace to cook it! In Western Europe and the U K, curry powders available contain more turmeric than anything else, and tend to be toned down to palates used to bland food. The tallest poppadom stack in the world stands at a massive 282 poppadoms. The record was set by a chef from the Jali Indian Restaurant in Blackpool. In 2008, Bath and North East Somerset Council advised a man to sprinkle curry powder on his wife’s grave to keep squirrels and deer away. Tim Stobbs, aged 42 years, currently holds the world record for munching an impressive 15 poppadoms in 5 minutes! The annual World Championships, in aid of Cancer Research UK Scotland, is held every year at St Andrews University. There are about 10,000 Indian restaurants serving curry in the UK, the vast majority of which are run by people from Bangladesh, not India. To make a ‘hot’ curry mild, just add some coconut milk. The word ‘masala’ means spice mix. In 1846, William Makepeace Thackeray wrote ‘A Poem To Curry’, as part of his Kitchen Melodies. Britain’s first curry house, called the Hindustani Coffee House and located in London’s Portman Square, opened in 1809. Now there are more curry houses in London, England than in Mumbai, India. Chili can help combat heart attacks and strokes. One of the hottest curry dishes ever made is known as the Bit Spicy 3 Chili Phall which is even hotter than the infamous ‘Chicken Naga’, made with a high volume of Naga pepper seeds. More than 100 times hotter than jalapeño peppers! People crave a curry because the spices arouse and stimulate the taste buds. Vindaloo was originally a Portuguese dish which took its name from the two main ingredients which were ‘vinho’, wine/wine vinegar, and ‘alhos’, garlic. Over time it was spiced up, hotted up and otherwise changed by the indigenous peoples of the ex-Portuguese colony of Goa. The ‘Big Jim’, a large chili hailing from New Mexico, currently holds the world record for the largest chili ever grown. This plant frequently produces chilies that are over a foot in length, which is hugely impressive considering that the plant itself never grows more than two feet! The town of North Curry is in Somerset while West Curry is in Cornwall. Madras and pathia are both hot and sour dishes. Kashmiri a more subtle and creamy dish usually made with lychees or bananas – or both. Scientists at Nottingham Trent University have discovered that people begin to crave for a curry because the spices arouse and stimulate the taste buds. One in seven curries sold in the UK is a chicken tikka masala, making it the most popular Indian restaurant dish in the UK. It is thought to have originated in Britain after an enterprising Indian chef had the idea of adding a tomato and onion paste to the grilled chicken to satisfy the British preference for food that isn’t dry. The largest naan bread ever made was a whopping 2.75m in diameter and contained meat dumplings – the equivalent of 167 normal sized naan breads. The bread took over ten hours to finish and required twelve chefs, 30kg mutton, 125kg flour, 16kg onion and 90kg of water to cook it. Southeastern Asian cultures have always mixed a number of spices to flavor their dishes, usually according to recipes handed down from generation to generation. A common way to categorize Thai curry is by the color of the curry paste used to make the curry dish. Green and red curry paste are the most typical. Yellow and sour curries (also sometimes known as orange curry, gaeng sohm) are also well known. Each has its own particular combination of herbs and spices to make up the curry paste that makes it unique. ‘Panang’ and ‘masaman’ curry are probably the most popular Thai curries in the West, because of their rich tastes. Finally, if you are eating a curry which is just too hot for you, don’t drink water, that only makes it hotter!

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511902

__label__wiki

January 19th, 2017 | By: Epic Scanner that can detect brain bleeds to be introduced in New Zealand This portable handheld device known as an infrascanner can tell in minutes whether a patient has a brain bleed. Using the same technology as your television remote, a new portable device is about to land in New Zealand that can detect brain bleeds instantly. The device, called an “infrascanner”, has been approved for use on our shores. It can pick up life-threatening brain haemorrhages and clots in head trauma victims injured on rugby fields, in nursing homes and in car accidents. It scans a person’s skull, firing infrared signals into the skull to a depth of three centimetres, then shows a negative or positive result. HAGEN HOPKINS Conrad Smith of the Hurricanes holds his head after returning from a concussion test during a 2015 game against the Chiefs. The infrascanner could be useful for rugby teams in detecting injury, say its distributors. “If it shows a red dot, you know there’s a bleed,” Peter Bailey, the sole distributor for infrascanner in Australia and New Zealand, said. “It’s good in trauma victims because a bleed is close to the skull. There’s some research into whether it could be used in stroke victims, but basically you still need a CT scan.” Bailey said the technology was developed in Israel, and was already used in the United States, India and parts of Europe and the Middle East in warzones, on sports fields and among frontline medical staff. “It’s extremely valuable for rugby teams because, if somebody gets a concussion, it’s quick and easy to see if they have a bleed if you just put them on the bench.” No-one in New Zealand has yet got their hands on an infrascanner, but the hope is for it to be rolled out among major sporting bodies, public and private ambulance services, trauma centres and remote healthcare facilities. At about A$17,000 a unit (about NZ$17,900), the technology isn’t cheap, but had about a 94 per cent rate of accuracy, Bailey said. “Anyone can be taught to use it and the device can be used anywhere. The scan takes two to three minutes to complete and results correlate with CT scans.” And if there’s no bleed, there’s the potential to save time and costs of further treatment and tests, Bailey, also a Melbourne paramedic said. Wellington Free Ambulance head of clinical services Paul Fake had not heard of the device, but said his team was always interested in new technology that could improve patient care. “We’re finding more and more that devices that were originally only available at emergency departments are becoming available to our people who are assessing and caring for people in all sorts of locations. “What we call ‘point of care testing’ is becoming a feature of modern paramedic practice.” The device has been used on Olympic athletes, in prisons, helicopter rescues and remote areas such as mines, oil rigs and rural areas with limited health resources. The infrascanner is manufactured by InfraScan Handheld Brain Diagnostics nad has been in the making since about 2004, but this model had been around for less than two years, Bailey said. Author:RACHEL THOMAS,January 19, 2017 Source: http://www.stuff.co.nz/ Link to original Article: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/88587407/Scanner-that-can-detect-brain-bleeds-to-be-introduced-in-New-Zealand?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511905

__label__wiki

Displaying 1 - 10 of 25. Show 10 | 20 results per page. Project acronym BG-BB-AS Project Birational Geometry, B-branes and Artin Stacks Researcher (PI) Edward Paul Segal Summary Derived categories of coherent sheaves on a variety are a fundamental tool in algebraic geometry. They also arise in String Theory, as the category of B-branes in a quantum field theory whose target space is the variety. This connection to physics has been extraordinarily fruitful, providing deep insights and conjectures. An Artin stack is a sophisticated generalization of a variety, they encode the idea of equivariant geometry. A simple example is a vector space carrying a linear action of a Lie group. In String Theory this data defines a Gauged Linear Sigma Model, which is a basic tool in the subject. A GLSM should also give rise to a category of B-branes, but surprisingly it is not yet understood what this should be. An overarching goal of this project is to develop an understanding of this category (more accurately, system of categories), and to extend this understanding to more general Artin stacks. The basic importance of this question is that in certain limits a GLSM reduces to a sigma model, whose target is a quotient of the vector space by the group. This quotient must be taken using Geometric Invariant Theory. Thus this project is intimately connected with the question of how derived categories change under variation-of-GIT, and birational maps in general. For GLSMs with abelian groups this approach has already produced spectacular results, in the non-abelian case we understand only a few remarkable examples. We will develop these examples into a wide-ranging general theory. Our key objectives are to: - Provide powerful new tools for controlling the behaviour of derived categories under birational maps. - Understand the category of B-branes on a large class of Artin stacks. - Prove and apply a striking new duality between GLSMs. - Construct completely new symmetries of derived categories. Derived categories of coherent sheaves on a variety are a fundamental tool in algebraic geometry. They also arise in String Theory, as the category of B-branes in a quantum field theory whose target space is the variety. This connection to physics has been extraordinarily fruitful, providing deep insights and conjectures. An Artin stack is a sophisticated generalization of a variety, they encode the idea of equivariant geometry. A simple example is a vector space carrying a linear action of a Lie group. In String Theory this data defines a Gauged Linear Sigma Model, which is a basic tool in the subject. A GLSM should also give rise to a category of B-branes, but surprisingly it is not yet understood what this should be. An overarching goal of this project is to develop an understanding of this category (more accurately, system of categories), and to extend this understanding to more general Artin stacks. The basic importance of this question is that in certain limits a GLSM reduces to a sigma model, whose target is a quotient of the vector space by the group. This quotient must be taken using Geometric Invariant Theory. Thus this project is intimately connected with the question of how derived categories change under variation-of-GIT, and birational maps in general. For GLSMs with abelian groups this approach has already produced spectacular results, in the non-abelian case we understand only a few remarkable examples. We will develop these examples into a wide-ranging general theory. Our key objectives are to: - Provide powerful new tools for controlling the behaviour of derived categories under birational maps. - Understand the category of B-branes on a large class of Artin stacks. - Prove and apply a striking new duality between GLSMs. - Construct completely new symmetries of derived categories. Project acronym CCOSA Project Classes of combinatorial objects: from structure to algorithms Researcher (PI) Daniel Kral Host Institution (HI) THE UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK Summary The proposed project aims at analyzing fundamental problems from combinatorics using the most current methods available and at providing new structural and algorithmic insights to such problems. The problems considered will be treated on a general level of classes of combinatorial objects of the same kind and the developed general methods will also be applied to specific open problems. Classes of dense and sparse objects will be treated using different techniques. Dense combinatorial objects appear in extremal combinatorics and tools developed to handle them found their applications in different areas of mathematics and computer science. The project will focus on extending known methods to new classes of combinatorial objects, in particular those from algebra, and applying the most current techniques including Razborov flag algebras to problems from extremal combinatorics. Applications of the obtained results in property testing will also be considered. On the other hand, algorithmic applications often include manipulating with sparse objects. Examples of sparse objects are graphs embeddable in a fixed surface and more general minor-closed classes of graphs. The project objectives include providing new structural results and algorithmic metatheorems for classes of sparse objects using both classical tools based on the theory of graph minors as well as new tools based on the framework of classes of nowhere-dense structures. The proposed project aims at analyzing fundamental problems from combinatorics using the most current methods available and at providing new structural and algorithmic insights to such problems. The problems considered will be treated on a general level of classes of combinatorial objects of the same kind and the developed general methods will also be applied to specific open problems. Classes of dense and sparse objects will be treated using different techniques. Dense combinatorial objects appear in extremal combinatorics and tools developed to handle them found their applications in different areas of mathematics and computer science. The project will focus on extending known methods to new classes of combinatorial objects, in particular those from algebra, and applying the most current techniques including Razborov flag algebras to problems from extremal combinatorics. Applications of the obtained results in property testing will also be considered. On the other hand, algorithmic applications often include manipulating with sparse objects. Examples of sparse objects are graphs embeddable in a fixed surface and more general minor-closed classes of graphs. The project objectives include providing new structural results and algorithmic metatheorems for classes of sparse objects using both classical tools based on the theory of graph minors as well as new tools based on the framework of classes of nowhere-dense structures. Project acronym CHAPARDYN Project Chaos in Parabolic Dynamics: Mixing, Rigidity, Spectra Researcher (PI) Corinna Ulcigrai Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL Summary "The theme of the proposal is the mathematical investigation of chaos (in particular ergodic and spectral properties) in parabolic dynamics, via analytic, geometric and probabilistic techniques. Parabolic dynamical systems are mathematical models of the many phenomena which display a ""slow"" form of chaotic evolution, in the sense that nearby trajectories diverge polynomially in time. In contrast with the hyperbolic case and with the elliptic case, there is no general theory which describes parabolic dynamical systems. Only few classical examples are well understood. The research plan aims at bridging this gap, by studying new classes of parabolic systems and unexplored properties of classical ones. More precisely, I propose to study parabolic flows beyond the algebraic set-up and infinite measure-preserving parabolic systems, both of which are very virgin fields of research, and to attack open conjectures and questions on fine chaotic properties, such as spectra and rigidity, for area-preserving flows. Moreover, connections between parabolic dynamics and respectively number theory, mathematical physics and probability will be explored. g New techniques, stemming from some recent breakthroughs in Teichmueller dynamics, spectral theory and infinite ergodic theory, will be developed. The proposed research will bring our knowledge significantly beyond the current state-of-the art, both in breadth and depth and will identify common features and mechanisms for chaos in parabolic systems. Understanding similar features and common geometric mechanisms responsible for mixing, rigidity and spectral properties of parabolic systems will provide important insight towards an universal theory of parabolic dynamics." "The theme of the proposal is the mathematical investigation of chaos (in particular ergodic and spectral properties) in parabolic dynamics, via analytic, geometric and probabilistic techniques. Parabolic dynamical systems are mathematical models of the many phenomena which display a ""slow"" form of chaotic evolution, in the sense that nearby trajectories diverge polynomially in time. In contrast with the hyperbolic case and with the elliptic case, there is no general theory which describes parabolic dynamical systems. Only few classical examples are well understood. The research plan aims at bridging this gap, by studying new classes of parabolic systems and unexplored properties of classical ones. More precisely, I propose to study parabolic flows beyond the algebraic set-up and infinite measure-preserving parabolic systems, both of which are very virgin fields of research, and to attack open conjectures and questions on fine chaotic properties, such as spectra and rigidity, for area-preserving flows. Moreover, connections between parabolic dynamics and respectively number theory, mathematical physics and probability will be explored. g New techniques, stemming from some recent breakthroughs in Teichmueller dynamics, spectral theory and infinite ergodic theory, will be developed. The proposed research will bring our knowledge significantly beyond the current state-of-the art, both in breadth and depth and will identify common features and mechanisms for chaos in parabolic systems. Understanding similar features and common geometric mechanisms responsible for mixing, rigidity and spectral properties of parabolic systems will provide important insight towards an universal theory of parabolic dynamics." Project acronym COMPAT Project Complex Patterns for Strongly Interacting Dynamical Systems Researcher (PI) Susanna Terracini Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI TORINO Summary This project focuses on nontrivial solutions of systems of differential equations characterized by strongly nonlinear interactions. We are interested in the effect of the nonlinearities on the emergence of non trivial self-organized structures. Such patterns correspond to selected solutions of the differential system possessing special symmetries or shadowing particular shapes. We want to understand, from the mathematical point of view, what are the main mechanisms involved in the aggregation process in terms of the global variational structure of the problem. Following this common thread, we deal with both with the classical N-body problem of Celestial Mechanics, where interactions feature attractive singularities, and competition-diffusion systems, where pattern formation is driven by strongly repulsive forces. More precisely, we are interested in periodic and bounded solutions, parabolic trajectories with the final intent to build complex motions and possibly obtain the symbolic dynamics for the general N–body problem. On the other hand, we deal with elliptic, parabolic and hyperbolic systems of differential equations with strongly competing interaction terms, modeling both the dynamics of competing populations (Lotka- Volterra systems) and other interesting physical phenomena, among which the phase segregation of solitary waves of Gross-Pitaevskii systems arising in the study of multicomponent Bose-Einstein condensates. In particular, we will study existence, multiplicity and asymptotic expansions of solutions when the competition parameter tends to infinity. We shall be concerned with optimal partition problems related to linear and nonlinear eigenvalues This project focuses on nontrivial solutions of systems of differential equations characterized by strongly nonlinear interactions. We are interested in the effect of the nonlinearities on the emergence of non trivial self-organized structures. Such patterns correspond to selected solutions of the differential system possessing special symmetries or shadowing particular shapes. We want to understand, from the mathematical point of view, what are the main mechanisms involved in the aggregation process in terms of the global variational structure of the problem. Following this common thread, we deal with both with the classical N-body problem of Celestial Mechanics, where interactions feature attractive singularities, and competition-diffusion systems, where pattern formation is driven by strongly repulsive forces. More precisely, we are interested in periodic and bounded solutions, parabolic trajectories with the final intent to build complex motions and possibly obtain the symbolic dynamics for the general N–body problem. On the other hand, we deal with elliptic, parabolic and hyperbolic systems of differential equations with strongly competing interaction terms, modeling both the dynamics of competing populations (Lotka- Volterra systems) and other interesting physical phenomena, among which the phase segregation of solitary waves of Gross-Pitaevskii systems arising in the study of multicomponent Bose-Einstein condensates. In particular, we will study existence, multiplicity and asymptotic expansions of solutions when the competition parameter tends to infinity. We shall be concerned with optimal partition problems related to linear and nonlinear eigenvalues Project acronym Critical Project Behaviour near criticality Researcher (PI) Martin Hairer Summary "One of the main challenges of modern mathematical physics is to understand the behaviour of systems at or near criticality. In a number of cases, one can argue heuristically that this behaviour should be described by a nonlinear stochastic partial differential equation. Some examples of systems of interest are models of phase coexistence near the critical temperature, one-dimensional interface growth models, and models of absorption of a diffusing particle by random impurities. Unfortunately, the equations arising in all of these contexts are mathematically ill-posed. This is to the extent that they defeat not only ""standard"" stochastic PDE techniques (as developed by Da Prato / Zabczyk / Röckner / Walsh / Krylov / etc), but also more recent approaches based on Wick renormalisation of nonlinearities (Da Prato / Debussche / etc). Over the past year or so, I have been developing a theory of regularity structures that allows to give a rigorous mathematical interpretation to such equations, which therefore allows to build the mathematical objects conjectured to describe the abovementioned systems near criticality. The aim of the proposal is to study the convergence of a variety of concrete microscopic models to these limiting objects. The main fundamental mathematical tools to be developed in this endeavour are a discrete analogue to the theory of regularity structures, as well as a number of nonlinear invariance principles. If successful, the project will yield unique insight in the large-scale behaviour of a number of physically relevant systems in regimes where both nonlinear effects and random fluctuations compete with equal strength." "One of the main challenges of modern mathematical physics is to understand the behaviour of systems at or near criticality. In a number of cases, one can argue heuristically that this behaviour should be described by a nonlinear stochastic partial differential equation. Some examples of systems of interest are models of phase coexistence near the critical temperature, one-dimensional interface growth models, and models of absorption of a diffusing particle by random impurities. Unfortunately, the equations arising in all of these contexts are mathematically ill-posed. This is to the extent that they defeat not only ""standard"" stochastic PDE techniques (as developed by Da Prato / Zabczyk / Röckner / Walsh / Krylov / etc), but also more recent approaches based on Wick renormalisation of nonlinearities (Da Prato / Debussche / etc). Over the past year or so, I have been developing a theory of regularity structures that allows to give a rigorous mathematical interpretation to such equations, which therefore allows to build the mathematical objects conjectured to describe the abovementioned systems near criticality. The aim of the proposal is to study the convergence of a variety of concrete microscopic models to these limiting objects. The main fundamental mathematical tools to be developed in this endeavour are a discrete analogue to the theory of regularity structures, as well as a number of nonlinear invariance principles. If successful, the project will yield unique insight in the large-scale behaviour of a number of physically relevant systems in regimes where both nonlinear effects and random fluctuations compete with equal strength." Project acronym DIOPHANTINE PROBLEMS Project Integral and Algebraic Points on Varieties, Diophantine Problems on Number Fields and Function Fields Researcher (PI) Umberto Zannier Host Institution (HI) SCUOLA NORMALE SUPERIORE Summary Diophantine problems have always been a central topic in Number Theory, and have shown deep links with other basic mathematical topics, like Algebraic and Complex Geometry. Our research plan focuses on some issues in this realm, which are strictly interrelated. In the last years the PI and collaborators obtained several results on integral and algebraic points on varieties, which have inspired much subsequent research by others, and which we plan to develop further. In particular: We plan a further study of integral points on varieties, and applications to Algebraic Dynamics, a possibility which has emerged recently. We plan to study further the so-called `Unlikely intersections'. This theme contains celebrated issues like the Manin-Mumford conjecture. After work of the PI with Bombieri and Masser in the last 10 years, it has been the object of much recent work and also of new conjectures by R. Pink and B. Zilber. Here a new method has recently emerged in work of the PI with Masser and Pila, which also leads (as shown by Pila) to signi_cant new cases of the Andr_e-Oort conjecture. We intend to pursue in this kind of investigation, exploring further the range of the methods. Finally, we plan further study of topics of Diophantine Approximation and Hilbert Irreducibility, connected with the above ones in the contents and in the methodology. Diophantine problems have always been a central topic in Number Theory, and have shown deep links with other basic mathematical topics, like Algebraic and Complex Geometry. Our research plan focuses on some issues in this realm, which are strictly interrelated. In the last years the PI and collaborators obtained several results on integral and algebraic points on varieties, which have inspired much subsequent research by others, and which we plan to develop further. In particular: We plan a further study of integral points on varieties, and applications to Algebraic Dynamics, a possibility which has emerged recently. We plan to study further the so-called `Unlikely intersections'. This theme contains celebrated issues like the Manin-Mumford conjecture. After work of the PI with Bombieri and Masser in the last 10 years, it has been the object of much recent work and also of new conjectures by R. Pink and B. Zilber. Here a new method has recently emerged in work of the PI with Masser and Pila, which also leads (as shown by Pila) to signi_cant new cases of the Andr_e-Oort conjecture. We intend to pursue in this kind of investigation, exploring further the range of the methods. Finally, we plan further study of topics of Diophantine Approximation and Hilbert Irreducibility, connected with the above ones in the contents and in the methodology. Project acronym ENTROPHASE Project Entropy formulation of evolutionary phase transitions Researcher (PI) Elisabetta Rocca Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI PAVIA Summary The ground-breaking nature of the project relies on the possibility of opening new horizons with a novel mathematical formulation of physical problems. The project aim is indeed to obtain relevant mathematical results in order to get further insight into new models for phase transitions and the corresponding evolution PDE systems. The new approach presented here turns out to be particularly helpful within the investigation of issues like as existence, uniqueness, control, and long-time behavior of the solutions for such evolutionary PDEs. Moreover, the importance of the opportunity to apply such new theory to phase transitions lies in the fact that such phenomena arise in a variety of applied problems like, e.g., melting and freezing in solid-liquid mixtures, phase changes in solids, crystal growth, soil freezing, damage in elastic materials, plasticity, food conservation, collisions, and so on. From the practical viewpoint, the possibility to describe these phenomena in a quantitative way has deeply influenced the technological development of our society, stimulating the related mathematical interest. The ground-breaking nature of the project relies on the possibility of opening new horizons with a novel mathematical formulation of physical problems. The project aim is indeed to obtain relevant mathematical results in order to get further insight into new models for phase transitions and the corresponding evolution PDE systems. The new approach presented here turns out to be particularly helpful within the investigation of issues like as existence, uniqueness, control, and long-time behavior of the solutions for such evolutionary PDEs. Moreover, the importance of the opportunity to apply such new theory to phase transitions lies in the fact that such phenomena arise in a variety of applied problems like, e.g., melting and freezing in solid-liquid mixtures, phase changes in solids, crystal growth, soil freezing, damage in elastic materials, plasticity, food conservation, collisions, and so on. From the practical viewpoint, the possibility to describe these phenomena in a quantitative way has deeply influenced the technological development of our society, stimulating the related mathematical interest. Project acronym FCCA Project Five Challenges in Computational Anatomy Researcher (PI) Darryl Holm Summary New medical imaging technologies encode human anatomy in a wide variety of data structures. Computational Anatomy (CA) offers an approach to synthesize this plethora of data by comparison of anatomical features using smooth invertible transformations specific to the data structure. This proposal is for work to develop new mathematical and numerical methods for image analysis in the framework of CA, aimed at meeting the following five challenges in image analysis for the comparison and interpolation of shapes in biomedical images of the heart and the brain. 1. Data structure: Develop a unified approach for registering images encoded in a wide variety of data structures. The unifying concept in our approach is the momentum map, a fundamental concept from the theory of Lie group transformations. 2. Data fusion: After placing the transformations of the variety of data structures into the same conceptual framework using momentum maps, synthesise (fuse) their multiple modalities of information by accounting for the different transformation properties of the different data structures under smooth invertible maps. 3. Multiple resolutions: Develop the momentum map framework to enable registration of data at multiple resolutions by concatenating the Lie group transformations that define the momentum maps. 4. Time-varying (4D) images: Treat time-varying images in this geometric framework by matching snapshots in time using geodesic splines that interpolate the image snapshot from one time to another. Quantity the effects of noise and uncertainty in 4D image analysis. 5. Changes in image topology: Extend the transformative approach to allow changes in topology in passing between images by using the method of metamorphosis. Simply put, the five challenges are: to 1. register images of different data structures and 2. combine them, even at 3. different resolutions; then do the same things with 4. splines and 5. metamorphosis, including noise. New medical imaging technologies encode human anatomy in a wide variety of data structures. Computational Anatomy (CA) offers an approach to synthesize this plethora of data by comparison of anatomical features using smooth invertible transformations specific to the data structure. This proposal is for work to develop new mathematical and numerical methods for image analysis in the framework of CA, aimed at meeting the following five challenges in image analysis for the comparison and interpolation of shapes in biomedical images of the heart and the brain. 1. Data structure: Develop a unified approach for registering images encoded in a wide variety of data structures. The unifying concept in our approach is the momentum map, a fundamental concept from the theory of Lie group transformations. 2. Data fusion: After placing the transformations of the variety of data structures into the same conceptual framework using momentum maps, synthesise (fuse) their multiple modalities of information by accounting for the different transformation properties of the different data structures under smooth invertible maps. 3. Multiple resolutions: Develop the momentum map framework to enable registration of data at multiple resolutions by concatenating the Lie group transformations that define the momentum maps. 4. Time-varying (4D) images: Treat time-varying images in this geometric framework by matching snapshots in time using geodesic splines that interpolate the image snapshot from one time to another. Quantity the effects of noise and uncertainty in 4D image analysis. 5. Changes in image topology: Extend the transformative approach to allow changes in topology in passing between images by using the method of metamorphosis. Simply put, the five challenges are: to 1. register images of different data structures and 2. combine them, even at 3. different resolutions; then do the same things with 4. splines and 5. metamorphosis, including noise. Project acronym GALOP Project Galois theory of periods and applications. Researcher (PI) Francis Clément Sais BROWN Summary A period is a complex number defined by the integral of an algebraic differential form over a region defined by polynomial inequalities. Examples include: algebraic numbers, elliptic integrals, and Feynman integrals in high-energy physics. Many problems in mathematics can be cast as a statement involving periods. A deep idea, based on Grothendieck's philosophy of motives, is that there should be a Galois theory of periods, generalising classical Galois theory for algebraic numbers. This reposes on inaccessible conjectures in transcendence theory, but these can be circumvented in many important cases using an elementary notion of motivic periods. This allows one to set up a working Galois theory of periods in many situations of arithmetic and physical interest. These ideas grew out of the PI's recent proof of the Deligne-Ihara conjecture, in which the Galois theory of multiple zeta values was worked out. Multiple zeta values are one of the most fundamental families of periods, and their Galois group plays an important role in mathematics: it is conjecturally equal to Drinfeld's Grothendieck-Teichmuller group, the stable derivation algebra on moduli spaces of curves, and the Galois group of mixed Tate motives over the integers. It occurs in deformation quantization, the homology of the graph complex, and the Kashiwara-Vergne problem, as well as having numerous connections to string theory, and quantum field theory. The goal of this proposal is to generalise this picture. Periods of moduli spaces of curves, multiple L-functions of modular forms, and Feynman amplitudes in quantum field and string theory should each have their own Galois theory which is yet to be worked out. This is completely uncharted territory, and will have numerous applications to number theory, algebraic geometry and physics. A period is a complex number defined by the integral of an algebraic differential form over a region defined by polynomial inequalities. Examples include: algebraic numbers, elliptic integrals, and Feynman integrals in high-energy physics. Many problems in mathematics can be cast as a statement involving periods. A deep idea, based on Grothendieck's philosophy of motives, is that there should be a Galois theory of periods, generalising classical Galois theory for algebraic numbers. This reposes on inaccessible conjectures in transcendence theory, but these can be circumvented in many important cases using an elementary notion of motivic periods. This allows one to set up a working Galois theory of periods in many situations of arithmetic and physical interest. These ideas grew out of the PI's recent proof of the Deligne-Ihara conjecture, in which the Galois theory of multiple zeta values was worked out. Multiple zeta values are one of the most fundamental families of periods, and their Galois group plays an important role in mathematics: it is conjecturally equal to Drinfeld's Grothendieck-Teichmuller group, the stable derivation algebra on moduli spaces of curves, and the Galois group of mixed Tate motives over the integers. It occurs in deformation quantization, the homology of the graph complex, and the Kashiwara-Vergne problem, as well as having numerous connections to string theory, and quantum field theory. The goal of this proposal is to generalise this picture. Periods of moduli spaces of curves, multiple L-functions of modular forms, and Feynman amplitudes in quantum field and string theory should each have their own Galois theory which is yet to be worked out. This is completely uncharted territory, and will have numerous applications to number theory, algebraic geometry and physics. Project acronym GeoMeG Project Geometry of Metric groups Researcher (PI) Enrico LE DONNE Host Institution (HI) UNIVERSITA DI PISA Summary What are the best trajectories to park a truck with several trailers? How fast can a lattice grow? These are some of the questions studied in this project because both the infinitesimal control structure of movement of a truck and the asymptotic geometry of a (nilpotent) lattice are examples of metric groups: Lie groups with homogeneous distances. The PI plans to study geometric properties of metric groups and their implications to control systems and nilpotent groups. In particular, the plan is to exploit the relation between the regularity of distinguished curves, sets, and maps in subRiemannian groups, volume asymptotics in nilpotent groups, and embedding results. The general goal is to develop an adapted geometric measure theory. SubRiemannian spaces, and in particular Carnot groups, appear in various areas of mathematics, such as control theory, harmonic and complex analysis, asymptotic geometry, subelliptic PDE's and geometric group theory. The results in this project will provide more links between such areas. The PI has developed a net of high-level international collaborations and obtained several results via a combination of analysis on metric spaces (differentiation of Lipschitz maps, tangents of measures, and Gromov-Hausdorff limits) and the theory of locally compact groups (Lie group techniques and the solutions of the Hilbert 5th problem). This allowed the PI to solve a number of open problems in the field, such as the analogue of Myers-Steenrod theorem on the smoothness of isometries, the analogue of Nash isometric embedding and the non-minimality of curves with corners. Some of the next aims are to establish an analogue of the De Giorgi's rectifiability result for finite-perimeter sets and prove the smoothness of geodesics, a 30-year-old open problem. The goal of this project is to tackle them, together with many more related questions. The PI received his first degree at SNS Pisa (advisor: M.Abate) and his PhD from Yale University (advisor: B.Kleiner). Before obtaining a permanent position only three years after graduation, he was at ETH, Orsay, and MSRI. He received the prestigious position of research fellow of the Academy of Finland. What are the best trajectories to park a truck with several trailers? How fast can a lattice grow? These are some of the questions studied in this project because both the infinitesimal control structure of movement of a truck and the asymptotic geometry of a (nilpotent) lattice are examples of metric groups: Lie groups with homogeneous distances. The PI plans to study geometric properties of metric groups and their implications to control systems and nilpotent groups. In particular, the plan is to exploit the relation between the regularity of distinguished curves, sets, and maps in subRiemannian groups, volume asymptotics in nilpotent groups, and embedding results. The general goal is to develop an adapted geometric measure theory. SubRiemannian spaces, and in particular Carnot groups, appear in various areas of mathematics, such as control theory, harmonic and complex analysis, asymptotic geometry, subelliptic PDE's and geometric group theory. The results in this project will provide more links between such areas. The PI has developed a net of high-level international collaborations and obtained several results via a combination of analysis on metric spaces (differentiation of Lipschitz maps, tangents of measures, and Gromov-Hausdorff limits) and the theory of locally compact groups (Lie group techniques and the solutions of the Hilbert 5th problem). This allowed the PI to solve a number of open problems in the field, such as the analogue of Myers-Steenrod theorem on the smoothness of isometries, the analogue of Nash isometric embedding and the non-minimality of curves with corners. Some of the next aims are to establish an analogue of the De Giorgi's rectifiability result for finite-perimeter sets and prove the smoothness of geodesics, a 30-year-old open problem. The goal of this project is to tackle them, together with many more related questions. The PI received his first degree at SNS Pisa (advisor: M.Abate) and his PhD from Yale University (advisor: B.Kleiner). Before obtaining a permanent position only three years after graduation, he was at ETH, Orsay, and MSRI. He received the prestigious position of research fellow of the Academy of Finland.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511909

__label__cc

What's the Big Deal With Race? By Matthew J. Hall “So why your interest in issues of race and theology?” The question was asked rather innocently of me in recent days. But it also betrayed some intrigue. Why would a thirtysomething white historian who spends most of his time working in academic administration be so fixated on questions of race, theology, and justice? Why in the world would I spend a whole semester leading a small group of seminary students through a study of race and theology in American Christianity? I guess it’s actually a legitimate question. So let me give you my answer. And, if I’m right, it might just help you consider why all Christians should be mindful of the gospel’s demands for racial reconciliation and justice. First, racial injustice is, at its core, a sin problem. Racism and all manifestations of racial injustice are not merely the result of historical forces, economic interests, or lacking education. The biblical account makes clear that our proclivity for self-exaltation is rooted in the primal sin of the Garden. As sons and daughters of Adam, we are spring-loaded to see ourselves as distinct and superior from other individuals, but also from groupings or communities of persons. Is racial prejudice and injustice really a matter of sin? We have abundant biblical evidence to conclude that it is. Moses records an especially informative account in Numbers 12 that should help us understand just how seriously God takes this sin. We’re told that Miriam and Aaron “spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman” (Numbers 12:1). The reference to this woman as a “Cushite” is clearly intended to convey racial meaning–presumably she was of darker skin, from the region of Cush, in modern day Sudan and Ethiopia. Interestingly, Aaron and Miriam’s accusations against Moses invoked the racial identity of his wife as evidence against his calling as a prophet of God. They cited her race as a way of delegitimizing Moses’ authority. But God’s response should tell us something. He summons the three siblings together at the Tent of Meeting and speaks to them, reaffirming his unique relationship with Moses and warning Miriam and Aaron. But not only that. We’re told that “the anger of the Lord was kindled against them” (Numbers 12:9). When God’s presence is removed from them, Miriam discovers she has been afflicted with leprosy and her skin is now “like snow.” We shouldn’t miss the irony here. Miriam, who had indicted her sister-in-law for her blackness is now judged. And her judgment takes expression in her whiteness. As John Piper has pointed out, it’s almost as if God says, “Oh, you think your skin color makes you superior? You think white is better? I’ll make you so white your skin will literally rot.” But the sin of racial injustice is far more insidious than we often realize. It is not content to restrain itself to individual prejudices, beliefs, and attitudes. Injustice infects and perverts entire societies, institutions, and cultures. And when a fundamentally unjust system is perpetuated for generation after generation, the effects and consequences of that sin become far more deep-rooted than we often can begin to see. Indeed, this kind of injustice is often harder for us to see. Well, maybe I should be more precise. It’s especially hard to see for those who are not victimized by it. But a historic Christian theology of sin will not be one that underestimates the insidiousness of sin. We see it all around us. We see it in a massive economic machine that preys upon poor and unmarried women, telling them that their choice to terminate a pregnancy is one of empowerment and security. We see it in state-run lotteries that disproportionately accumulate billions of dollars off the backs of the poor and those most desperate to see their luck change. We see it around us in an industrialized penal system that is overwhelmingly populated by young black men. And we see it in the recurring headlines of unarmed black teenage boys shot by police officers. Sure, we can trumpet the virtue of personal responsibility and try to sleep better at night, our uneasy consciences salved by the distance of “out of sight and out of mind.” But look more closely and you’ll see that sin is never confined merely to the orbit of individual choice or personal responsibility. Second, racial injustice denies the truth of our universal kinship. The great lie of Jim Crow and all forms of racial injustice was–and continues to be–that it perpetuated a system that implied a differentiation in human worth and dignity among human beings, all made in the image of God, all sons of Adam, sons of Noah (cf. Acts 17:26). We literally share the same DNA, we are all part of the human family. So any system that elevates one branch of the family tree while denigrating or demeaning another on the basis of race or ethnicity contradicts this ancient reality. The spiritual kinship shared by the redeemed in Christ is enduring and eternal, one that supersedes genetic family ties. But we should not miss the reality that there is also a basic human kinship–we are all connected to one another by genealogy and blood, descended from the same first parents. Third, racial injustice is contrary to the heart of the gospel of Jesus Christ. One of the implications of our universal kinship in Adam is that we are also all tied together in the sin and culpability of our first parents. But the good news of the Christ and his kingdom is that where the first Adam failed, the second Adam has now taken on our guilt and suffered the judgment we deserved (Romans 5). In exchange, he grants his perfect righteousness to men and women from every sector of the human family–every “nation, tribe, and tongue”–to reconcile us to God. There’s also an eschatological vision to this. In his vision of the new heavens and new earth, the Apostle John relays a vision of the people of God, gathered together in worship of the Christ. This great assembly is not racially, ethnically, or culturally monolithic. Instead, the apostle tells us, it’s a congregation of ransomed sinners too large to count from “every tribe and language and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9). As civil rights hero John Perkins has noted, if God’s great plan of vertical reconciliation–to redeem sinners to himself through his Son’s sacrificial death and resurrection–required a deliberate and providential plan, then we should also expect that our horizontal reconciliation with one another will require a similar measure of intentionality. It won’t happen by sheer good intentions or by cultural inertia. Fourth, evangelicals have a complicated history when it comes to racial justice. As a historian, this truth haunts me. How could so many of my own theological forbears within my own denomination have been so right on biblical authority, the urgency of global missions, the exclusivity of the gospel, and the centrality of the cross, but have been so wrong on the issue of racial justice? Of course, this historic reality has a humbling and sobering effect. And it should. It should serve to inoculate against arrogance or self-righteousness. Even God’s people, those who are sojourners and aliens, are still embedded within cultures and societies marked by injustice. And it is far easier than we realize for us to be lulled into it and simply make our peace with it. Fifth, the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only full and final solution for racial injustice. There are a host of good and necessary steps needed for racial justice and reconciliation. We can and should have reasoned and civil debates about matters of policy and law that will uphold justice and equity. But the only solution capable of rooting out the sin that is fundamentally responsible for this kind of evil is the good news of the Kingdom of Christ. This is at the heart of the New Testament. As our great High Priest, Jesus Christ mediates a new and better covenant, reconciling us to God and to one another. In him, there is no longer a dividing wall of hostility–whether between sinners and God, or between the redeemed new people of God. Now Jew and Greek, slave and free, men and women are all “one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3.28; cf. Col. 3:11). If the gospel of Jesus Christ really is the only full antidote to racial injustice, then we understand it as long as we wander through this present evil age, we will have to temper our expectations. Yes, Christ has conquered sin and crushed the head of the serpent. But until he comes again, we continue to wage war against principalities and powers recognizing that the conflict will not subside until the consummation of all things. So we work, we pray, we speak out, we listen, and we yearn for racial reconciliation and justice. But ultimately, we join with the church through the ages and with the Apostle in crying, “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev. 22:20). Matthew J. Hall (Ph.D., University of Kentucky) is vice president of academic services at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, where he also teaches courses in church history. He is a research fellow of the ERLC Research Institute and co-editor of the forthcoming Essential Evangelicalism: The Enduring Influence of Carl F.H. Henry (Crossway, 2015). Matthew J. Hall is dean of Boyce College. He has served as vice president for academic services at Southern Seminary since 2013. Read More August Profiles: Justin Giboney on Christian compassion and conviction in politics By Steven Harris Why is it important for Christians to understand the image of God? By William "Duce" Branch How can Christians cultivate humility in a social media platform era? When and how did God develop distinct ethnicities? By D.A. Carson

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511910

__label__wiki

Posts Tagged ‘saawariya’ Looking Ahead 2010 Here’s what we suggest you bring out the popcorn for MUMBAI MIRROR; January 01, 2010 Karthik Calling Karthik Farhan Akhtar’s next film is a story of a lovable loser whose chance meeting with his namesake changes his life forever. Karthik Calling Karthik has a star-studded credit list which includes Deepika Padukone, Javed Akhtar and Shankar, Ehsaan and Loy. Considering Farhan acts in the movies he either directs or produces, it seems like he is bent on wanting to typecast himself as the underdog. Weird but true! Bollywood’s biology lessons continue with My Name Is Khan. With 9/11 as the backdrop, the movie follows Rizwan Khan (SRK) who suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome. This is an autistic disease that makes the victim devoid of empathy. This, of course will give rise to many comical situations, just like Paa did. The film brings together the electrifying pair of Shah Rukh Khan and Kajol back on the silver screen. Add Karan Johar to the mix and you have a surefire hit. But come on, what is the film industry going to explore next, the common cold? Raajneeti A modern-day political rendition of the Mahabharata, Raajneeti boasts of an A-list star cast – Ajay Devgan, Arjun Rampal, Ranbir Kapoor, Nana Patekar, Vivek Oberoi, Manoj Bajpai and Katrina Kaif. The movie will use the dilemmas the characters in the book went through, and draw parallels with it in reel life. Katrina Kaif is reportedly playing the role of Sonia Gandhi in the movie. After all both of them are quite similar: accent – check; powerful woman – check; foreign descent – check; relationship with Salman Khan – no one really knows. Kites follows the story of Hrithik Roshan, a salsa dancer who falls in love with his student. Language barriers don’t matter here, love conquers almost all. But ‘something’ happens and it’s up to another student Kangna Ranaut to save the day. Maybe Sussanne walks into the movie or some other terrifying event occurs, we don’t know yet. But we hope the movie does better than Hrithik’s personal life. Raavana A modern day rendition of the mythological text, Raavana will get Aishwariya and Abhishek on the silver screen together for the first time after getting hitched. The movie has been plagued with problems – floods, elephants stomping around the set, maybe a higher power is sending a message through all of this. We won’t say anything, let the box-office decide. Action replay In Action Replay, a man ages backwards… Hmm, let’s see where have we heard this story before? A clear rip-off of the Hollywood hit, Benjamin Button, the film will feature Akshay Kumar and Aishwarya Rai. Director Vipul Shah is back with Akshay Kumar and hopes his dream run will continue. As much as producer Ambika Hinduja denies it, Teen Patti’s plot seems like a rip-off of the Hollywood blockbuster 21. The film features three ace actors, Ben Kingsley (supposedly not doing a cameo), Big B and Madhavan. With the help of a unique algorithm, Amitabh who plays a mathematical genius leads a team of college students to make a lot of money. Does Amitabh hold the algorithm for the movie’s success or will this be just another failed spin-off? Akshay Kumar has a slew of releases lined up next year and Houseful, the laugh-riot is one of them. The story follows Akshay who is very unlucky in life and is trying to find true love. The women helping him achieve this goal are Deepika Padukone, Lara Dutta and Jiah Khan. In real life, however, we think it’s the other way around. Akshay will end up teaching Deepika more than two expressions, Lara how to sign movies and Jiah Khan how not to be dropped from the one-odd film she has signed. Anees Bazmee has three mega comedy films lined up next year. One of them is No Problem which has quite a star cast – Anil Kapoor, Sanjay Dutt, Akshaye Khanna, Sushmita Sen, Kangna Ranaut, Paresh Rawal and Sunil Shetty. The film is a love story of impossible proportions. Another impossible proposition is Kangna actually makes people laugh after making them weep all these years. Well Done Abba Shyam Benegal has been travelling the world with his latest film, Well Done Abba. The satirical movie sees Boman Irani play two roles. Fitting two Bomans in one shot is a feat in itself and a testament to Benegal’s directorial skills. The movie follows the journey of Armaan Ali, a driver from Mumbai, who is out to find his daughter’s (Minissha Lamba) beau. Minissha, who has been alternating between commercial and semi-art house cinema, is reportedly playing a strong role in the film. The film that is loosely based on Whose Life is it Anyway? has Hrithik playing a paraplegic radio jockey. The film seems like a cry-till-your-tearbuds-dry-out movie – it explores the dilemma of euthanasia. Hrithik who believes in challenging himself till the cows come home, reportedly, spent hours in the wheelchair when not required to shoot, to get into the head of the character. Hrithik and Aishwarya reunite after Dhoom 2, and with Sanjay Leela Bhansali directing, it becomes one of the most awaited films in 2010, never mind Saawariya. Road, Movie Indian cinema has been through many fascinating twists and turns but none quite as romantic as touring cinemas. Essentially this means that the owner of one mounts the film projector on the back of a truck and the projectionist travels the length and breadth of a state with the truck, stops wherever there is a pilgrimage or a mela and projects the films he is carrying onto a white curtain which is then viewed by the locals sitting on both sides of the screen. Dev Benegal has made Road, Movie about one such projectionist (Satish Kaushik) and the young owner (Abhay Deol) and the adventures they have as they show their movies. The film has been very well received on the festival circuit. After playing twelve characters in What’s Your Raashee?, we’re sure Priyanka Chopra has become a stranger to herself, especially after the film tanked. Siddharth Anand, director of Ta Ra Rum Pum and Salaam Namaste, tries a romcom with Anjaana Anjaani. Starring Ranbir Kapoor and Priyanka, the film shows two strangers who fall in love and the journey they take together. Abhay Deol’s love for Delhi continues with his Bollywood release, Aisha where he plays another spoilt, rich Delhi brat. His character is modelled on Mr Knightly from Jane Austen’s novel, Emma. The movie is a romantic comedy that explores horrible mismatches. It also has a strong female role that has been bagged by Sonam Kapoor. Whether Sonam is strong enough for the film after two failed films (read: Saawariya and Delhi-6) is another matter. Ashutosh Gowariker is no stranger to large canvasses (think Lagaan, Swades, Jodhaa Akbar) so it’s no surprise that he is now filming another humongous project, Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Sey, which revolves around the Chittagong Uprising in the pre Independence days. After What’s Your Raashee?, this is another film adapted from a book, Do and Die by Manini Chatterjee. Abhishek Bachchan and Deepika Padukone lead the star cast and Nitin Chandrakant Desai leads the crew. Hopefully Ashutosh’s version of history will not be challenged, the way Jodhaa Akbar was. Inspired’ from the Hollywood masterpiece Phone Booth, Mani Shankar will look to re-create the magic in Bollywood. A man is trapped inside a phone booth, not because the door is stuck, but an assassin has a sniper rifle trained on him. Kangna plays the role of a journalist, Irrfan plays a cop and Sanjay Dutt the assassin. A true-blue rom-com, I Hate Luv Storys brings together the very glamourous Sonam Kapoor and the man with the melting eyes, Imran Khan. Described as a love story not meant to happen but which does happen, it is the story of a man who does not believe in love and a girl who does. They meet on a film set; a milieu the director Punit Malhotra is very familiar with, having cut his teeth on Karan Johar’s sets as an assistant director; and sparks fly. 1-800-Love When you have a tag line that says, ‘From the makers of Ghajini and Jaane Tu…’ you know you’re in for a commercial roller-coaster. Abbas Tyrewala dons the director’s hat for 1-800-LOVE again and the music score is Rahman’s handiwork. A telephone call connects two people – one who wants to die, the other who is searching for meaning in life. They meet, fall in love, yada yada… If you are watching the movie and you get bored of John Abraham’s three expression repertoire, close your eyes and maybe the music will do the trick for you. Tees Maar Khan has gotten more publicity that it ever dreamed of just because Shah Rukh Khan is not playing a role in Farah Khan’s film. But it does seem like SRK has rubbed off on the new lead actor, Akshay Kumar. Kumar plays a ‘stylish’ (metrosexual) conman in the film. He will be joined by Akshaye Khanna, but the female lead has not yet been confirmed. Hook Ya Crook Finally, Bollywood gets a movie that shows hope in combining two things that Indians love best – cinema and cricket. Viraj Pradhan (John Abraham) dreams of being a cricketer but is a repeat offender who gets thrown into a maximum security prison. The jail is a haven for cricket players, but Viraj wants much more, he wants to be part of the men in blue. The film has reportedly roped in Indian cricketers for the movie but going by the ads on TV, the word ‘acting talent’ isn’t part of the Indian cricket team’s vocabulary. Tags: 1-800-love, 21, 9/11, Abbas Tyrewala, abhay deol, Abhishek Bachchan, ACTION REPLAY, aisha, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Ajay Devgan, akshay kumar, akshaye khanna, ambika hinduja, Anees Bazmee, Anil Kapoor, anjaani anjaani, arjun rampal, armaan ali, Ashutosh Gowariker, asperger's syndrome, assassin, austism, Barbara Mori, ben kingsley, Benjamin Button, Big B, Blue, Bollywood, Boman Irani, chittagong uprising, conman, cop, Deepika Padukone, Delhi, Delhi 6, dhoom 2, do and die, ehsaan, elephants, emma, euthanasia, Farah khan, farhan akhtar, Fenil, floods, ghajini, Guzaarish, HOOK YA CROOK, houseful, Hrithik Roshan, hyderabad, i hate luv storys, Imran Khan, Irrfan Khan, jaane tu...ya jaane na, jane austen, january 1, javed akhtar, jiah khan, Jodhaa Akbar, journalist, kajol, Kangna Ranaut, Karan Johar, karthik calling karthik, Katrina Kaif, khelein hum jee jaan sey, Kites, knock on, lagaan, Lara Dutta, loy, Madhavan, mahabharata, manini chatterjee, MANOJ BAJPAI, minissha lamba, mr knightly, Mumbai, Mumbai Mirror, My Name Is Khan, Nana Patekar, nitin chandrakant desai, No Problem, Paa, pakhi, paraplegic, paresh rawal, phone booth, prison, priyanka chopra, punit malhotra, raajneeti, raavana, ramayana, Ranbir Kapoor, riswan khan, road movie, saawariya, sajid khan, Sajid Nadiadwala, salaam namaste, Sanjay Dutt, Sanjay Leela Bhansali, satish kaushik, shankar, shyam benegal, siddharth anand, Sonam Kapoor, sonia gandhi, SUNIL SHETTY, Sushmita Sen, sussanne, swades, ta ra rum pum, Teen Patti, tees maar khan, Vipul Shah, viraj pradhan, vivek oberoi, well done abba, what's your raashee Ranbir rocks Radio Mirchi FLYING HIGH: Ranbir Kapoor, Jaideep Sahni and Shimit Amin at the Radio Mirchi studios Ranbir Kapoor rocks Radio Mirchi studios in cheeky broadcast for 98.3 FM NIMISHA TIWARI Times News Network (BOMBAY TIMES; December 10, 2009) Look who’s flying rockets at the Radio Mirchi studios in Lower Parel…Ranbir Kapoor aka Rocket Singh, the sexiest Surd in town. Though he was clean shaven for this appearance, the hot new kid on Bollywood’s block said, “I look sexy even with a beard, you gotta check me out in Rocket Singh!” That toh the actors fans are bound to do when the Yashraj Films’ release hits the screens on Friday, but before that, you can catch the high-octane interaction Ranbir had at Radio Mirchi by tuning in to 98.3 FM and also listen to songs from the new film and win attractive merchandise. With him were Rocket Singh director Shimit Amin (of Chak De! India fame) and Jaideep Sahni who wrote the screenplay of the film. The actor spoke about his character in the film which is all about toppers in life — not necessarily toppers in school or college — even while making paper rockets and sending them darting all about the place. He joked with two female listeners of the radio station who were invited to meet him. One complimented him on his debut flick Saawariya. And the other asked him to adopt her “as maa, baap anything”. Both, Rocket Singh and Ranbir Kapoor blushed! Tags: 98.3 fm, adopt, baap, beard, Bollywood, Bombay Times, Chak De India, cheeky broadcast, clean shaven, college, december 10, female listeners, Fenil, Jaideep Sahni, lower parel, maa, nimisha tiwari, radio mirchi, radio station, Ranbir Kapoor, rockets, saawariya, school, screenplay, sexy, Shimit Amin, studios, Times News Network, toppers, Yash Raj Films Rocket Singh is my greatest film till date-Ranbir Kapoor By Joginder Tuteja, December 7, 2009 – 11:23 IST It’s the Ranbir Kapoor wave. Saawariya is a thing of the past and suddenly the nation has woken up to the emerging superstar who has not just delivered two back to back successes (Wake Up Sid, Ajab Prem Ki Ghazab Kahani) but also found a certain respectability coming his way as an actor. Belonging to those rare breed of newer generation actors who have also found being hailed as stars in their initial efforts itself (Hrithik Roshan is the last big name that comes to the mind), Ranbir Kapoor today finds himself in a comfortable position in the industry. With Rocket Singh – Salesman of the Year coming up next and all set to be a success, courtesy names like Shimit Amin (Chak De India, Ab Tak Chappan) and Yash Raj involved, he must be a little relieved, right? “Yes, I am and mainly due to the fact that Rocket Singh…. experience has taught me something which is that one can never be over and above a film. In totality, one has to look at the kind of respect that the film gets. I am sure Rocket Singh… will get all the respect that it deserves”, he says in a confident tone. Given the fact that the director at the helm of affairs is none other than Shimit Amin who gave Shah Rukh one of his most respected characterisation ever in Chak De India, what is Ranbir’s view about Rocket Singh…? “I can proudly say that Rocket Singh… is not just my greatest film till date but also one of the greatest films made in the recent times. Believe me, it belongs to a different world altogether”, he states positively. Coming up next is Rajneeti which seems like an altogether different outing for Ranbir when compared to the three releases he has enjoyed in 2009. Happy to have found himself in this glorious period where different films are being made? “Of course and the best part is that all these films are like chalk and cheese and have shaped up quite well”, says Ranbir. Meanwhile these are hectic times for Ranbir. He has been virtually promoting Wake Up Sid, Ajab Prem Ki Ghazab Kahani and Rocket Singh… back to back. He was also busy wrapping up the shoot of Ranjeeti while also participating in the overseas schedule of Siddharth Anand’s Anjaana Anjaani with Priyanka Chopra in the middle of it all. Given the fact that recently even Amitabh Bachchan commented that promoting a movie is tougher than shooting, does he too believe in the saying? “Ask me”, he smiles, “No really, it is no fun. Thankfully both Wake Up Sid and Ajab Prem… succeeded, so it means that I continued to talk about them even after their release. Now there is Rocket Singh – Salesman of the Year arriving in a few days so I guess there is still no time for rest. Thankfully, shooting for Anjaana Anjaani acted as a breather of sorts.” BOLLYWOOD HUNGAMA.COM Tags: ab tak chappan, Ajab Prem Ki Ghazab Kahani, Amitabh Bachchan, anjaana anjaani, Bollywood, bollywood hungama, Chak De India, december 7, Fenil, greatest film, Hrithik Roshan, Joginder Tuteja, overseas schedule, priyanka chopra, raajneeti, Rajneeti, Ranbir Kapoor, respect, rocket singh, rocket singj-salesman of the year, saawariya, Shah Rukh Khan, Shimit Amin, siddharth anand, superstar, Wake Up Sid, Yash Raj Films Sonam Kapoor on the men in her life on screen MAN TALK: Sonam Kapoor MEENA IYER Times News Network (BOMBAY TIMES; November 27, 2009) Despite her two films, Saawariya and Delhi 6, not making way for her at the box office, Sonam Kapoor is still counted among Bollywood’s more sensational leading ladies. She did manage to pick up accolades for her two performances and is being closely watched by the big daddies of cinema because she has talent in abundance… not to mention that ‘it’ quality to make her soar. In one of those off-the-cuff interviews, Sonam talks to BT about her leading men, and her varying chemistry with each of them… My chemistry with Ranbir is special. Ranbir will also always be the most special costar in my life because he is my first hero. After Saawariya I was offered a couple of films with him but if we haven’t worked together, it is because I’ve decided that when we do team up it must be for something sensational. I don’t want to do a multiple heroine project with him. Both of us must have equal parts. Shooting for I Hate Luv Stories is a riot. Imran and I are like two puppies always getting at each other. Our pairing is similar to the Dimple Kapadia-Rishi Kapoor one in Bobby. We’re both young, we’re constantly pulling each others’ legs on the set. It’s a young, fun pairing that is vibrant. He’s a fabulous performer. Aisha wouldn’t be the same without Abhay in it. He keeps feeding me humus with carrots/cucumber. And I find our chemistry similar to the Julia Roberts-Richard Gere one in Pretty Woman. Abhay is more mature and grounded than I am. Also he is very intelligent. I love spending time with him on sets. Well, what can I say? I think I played the perfect Bittu to him in Delhi 6. We haven’t been offered any other film together as yet. Those reports that I was offered Ashutosh Gowarikar’s Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Se before Deepika Padukone signed it, are untrue. Of course, I’d love to work with Abhishek again. Tags: abhay deol, aisha, Ashutosh Gowariker, bittu, bobby, Bollywood, Bombay Times, box office, BT, Deepika Padukone, Delhi 6, dimple kapadia, Fenil, first hero, i hate luv stories, Imran Khan, intelligent, julia roberts, khelein hum jee jaan se, Meena Iyer, men talk, multiple heroine project, november 27, preety woman, puppies, Ranbir Kapoor, richard gere, riot, Rishi Kapoor, saawariya, sensational, Sonam Kapoor, talent, Times News Network I make the best pair with Konkona Sen-Sharma-Ranbir Kapoor Man of the moment: Ranbir Kapoor Ranbir Kapoor fell in love with movies while still at school. He talks to Subhash K Jha about love, life and how actors are overrated TIMES LIFE! (October 18, 2009) RANBIR KAPOOR’S earliest memories of his grandfather Raj Kapoor make him smile as he gets ready for his first shot for the day in Bhopal where he’s shooting for Prakash Jha’s Rajneeti. “I was his favourite grandchild. Whenever my mom shouted at me I would call him up and he would fire her. I, being his first grandson, was special. Every weekend, the grandkids used to go to his home in Chembur. He kept a bag of toffees and gave us one every time we salomed him. I once asked him for a suit when he was visiting Russia. He got back two bags of suits in every colour possible. He never shopped for anyone else.” Wonder if the suits had anything to do with it, but Ranbir became an ardent fan of Raj Kapoor’s cinema in school. “It was during my last days of school. That’s when I realised I wanted to be part of the film industry. The first RK film I saw was Sri 420. It influenced me deeply.” Ranbir’s father Rishi Kapoor wanted his son to get a formal education before he became an actor. “I completed my Standard 12 in Mumbai. Then I went to film school in America although everyone suggested I go to business school. But I don’t think I ever could do anything apart from movies. My father supported that and agreed to send me to acting school.” Ranbir loved the experience of living alone in the US. “I learnt to value my family and my money. I missed my parents. I met them three times a year in Mumbai. In New York, my friends and I would take a train to Queens to see new Hindi films. Being in touch with Hindi films and music during my stay in the US made me determined to turn a director at the earliest.” ‘I’M REALISTIC ABOUT LOVE’ Ranbir didn’t have a girlfriend in the US. “But I had my first girlfriend before that in school in Mumbai when I was in Class 7. I was really naïve then. I didn’t understand love. When that relationship ended I went into depression. I thought I would never fall in love again. Now I think I’ve become more realistic about love. Love is a beautiful feeling. It almost equals cinema in my list of passions.” Ranbir’s parents have been married for over 30 years. “I firmly believe in marriage. Marriages today go wrong for temporary pleasure and lust. My marriage will be for keeps.” The Wake Up Sid actor has seen his parents’ marriage go through turbulent times. “That’s what makes any relationship stronger. My sister and I were never kept in the dark about my parents’ fights. If after marriage, God forbid, my wife and I fight, I’d make sure our children don’t feel insecure.” Ranbir feels Rishi Kapoor and Neetu Singh make the best ever pair on and off screen. “Just as Raj Kapoor made the best onscreen pair with Nargisji. Me? I think I make the best pair with Konkona Sen-Sharma.” He admits, “Yup, I think I have a wonderful life. But I want more. Much more. I don’t want my life to get perfect. Because then there’d be nothing more to strive for.” The way he’s handling his career would have made his grandfather Raj Kapoor proud. If Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Saawariya brought Ranbir instant notice, his new film Wake Up Sid has given the young actor a cult status. Ranbir isn’t taking the rave reviews seriously. He pushes on doing his work, sometimes to the exclusion of a personal life. Girlfriend Deepika Padukone recently had to fly in to Bhopal to spend time with the country’s latest heartthrob. But when he’s shooting, Ranbir detests distractions. He’s so focussed on his work the people close to him feel left out. For Shimit Amin’s Rocket Singh Salesman Of The Year, which releases next, Ranbir learnt to speak fluent Punjabi. “Rocket Singh made me a better human being. Not too many roles do that. Though my mother is Sikh, I didn’t speak fluent Punjabi. But I started speaking Punjabi for the role of the Sikh. I wore a kadaa throughout the making of the film. I had a beard and turban. I read the Guru Granth. This film made me know and respect the Sikh culture and religion.” ‘ACTORS ARE OVERRATED’ Ranbir is all set to buy himself a home, “It’s just property acquisition. I’ll never live in it, not even when I get married. I can’t stay away from my parents.” He also has a wishlist of 40 directors he wants to work with. It’s not just in his head. The names are diligently written down and being ticked off one by one. “For me, cinema and not just acting is a passion. I love filmmakers. Actors are generally just tools, and overrated.” Ranbir reveals his plans as a director. “It sounds too pompous to say I’m already directing a film. But I’ve been inspired by the work of Raj Kapoor, Guru Dutt, Mehboob Khan, Bimal Roy. My father made me watch their works. I’m not influenced by actors. I’m influenced by these directors. They made me passionate about cinema. I’ve a number of ideas for what I want to make. But I’m not a good writer. I would definitely like to cast myself because I know my film would be about a boy my age. And I’d like to believe no one else would fit the bill better.” He lights up when he speaks about his father Rishi Kapoor. “I loved my father in Love Aaj Kal. He’s a source of inspiration. His passion for any film, good or bad, is exemplary.” He has signed only one new film. “I want to take a month off. On the other hand, these are the best years of my life and I might as well make the best of them. Truth is, I feel guilty when I’m not working. I would rather be on a film set than anywhere else.” Pausing to think, Ranbir says, “I think God has already made plans for me. How things turn out are not in my hands. All I can do is follow my conviction.” timeslife@timesgroup.com Tags: america, beard, Bhopal, Bimal Roy, Bollywood, business school, chembur, class 7, Deepika Padukone, depression, Fenil, film school, first girlfriend, first shot, fluent punjabi, formal education, girlfriend, good writer, grandchild, grandfather, guru dutt, guru granth, hindi films, kadaa, konkona sen sharma, LOVE AAJ KAL, lust, Mehboob Khan, money, nargisji, Neetu Singh, new york, october 18, Prakash Jha, property acquisition, queens, Raj Kapoor, Rajneeti, Ranbir Kapoor, Rishi Kapoor, rk film, Rocket Singh-Salesman of the year, russia, saawariya, Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Shimit Amin, sikh, sri 420, standard 12, Subhash K Jha, suit, temporary pleasure, times life!, toffees, turban, turbulent times, US, Wake Up Sid Fenil’s Bollywood Talk # 68 Posted by: fenilseta on: October 1, 2009 In: Fenil's Bollywood Talk WAKE UP SID OR DO KNOT DISTURB THIS WEEKEND? I had stated in my talk no 22 as to how youth-oriented films have a great chance of succeeding at the BO since the young constitute almost 60-70% of the moviegoing audience. Thus, there are loads of expectations from Wake Up Sid (WUS), that is all set to release tomorrow. It seems Ranbir Kapoor had made an unintentional norm to release his films on public holidays! WUS releases on Gandhi Jayanti while Ranbir’s previous films, Saawariya (2007) and Bachna Ae Haseeno (2008) were released on the day of Diwali and Independece Day respectively! A lot of ‘firsts’ are associated with WUS, produced by Karan Johar. It is the first time that a KJo produced film is shot entirely in Mumbai. All the rest of KJo films were shot abroad (except Kaal but it wasn’t filmed in the city). This is the first film of Karan Johar that would be distributed by UTV Motion Pictures and not by Yash Raj Films (had stated this point in talk no 51). The music isn’t larger than life and the film is made on a low budget, unlike other Johar’s grand films! The promos of this film are rocking and indicate perfectly as to what the film is all about. The plus point of WUS is its plot which is very relevant and the character of Sid is extremely relatable. In short, half of the battle is won! That’s because characters where almost everyone can identify with manages to strike a chord with the audiences. Taare Zameen Par, for instance, worked big time as it wonderfully executed the separation anxiety faced by a child when separated from his parents for a brief period of time. Everyone must have faced such a situation at least once during their childhood and hence, the film was loved a lot. Similarly, WUS also has high chances of impressing the audience. The Ranbir Kapoor-Konkona Sen Sharma pairing, though unconventional, manages to rock! In fact, both are top performers and look wonderful together. I am dying to see them as a pair as I appreciate both of them a lot! Couple of months back, somebody on a social networking website had wrongly stated that WUS is a love story of a younger handsome hunk and an older not-so-beautiful woman. Unfortunately, the rumour spread far and wide and director Ayan Mukherjee had to give his word about the rumour. He also made a clapworthy dialogue, “Who says Konkona is not beautiful?” I agree with him completely. Konkona looks stunning and has given wonderful performances, for which she has also won many awards and accolades. Mark my words-Konkona will pitch in an excellent performance in WUS! With such a strong buzz about the film, it is definitely going to take a good opening in the metros. However, it may not find many takers in the small centres. Let’s hope WUS works, provided it’s a well-made film! Do Knot Disturb (DKD), on the other hand, may see a better opening than WUS. The Govinda-David Dhawan combo has worked well in the past and there are tremendous expectations from DKD. Which film are you interested in? Do let me know! WHY ISNT SANJAY GUPTA PROMOTING ACID FACTORY? Marketing and publicizing a film is very important, especially in the current scenario, where so many films are releasing week after week. But still, some filmmakers don’t care and ultimately, their movie flops due to no hype. I fear that something similar can happen with Acid Factory, produced by Sanjay Gupta and directed by Suparn Verma. There has been very little promotion of the film and I can hardly see its promos on TV. With just 8 days to go for the film (its releasing next Friday, October 9), Gupta and his team should be aggressively promoting their film. Most of the promos are just released on the net, which is not a good thing to do as majority of people have a better access to television then to the internet. The new theatrical trailer of the film is fabulous and it really looks like an excellent stylish thriller. I have uploaded the promo below-do not miss it! And let’s hope better sense prevails and that we can see and hear more of Acid Factory in the coming days! This post first appeared on MouthShut.com: http://www.mouthshut.com/diary/ddidnsrro/Fenils-Bollywood-Talk68 Tags: 2007, 2008, 8 days, abroad, acid factory, ayan mukherjee, bachna ae haseeno, Bollywood, child, childhood, current scenario, David Dhawan, diwali, dkd, Do Knot Disturb, Fenil, Fenil's Bollywood Talk, Gandhi Jayanti, govinda, grand, handsome hunk, independence day, kaal, Karan Johar, KJo, low budget, marketing, metros, moviegoing audience, Mumbai, net, october 9, parents, plot, promos, public holidays, publicizing, Ranbir Kapoor, Ranbir Kapoor-Konkona Sen Sharma pairing, relatable, relevant, rumour, saawariya, separation anxiety, sid, small centres, social networking website, suparn verma, Taare Zameen Par, talk no 51, television, theatrical trailer, TV, unconventional, UTV Motion Pictures, Wake Up Sid, wus, Yash Raj Films, young, youth-oriented films Prateik Babbar to work with SLB Smita Patil’s son Prateik Babbar may have refused Saawariya, but now he’s on board Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s next production, My Friend Pinto By Subhash K Jha (MUMBAI MIRROR; August 30, 2009) One of Sanjay Bhansali’s desires, of working on a film with Smita Patil, was never fulfilled, but the director has signed her son Prateik Babbar to do a film with him. Prateik will be featuring in a film produced by Sanjay later this year. Titled My Friend Pinto, the film will be directed by Raghav Dar who assisted Mani Ratnam on Guru and also worked as the associate assistant to Abbas Tyrewala on Jaane Tu Ya… Jaane Na. And it was during the filming of JTYJN that the Prateik and Raghav decided to work together. My Friend Pinto will be Prateik’s first lead role. He had an appreciated cameo in JTYJN and Aamir Khan plays the lead in his next, Kiran Rao’s Dhobi Ghat. Prateik’s aunt Manya Patil is only too happy for Prateik. A thrilled Manya said, “Do you know Prateik was offered Saawariya at the very initial stage of the film when Sanjay was undecided about who to cast as the lead? But back then, Prateik was not interested in acting. He was at a stage in life where he was not sure which way to go next. Then Abbas offered him JTYJN. It seemed too small a role to me, but Abbas asked me to trust him with the role, he said was tailor-made for Prateik. And just like he had assured me, the role was good and Prateik’s career is shaping up well.” Prateik said, “I’m happy to work with Mr Bhansali.” Manya Patil Tags: Aamir Khan, Abbas Tyrewala, associate assistant, august 30, Bollywood, dhobi ghat, Fenil, guru, jaane tu...ya jaane na, JTYJN, kiran rao, mani ratnam, manya patil, mr bhansali, Mumbai Mirror, my friend pinto, prateik babbar, raghav dar, saawariya, Sanjay Leela Bhansali, smita patil, Subhash K Jha

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511911

__label__wiki

MOSKVA … Between the covers It might be thought that all the books about the problems of law and order in communist and post-glasnost Russia have already been written. Didn’t Martin Cruz Smith corner the market with his accounts of Arcady Renko and his tussles with the authorities? Or what about Boris Starling and Vodka, his tale of gangsters and oligarchs in a Russia struggling to come to terms with the free market? Jack Grimwood’s Moskva sets out to convince us that there is room for one more tale of conflicted lives in a modern Russia full of paradox and uncertainty. The book came out in hardback earlier this year, and is now available in paperback, from Penguin. Does Grimwood, who made his name writing science fiction and fantasy novels, hit the spot? Tom Fox is one of those rough, tough individuals who is paid by men in suits to go to dangerous places and do unpleasant things for Queen and Country. He has, however, been doubly traumatised: firstly, a tour of duty working undercover in the bitter sectarian war in Northern Ireland has left him psychologically scarred; secondly, his marriage is pretty much over after his teenage daughter drove her Mini into a tree at 80 mph. Suicide? Drugs? No-one knows for sure, but the blame game has been played to its conclusion, and Fox has lost. Now, in the winter of 1986, his instability is such that his paymasters and handlers in London have packed him off to Moscow, ostensibly to write a report on the state of religion in Gorbachev’s Russia but, in reality, he has been sent far away to keep him out of trouble. As soon as Fox makes the acquaintance of ambassador Sir Edward Marston and his wife, he is left in little doubt that he is as welcome as a man with something vile on the sole of his shoe trampling over the embassy Axminster. At a reception Fox meets Sir Edward’s fifteen year-old step-daughter Alex and, noticing that she has self harm marks on her lower arms, makes a flippant remark which he soon has cause to regret. “Beneath her cuffs, not quite visible and not quite hidden, raw welts crossed both wrists. A blunt knife would do it. ‘Nothing.’ ‘Exactly’ ‘Wrist to elbow,’ he said.’Wrist to elbow. If you’re serious.’” Despite their disdain for Fox, Sir Edward and his wife Anna soon have need of his rough talents when Alex goes missing. There is no ransom note, and no apparent motive except a possible link with the body of a dead boy found frozen in the snow near The Kremlin. Fox is an excellent linguist, and his near-perfect Russian enables him to ‘go native’ in the search for Alex. His investigation takes him to a back street drinking den run by Dennisov – a one-legged veteran of Russia’s Afghanistan war – and his sister Yelena. Their father is a distinguished veteran of that most blood-stained period in modern history which ran from 22nd June 1941 to 9th May 1945, known with reverence by many Russians as The Great Patriotic War. The further Fox digs into the mystery of Alex’s abduction, the more he realises that there is a motive – but one which has deep roots in the days and deeds of April 1945 when the Russians unleashed 20 armies, 6,300 tanks and 8,500 aircraft to crush the defenders of Berlin. The breadth of this novel in terms of time sometimes makes it hard to work out who has done what to whom. Patience – and a spot of back-tracking – will pay dividends, however, and the narrative provides a salutary reminder of the sheer magnitude of the numbers of Russian dead in WWII, and the resultant near-psychosis about The West. To top-and-tail this review and answer the earlier question as to whether Jack Grimwood (right) “hits the spot”, I can give a resounding “Yes!”. Yes, the plot is complex, and yes, you will need your wits about you, but yes, it’s a riveting read; yes, Tom Fox is a flawed but engaging central character, and yes, Grimwood has sharp-elbowed his way into the line-up of novelists who have written convincing crime novels set in the enigma that is Russia. Moskva is available in hardback, paperback and Kindle.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511917

__label__wiki

THE POSTMAN DELIVERS . . . Bartram, Connolly & Hall THE TANGO SCHOOL MYSTERY by Peter Bartram Welcome to Brighton, England – where they do like to murder beside the seaside…Want to know what it’s like when a quiet romantic dinner ends in murder? Ace reporter Colin Crampton and his feisty girlfriend Shirley Goldsmith are tucking into their meal when Shirley discovers more blood on her rare steak than she’d expected. And once again Colin is on the trail of a big story that can only end in more murder. Colin reckons he’s cracked the story when he uncovers a plot involving a sinister figure from the past. A Tango Academy seems to lie at the heart of the conspiracy. But nothing is quite what it seems as Colin peels away the layers of the mystery. He tangles with a cast of memorable characters including a professor of witchcraft, the former commander of an army mobile latrine unit, and a tango instructor with two left feet. Join Colin and Shirley for another madcap mystery in Swinging Sixties’ Brighton, where the laughs are never far from the action. The Tango School Mystery is out now, and a full review will be posted on https://fullybooked2017.com very soon. THE WOMAN in the WOODS by John Connolly Charlie Parker – crime fiction’s most haunted private investigator – is back. As fans of the Portland, Maine detective know, death isn’t just part of the his natural human life cycle – it often assumes corporal form and walks alongside the living. The remains of a young woman are uncovered when a tree is uprooted, and when the body is examined, it is discovered that she had given birth shortly before her death. A Star of David has been carved in the bark of a tree, and Parker is hired by a Jewish lawyer to learn if the death has any anti-semitic overtones. A mysterious – and deadly – man named Quayle is also keen to learn more about the dead woman, but even more anxious to discover what became of the new-born child. Along with his companion – a creature named Mors who is truly from hell – Quayle’s path is destined to cross that of Parker. Charlie’s deadly pals Louis and Angel are in attendance, but Angel is there in spirit only, as he is recovering from an operation to remove a deadly tumour. Louis cannot comprehend why his partner has been chosen by the Cancer God, and his incomprehension turns to anger, which he vents on a young man who is unwise enough to have Confederate flags flying from his truck. The Woman In The Woods is published by Hodder & Stoughton and is out now. OUR KIND OF CRUELTY by Araminta Hall Obsession, deception, emotional perversion, sexual mania, psychological sadism…? Yes, indeed. Araminta Hall ticks all of those toxic boxes in her eagerly awaited new thriller, which tells the tale of Mike and Verity. At the very heart of their unusual relationship is a game of seduction and danger, but with Verity’s impending marriage, the game has to end. At least it would in any normal relationship, but of all the adjectives that could be applied to what Mike and Verity get up to, the word ‘normal’ comes way, way, way down the list. So, what happens? Death is what has to happen, but the Grim Reaper seldom walks alone. Our Kind of Cruelty is published by Century; it will be available as a Kindle on 19th April, in hardback on 3rd may, and in January 2019 as a paperback. SWITCHED ON: THE STORY OF 1960s TV GAME SHOWS . . . by Peter Bartram It’s 7.00pm on a Thursday in September 1964 and a goodly proportion of the British population are settling down in front of their television sets to watch one of the most popular shows of the time. The programme, Double Your Money, starts with a catchy tune that ends with lyrics – “double your money and try to get rich” – that leave no doubt what the show is about. The credit titles fade and a thin man with a cheesy grin, popping eyes, and a faintly transatlantic accent, steps in front of the cameras. Hughie Green was one of a group of 1960s TV presenters who made their names as game show hosts. By today’s standards, most of the shows seem corny. In Double Your Money, the contestant would answer a question on the subject of their choice – sport and spelling were two favourites – to win £1. If they got it right, they’d move on to a £2, then £4 question all the way up to £32. If they answered that correctly, some had an opportunity to move on to the “Treasure Trail” where they could win up to £1,000 – equivalent to £18,600 in today’s money. Most of these shows turned up on ITV – commercial television started broadcasting in Britain in 1955 – because the publically-funded BBC didn’t think it right to give away licence-payers’ money in cash prizes. The BBC stuck to more cerebral game shows, like University Challenge, which first broadcast in 1962 and was based on a US television show called College Bowl. One thing is certain, Colin Crampton, crime reporter on the Brighton Evening Chronicle, and his girlfriend Shirley Goldsmith would not have been among the 15 million people tuning into Double Your Money. They were too busy chasing the killers in The Tango School Mystery. It meant they would also have missed other top game shows of the time, such as Take Your Pick, hosted by Michael Miles, a character with all the on-screen charm of a second-hand car salesman. A car – definitely not second-hand – would sometimes be the star prize on the show. To get a shot at winning a prize, contestants had to answer three out of four general knowledge questions. They would then pick the key to one of 10 boxes. Seven contained good prizes, such as a TV set or holiday, while three held booby prizes. Before they got to open the box, Miles would try to buy the key back off the contestant in a kind of reverse Dutch auction. Most players resisted and ended up with whatever the box had to offer. As the 1960s progressed, TV companies sought more and more inventive formulae for their game shows. Criss Cross Quiz was based on the US show Tic Tac Dough. It was presented first by Jeremy Hawk and then by Barbara Kelly. Two contestants played a game of nought and crosses. Each took turns to answer a question to get a nought or a cross in a square. They won £20 for every square they filled or £40 for the centre square. The winner – the first to get three noughts or crosses in a row – became the champion and took on another challenger. The Golden Shot involved contestants, either at home on the telephone or an isolation booth in the studio, directing a blindfolded cameraman with a crossbow bolted to his camera. The contestant could see the target on the TV screen and directed the cameraman with instructions like “left a bit”, or “down then stop” et until they’d lined up the target and gave the order to fire. On one occasion, a contestant took part from a telephone box. He was watching the screen on a television in a shop window. Half way through his directions to the cameraman the shop TV was turned off. But it wasn’t only big-prize game shows that pulled in viewers during the Swinging Sixties. Panel games, such as What’s My Line and Call My Bluff, were popular, especially with older viewers. But other game shows, such as Concentration, Jokers Wild and Password, are long forgotten. Which only goes to prove that even among game shows there were winners and losers. Peter Bartram’s new Colin Crampton mystery is out now, and a full review of the book will be on here very shortly!

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511918

__label__cc

The Case for Open Objectivism By Azrael Rand, October 16, 2018 in The Critics of Objectivism Doug Morris 25 Other Public-visible Contact Info:[email protected] If there are "non-minor differences in characteristics that aren't just superficial" among races in some statistical sense, there is still even greater individual variation, and it is still essential to think of people and treat them as individuals. None of this shakes the moral foundation of Objectivism as it applies to people with free will. People without free will are insane or severely mentally retarded and are a rare special case. People have natural incentives to do things like eating, drinking water, staying warm, and having sex. As long as we have free will, we can give reason the final word on what we do, although a lot of people fail to do this. If there are any natural incentives to be tribal, the same applies. Eiuol 396 Location:NJ 17 hours ago, Azrael Rand said: I would advocate a solution quite similar to the one your would likely advocate for and that is the freedom of association within the borders of any given country. Then why do you go on about IQ differences and "moral implications"? If you simply will let it go and allow people to live according to their free will, there couldn't be any implication. People who are less smart than me, I don't treat them as morally inferior, it really doesn't matter, because sometimes they can do things even better than me, and still share similar moral values sometimes. I mean, I think you're wrong to think that homogenous society is the inevitable result of free association, I think heterogeneous society is what happens when you allow people to live according to their own values. But if that's only difference, I have no beef with your political position. And what does your position on immigration have to do with race? If your issue is somebody entering the country illegally, that has nothing to do with race. That's an issue of law, that applies to all individuals, regardless of race. Azrael Rand 0 6 hours ago, Eiuol said: I can answer that by approaching the scenario from the opposite side: If immigration isn't about race then we should just eliminate immigration caps and allow entry to anyone from any foreign country so long as they aren't murderers and rapists. If race and tribalism aren't an issue, then the domestic population becoming a political minority should have no bearing whatsoever on the fabric of society. In my opinion advocacy and insistence on "legal immigration" is a means for conservatives to attempt to justify their white in-group preference without having to publicly endorse racist viewpoints. "We're all for legal immigration" they say, except they're really not when you look at public opinion surveys on immigration. The left of course sees right through this and calls them out on it every time. Why not change the law so everybody can come here so that there's no breach of law? Then why do you go on about IQ differences and "moral implications"? If you simply will let it go and allow people to live according to their free will, there couldn't be any implication. As I stated before I advocate for a social system in harmony with human nature. Selfishness is a defining feature of our inherent nature and freedom is the logical means to account for it. That doesn't change the fact that we are also tribal, but given the selfish aspect of human nature I believe it's best to use culture to account for the tribal aspect assuming where talking about an objective system (I could be wrong here but that's my current view). Of course we haven't achieved the objective system yet so this means we have to work with the tools at our disposal (statism) to try to reach the objective system. People who are less smart than me, I don't treat them as morally inferior, it really doesn't matter, because sometimes they can do things even better than me, and still share similar moral values sometimes. Same here, but we're not talking about individual interactions but a variety of potential distributions of more and less intelligent people in society. All things equal, if we increase the number off less intelligent people in society, society will become less free and less prosperous. The fact that more intelligent and less intelligent people can and do prosper (materially and emotionally) based on mutual interactions makes the preceding fact a very hard pill to swallow (emotionally) but that doesn't change the fact that reducing the average level of intelligence in society has adverse consequences. I personally don't mind living by the notion of noblesse obligue to a certain extent so long as our efforts are appreciated and we create a humane society in the process, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Based on human nature, I'm proposing natural in-group preference being a good first draft for drawing that line. 10 hours ago, Doug Morris said: People without free will are insane or severely mentally retarded and are a rare special case. If I were a sophist by trade I'd discredit the entirety of your post based on this assertion alone. Free will is possible and it is arguably what makes us humans special but saying that people without free will are a rare occurrence or special case is contrary to the fact that humans are led by emotions not reason. Unless you take active steps to cultivate and maintain it you're essentially just chasing dopamine hits in the here and now. Taking an objective look around you, observing the continuous erosion of freedoms, how could you possibly claim that free will is the norm? The answer to the question is that this assertion wasn't based on an objective observation rather based on wishful thinking (emotional reasoning). That's comparing apples (individual variances) to oranges (group variances). As I stated in my reply to Eiuol's post, decreasing the average IQ in a society has consequences and that's without any consideration to even factoring in the tribal aspect of human nature. Yes we should treat people kindly and we should hold people accountable to a shared standard but what that standard is depends on the population in question. Average IQ, among other factors, impacts this standard. The more diverse the population the more the standard will have to change otherwise you won't be able to enforce it from a practical perspective. If you have a low IQ and low empathy population where certain forms of rape are culturally accepted you cannot legally enforce rape laws if this group of people makes up a significant portion of your population. A society cannot function properly with half of its citizenry incarcerated. People have natural incentives to do things like eating, drinking water, staying warm, and having sex. As long as we have free will, we can give reason the final word on what we do, although a lot of people fail to do this. If there are any natural incentives to be tribal, the same applies.  Given our selfish nature and human nature in general you can only suppress natural urges to a certain extent and call it a success. We all know what happens when you outlaw sexual intercourse. The Catholic Church being a perfect example to illustrate this point. Or take a look at all the leftist male feminist supporters that treat women as less than human. Edited November 17, 2018 by Azrael Rand 3 hours ago, Azrael Rand said: I can answer that by approaching the scenario from the opposite side: Ah, by now it's safe to just say you're a racist, plain and simple. I think all I can say now is I hope you interact with more varieties of people, because I don't think persuasive argument will change your mind anymore. As I stated before I advocate for a social system in harmony with human nature. Selfishness is a defining feature of our inherent nature and freedom is the logical means to account for it. That doesn't change the fact that we are also tribal, but given the selfish aspect of human nature I believe it's best to use culture to account for the tribal aspect assuming where talking about an objective system (I could be wrong here but that's my current view). Of course we haven't achieved the objective system yet so this means we have to work with the tools at our disposal (statism) to try to reach the objective system. Of all the meta-ethical theories floating around in philosophy, there are usually 4 types: god, society, reason, or nature. Usually attacks on Rand's views as a naturalist come from one of the other templates. A Kantian, for example, might claim Rand fails to attach moral claims to pure reason, a conventionalist might claim public agreement lends to more altruism than Rand wants to allow. You seem to want to challenge Rand's views from within the context of human nature, by pointing to some tribalistic aspects of human nature that we've ignored or failed to see. You mentioned a number of times bow, humans are led by emotions, humans are tribal, humans are inherently this or that. But it's not as if merely asserting this or that constitutes a reason to believe something. It's fine if you want to map out the territory, well if humans were inherently interested in only members of their own race, then some sort of racist ethical prescription might follow, but your posts in here suffer from serious "argument from assertion" fallacies. To simply assert is not to establish. It's as if your claims become their own mantra "I see what you're saying but, humans are inherently tribalistic, QED." Is this the proper way to do philosophy? Is this intellectual honesty or ethical discussion? There are many challenges to a neo-Aristotelian conception of human nature, a Randian could challenge, eg., A Nietzschean account by challenging Nietzsche's views of human nature. But just making assertions and repeating them as a mantra is sophism, not philosophy. Moreover, there are many conservative and communitarian critiques of liberty that point to a supposed inherent tribalism, and establish statism to arrange society in tribalistic patterns. MacIntyre, for example, argues against cosmopolitan liberalism from even a largely Aristotelian framework. But he does more than assert "humans are tribal" over and over. The right-Hegelians wished to establish a tribal society in the basis of racist scientific claims. In any event, your original post was about being an "open Objectivism" and revision of certain claims. It's not clear how, if one adopted the above views, one would be offering a divergence from, rather than new version of, Rand's views. If one is rejecting free will, the efficacy of reason, and open ended human sociality, and opposition to statism, this just comes across as petty opportunism or entryism, rather than being an honest conservative critic. softwareNerd reacted to this 21 hours ago, Eiuol said: So we're back to insults and name calling again. That's unfortunate, considering I thought we'd be able to move beyond that. So what's next? Do I get to look forward to you moderating my posts again because you disagree with the content of my speech? I certainly hope that won't be the case. 5 hours ago, 2046 said: But it's not as if merely asserting this or that constitutes a reason to believe something. It's fine if you want to map out the territory, well if humans were inherently interested in only members of their own race, then some sort of racist ethical prescription might follow, but your posts in here suffer from serious "argument from assertion" fallacies. I understand how you might interpret my position as an amalgamation of assertions fetched out of thin air but there's actually a little more substance based on the work of numerous social scientists and authors: Us being led by emotion not reason: Jonathan Haidt, Robert Chialdini, Scott Adams, Daniel Kahneman. Groupish / Tribal nature: Ryan Enos, Jonathan Haidt, et al. My key point is that Ayn Rand's Objectivism does not account for human nature in a complete and integrated fashion. Yes we are mostly selfish creatures by nature that possess a faculty capable of reasoning (with certain limitations attached) but that doesn't mean we get to sweep the other aspects of human nature under the rug and call it a day. Not sure why you're comparing me to other thinkers / critics of Objectivism. Either what I'm saying is correct at face value or it isn't. Why compare me to other thinkers as opposed to holding my argument to the objective standard of facts, reason and evidence? If one is rejecting free will, the efficacy of reason, and open ended human sociality, and opposition to statism, this just comes across as petty opportunism or entryism, rather than being an honest conservative critic. If what I wrote above doesn't fully address this concern I would add the following: Why is it the American experiment is failing? Ayn Rand proposed a hypothesis and a solution. Her solution has yet to materialize despite her best efforts. My assertion is that Ayn Rand's solution has yet to materialize because she did not account for certain factors as part of her analysis in properly defining the problem and therefor her solution to the problem was inadequate and ineffective. My train of thought is that if we properly account for the things she did not account for we should be able to formulate an effective solution to the problem we are facing today. So we're back to insults and name calling again. That's unfortunate, considering I thought we'd be able to move beyond that. "Racist" describes your position, that is, advocating for specifically judging people based on their race rather than their individual characteristics, specifically for perceived threat and destabilization of your country. You were telling me about immigration policies you want in reference to race, you didn't mention anything about, say, only allowing people with a certain IQ to become citizens or immigrate (although wrong, not racist). Moreover, this isn't an implication of what you're saying, it is what you're saying, you seem to just want a nice word without the connotations. If you think it is offensive because it is inaccurate, and you don't want to judge people collectively according to their race, you should fix what you're saying about immigration. Otherwise, you should own up to the most accurate label you can, even if it is distasteful. Edited November 18, 2018 by Eiuol 2046 reacted to this I understand how you might interpret my position as an amalgamation of assertions fetched out of thin air but there's actually a little more substance based on the work of numerous social scientists and authors: Us being led by emotion not reason: Jonathan Haidt, Robert Chialdini, Scott Adams, Daniel Kahneman. Umm, I don't know about the others, but I've read a lot of Haidt, in fact I highly recommend particularly his The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom (2006) which I think is highly cogenial to a general Rand-friendly perspective. In any event, knowing this is what you're basing your "humans are inherently tribal" mantra off of, I'm 100% in agreement with Eiuol that you literally don't know what you're talking about. Haidt isn't claiming what you take him to be claiming. You seem to be reading into him a view that is not present. It hardly follows from that fact that human flourishing is inherently social, or that human flourishing requires social relationships and connections with others (something that all of us are fully saying) that it is tribal in the specific sense meant here (eg., in Rand's PWNI or VOR, notably the social pathology she terms the "tribal lone wolf"), or that said tribalism is actually racial in form, or that statism is required to coordinate these forms of social connectivity. What's completely missing from your non sequitur based off Haidt is that social connections can be formed, reformed, modified, and diversive (owing itself to the fact that humans themselves are particular and diversive), and that a political standard is needed that will allow social life in its widest and most open-ended sense possible without structurally prejudicing one mode or form of social connectivity (such as pre-determined adherence to one static tribe or group) over another. And the reason I bring up other thinkers like Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, and John Gray is that they make your point way better than you do. Most people who are led by emotions not reason still have free will; they just don't make proper use of it. If a low IQ, low empathy person thinks rape is OK, it is still very wrong. If there are so many such people that it becomes impossible to enforce laws against rape, we have a very serious problem, and a lot of bad things will happen. It might not be possible to have a viable society in that case, especially if they think other aggressions are OK too. I understand there are some pathological circles in which a guy gains prestige and status by raping. I'm sure this is more cultural than anything else. Such a person still has the power to think things through and realize it's wrong. Such people do not dominate society. Fortunately men with similar attitudes and practices who have achieved positions of power are now being weeded out. Is any data available on the IQ's of such men? Some of them have been very economically productive, but weeding them out does not seem to be endangering our society. How many people are there anywhere who consider rape to be OK? Letting reason have the final say in what we do does not mean abstaining from sexual intercourse. It does not mean treating any sex or race as less than human. It probably does not even mean totally abstaining from fast food. It certainly does not mean forcing anyone else to do any of these things. The reason Ayn Rand's solution has yet to materialize is that it can only do so when a lot of people make fundamental changes to their thinking, and that takes a lot of time. @ Dough Morris On 11/18/2018 at 10:07 AM, Doug Morris said: If a low IQ, low empathy person thinks rape is OK, it is still very wrong. From the perspective of someone that has normal or above average levels of empathy yes. For someone with low IQ and low empathy they're just following what they understand to be their immediate self interest. If there are so many such people that it becomes impossible to enforce laws against rape, we have a very serious problem, and a lot of bad things will happen. It might not be possible to have a viable society in that case, especially if they think other aggressions are OK too. Agreed. I understand that we, all things being equal, like to view people in terms of their best potential but unless we have in place the means necessary to draw out said potential we're just making things worse as it relates to immigration. I don't blame immigrants for sticking to their own value systems considering today's dominant value system in the West consists of the xenophilia and self-hatred of the domestic population. There's no incentive to change even if said change were theoretically possible. I understand there are some pathological circles in which a guy gains prestige and status by raping. I'm sure this is more cultural than anything else. Such a person still has the power to think things through and realize it's wrong. Such people do not dominate society. Depends on the society and how the cultural incentive structure is defined for that society. If there's no incentive to think about something the majority of people will likely not think about it. If you have a low empathy population whose only happiness in life comes from the times they are able to spread their misery onto those weaker than themselves I fail to see how things can and will change. The type of thinking we're talking about requires a level of high intelligence, a sense of empathy, and a desire to make the world better place. And then there's the hurdle of having to persuade enough people to change their views to support and realize your belief system which requires a certain level of intelligence and empathy on their part. Fortunately men with similar attitudes and practices who have achieved positions of power are now being weeded out. Is any data available on the IQ's of such men? Some of them have been very economically productive, but weeding them out does not seem to be endangering our society. Depends on which country we're talking about. If you're the head of anything, be it a company, tribe, or country, that requires at least a certain level of intelligence and understanding of human nature (emotional intelligence). I'm not aware of any IQ studies for this specific segment though. As far as how they treat others, that will likely depend on their ability/willingness to emphasize with others so a high IQ doesn't guarantee empathy, it just enhances one's ability to perceive a broader range of moral implications based upon one's sense of empathy. Again this depends on what area of the world we're looking at. I don't think that all Muslims are a-ok with rape, but unless the Muslim community as a whole acts against rape by severely punishing, ostracizing or shunning offending individuals it effectively makes no difference from an incentive standpoint and then you've got yourself a genuine rape culture. Letting reason have the final say in what we do does not mean abstaining from sexual intercourse. My point here was that you have to try to account for all aspects of human nature not just the ones you feel strongly about. Saying you should just suppress your sexual desires, suppress your selfish nature, suppress your tribal urges is not the way to go if you value positive outcomes. It does not mean treating any sex or race as less than human. This is a tricky one, especially if you have a purely individualist and universalist mindset. It's easier to just say that we're all humans and to stop looking for the truth once you've reached this criteria. However there are differences between the genders and the races. It's important to actually get it right as not to dwell too much on the side of biological determinism and equally not to grant liberties that are beyond someone's capability to handle. It's a fine line but saying we're all equal and calling it a day is objectively incorrect. Yes society works best when we're all held to the same standard, but there are certain biological differences that we have to account for unless we want to suffer the consequences. The inability of the men in the West to properly understand and account for female human nature led to the cultural embrace of feminism which as a result has made both men and women miserable. From a purely Darwinian perspective you could view the wave of Muslim men migrating into Europe as a self-correcting mechanism of nature in response to Western man's inability to correctly handle his women. Ayn Rand never actively embraced the field of study that is influence and persuasion. Unlike those on the left she never used human irrationality to her advantage for obvious reasons. The left however used it to its full advantage precisely because their ideology was so utopian and could not be propagated using reason and evidence so they became the masters of manipulation. This is one of the greatest lessons that can be learned from Donald Trump and that is that both parties can play this game and win. The only way that people will make a fundamental change to their way of thinking is if there's a recognizable incentive to do so. However we're not just at the mercy of environmental factors; we can affect the environment using objective means of persuasion that recognize human nature for what it is not what we want it to be. Donal Trump is living proof this can work. On 11/17/2018 at 11:52 PM, 2046 said: Umm, I don't know about the others, but I've read a lot of Haidt, in fact I highly recommend particularly his The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom (2006) which I think is highly cogenial to a general Rand-friendly perspective. Good to know I'm not the only Objectivist that stumbled across Jonathan Haidt. Agree with you 100% that his work is Objectivst friendly and would argue its a natural transition point from where Ayn Rand left off. In any event, knowing this is what you're basing your "humans are inherently tribal" mantra off of, I'm 100% in agreement with Eiuol that you literally don't know what you're talking about. Haidt isn't claiming what you take him to be claiming. You seem to be reading into him a view that is not present.  Should have been more clear why I referenced Haidt. I referenced him under tribalism based on the case he lays out in his book The Righteous Mind as it related to our "groupish" or "hivish" nature. It hardly follows from that fact that human flourishing is inherently social, or that human flourishing requires social relationships and connections with others (something that all of us are fully saying) that it is tribal in the specific sense meant here (eg., in Rand's PWNI or VOR, notably the social pathology she terms the "tribal lone wolf"), or that said tribalism is actually racial in form You're correct in that Jonathan Haidt does not focus on race as it pertains to or social nature. This is where the other author I listed, Ryan Enos, comes in. Like Haidt he leans to the left (although Haidt is now more of a centrist) and doesn't shy away from objective truths just because they conflict with his ideological world view. Enos discussed the topic of what one might call subconscious racism, specifically how it interacts with geographic proximity and the demographic composition of communities and how these variables impact social cohesiveness, social institutions, and civic engagement. His book confirms what has become evident which is that diversity plus proximity equals conflict. He concludes that this will be the case so long as ethnic groups continue to live in their own geographic enclaves. To combat the natural tendency for people to live amongst people that look and behave like themselves he hints at the need for pragmatic solutions from enlightened central planners (obviously not in support of this). I do fully recommend his book The Space Between Us as it is a good transition from Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind. Seeing as the book is a little on the expensive side I'll post a link to a free article that discusses tribalism/subconscious racism in case anyone still believes that "racist" feelings and perceptions are the product of social indoctrination (by a different author): https://www.newsweek.com/biologist-eo-wilson-why-humans-ants-need-tribe-64005 or that statism is required to coordinate these forms of social connectivity. Not a big fan of state intervention into private affairs as this actually runs counter to human nature in a lot of cases. Coercion and true understanding / objective recognition of reality usually don't go hand in hand. I would only advocate state involvement as it relates to immigration policy. Here's why: It is the state's responsibility to guarantee objective freedoms in the form of clearly delineated and understandable rights. Freedoms and rights however cannot exist in a practical sense without certain prerequisite requirements being met. A peaceful society being is one such requirement. Ethnic diversity all things being equal contributes negatively to the establishing and preservation of a peaceful society based on our tribal nature alone. Compounding this fact are differences in superficial and non-superficial characteristics based on race. We all like to say that all that counts is what's in someone's heart, content of character, but how often does a 10 settle down with a 1. Superficial criteria matter even if we'd like to pretend that they don't. Just look at the size of the make-up industry. If we value objectively superior outcomes then we must consider all variables, not just the ones we're comfortable with. Racial or cultural diversity is not a strength rather it's a liability. That's not to say there shouldn't be any cultural exchanges with other peoples', after all some people are born with a tendency to favor diversity over security (r vs K selection/epigenetics) however we need to be sure to strike an objective balance and that includes state involvement in the domain of immigration to preserve our rights and freedoms. I don't think anyone in the Objectivist movement would object to the state being involved in military matters, as national security is a widely recognized precondition for maintaining our freedoms, but the issue of ethnic homogeneity is considered controversial. Why is that? My theory is that it is based upon what I would call racial/collectivist altruism: The wealthiest race, whites, has a positive moral obligation to the less wealthier races. This idea has become the moral mission for all white Western nations. It is the one idea that no white person is allowed to question. It is the one thing that unites both conservatives and liberals alike. And based on the workings of human nature is what will be our undoing if we don't find a way to self-correct. On 11/17/2018 at 11:41 PM, Eiuol said: So you're calling my motive into question rather than trying to disprove/address my actual arguments... While it would be irrational to state that we aren't emotionally motivated how is it that you know for a fact what my motivations are? Instead of accusing me of something you don't know is true why not bring the same vigor to discrediting the actual arguments I'm posting. Using the word "racist" is an attempt to either silence the debate by shaming someone or trying to get your opponent to switch from offense to defense which helps if you've either run out of arguments on your end or just don't want to put in the effort to actually debate. It appears to me that if you're not going to moderate my posts that your next course of action is to use entry-level sophistry. I expected better of someone that for all intents and purposes appears to be an accomplished Objectivist professional. Note that it is important to engage in these types of debates precisely because we are emotionally motivated by nature. Withdrawing from the argument is withdrawing from the truth, and withdrawing from the truth is withdrawing from Objectivism. I'm getting tired of this. I see at least some repetition in it. 5 hours ago, Doug Morris said: Agreed. I think we've all said our piece and have laid out our arguments to the best of our ability. Good discussion all in all. On 11/21/2018 at 9:02 PM, Azrael Rand said: So you're calling my motive into question I didn't mention motivation. I've described your position. You didn't actually say I described your position incorrectly, you just seem to not like the word. I spent pages addressing your actual arguments, I just have near zero motivation to persuade someone who thinks that racism is good that it is in fact bad. I see it on a level of explaining why rape is bad. It's not worth it. It's unfortunate that some people use the word racist merely for shaming, but here I'm using it to describe your actual position. 2046 said so as well, but said your argument even failed to be arguments for racism. They are mostly assertions, not arguments. I spent pages addressing your actual arguments I'd say you roughly addressed a quarter of my points and ignored the rest whereas I addressed virtually all of your arguments point by point. I spent pages addressing your actual arguments, I just have near zero motivation to persuade someone who thinks that racism is good that it is in fact bad. I see it on a level of explaining why rape is bad. It's not worth it. More sophistry huh, a false equivalency this time around... The two aren't even close. Rape isn't in anyone's rational-self interest whereas maintaining a cohesive society is a pre-condition for individual rights and limited government. There are tribal aspects to human nature whether you like it or not. I have provided more than one resource for this as part of this discussion. I agree that things would be so much simpler if we could just ignore the issue of race and live in a colorblind society, but that isn't the lesson objective reality is imparting on us. I understand where you're coming from. I understand that you most likely don't support the type of illegal immigration we are seeing in the West today and that you approach the issue from a perspective that looks at the ideal state society out to be organized under. But even here you're not accounting for all of human nature. You're selectively accepting the aspects you personally identify with and ignoring the ones you dislike. While understandable, this is not an objective stance to take. As far as the term racism is concerned, there isn't even agreement in the US what the term means. It means different things to different people. To the individualist it means not judging someone solely by the content of character, to the collectivist it means not acting as you ought to based on your race, and to the anti-white activist it means not acknowledging white privilege. The only thing all of these applications of the word have in common is that it is used as a means to demonize your opponent. 1 hour ago, Azrael Rand said: I agree that things would be so much simpler if we could just ignore the issue of race and live in a colorblind society, but that isn't the lesson objective reality is imparting on us. So... But like... You're literally affirming what Eiuol is saying... 20 hours ago, 2046 said: I agree with the sentiment and this is the philosophy I apply in my personal life; a person is obviously more than just a member of their tribe. However from a group-level perspective there are limitations to applying this philosophy. Namely what is re-affirmed in Enos work. I'm not opposed to having any non-whites living in a white nation however I also realize that based on human nature there is a limit to how much racial diversity a society can deal with without adverse consequences. It goes back to the r vs K thing. rs value diversity whereas K value safety. I my opinion an objectively organized society should provide a means for both rs and Ks to live happy and productive lives; this in my opinion requires an objective balance that still unites the rs and Ks under a common cultural identity. Logically extending the colorblind society concept to its logical end could result in ethnic population replacement of the majority group and this leads to adverse consequences as I've discussed in this thread. 24 minutes ago, Azrael Rand said: I agree with the sentiment and this is the philosophy I apply in my personal life You clearly don't even agree with the sentiment, you haven't spent any time saying what you agree with. You're not getting any points for saying you agree with the sentiment, but then none of your beliefs at all coincide with individualism or individual rights. The more you say, the deeper the hole you dig. On 11/25/2018 at 6:09 PM, Eiuol said: You believe in individual rights as an end unto themselves (traditional Objectivism), whereas I consider them an important component and a piece of the puzzle to a greater whole. I don't expect this to change anytime soon for either of us. We have a different understanding of human nature and those differences lead us to our different worldviews. I do understand where you're coming from having held our convictions in the past and I don't think you'll change your view until you find yourself in a situation where your existing worldview no longer provides acceptable answers to the questions you ask yourself. Having been there myself, by no means do I hold your misguidedness against you. I for one have enjoyed our conversations thoroughly. That's not accurate actually, the view is that individual rights are a necessity to a healthy and functioning society, not an end in itself. I mean, if you're talking about individual rights and then also other things to enhance that, sure. But you can't have individual rights if you propose specifically racist policies (judging people collectively according to their race). I mean, individual rights aren't some appeal to a platonic good, the whole idea is that it does in fact work better on a practical level and a moral level. If you accept individual rights as theoretically good, but in practice see them as a failure, you are actually rejecting the theory in the first place. It might make more sense if I define what I mean with individual rights so that we're both on the same age in terms of definitions/terminology: I reject the notion of human rights or universal rights and instead support the view of individual liberties in a context of liberties afforded to and enforced by the members of a given society. To assert that members of a different state are entitled to the rights and protections offered by another state, while idealistic, is misguided and not aligned with the realities of human nature. There's nothing more I can say to convince you that I haven't already said before in this thread. Human cognition is based around an emotional motive; that is we do not normally embrace facts unless they align with our emotional self-interest. You know this just as much if not more so than I do. The ideas and facts that I've presented here do not align with your world view and are therefore dismissed as irrelevant. If you think you've already discovered the truth and aren't actively seeking it out then you're not likely to accept facts that are contrary to your core belief system. Simple as that. At the end of the day we can talk about our ideal vision of society all we want but it doesn't change the fact that we aren't even close to living in an environment where that type of discussion is actually relevant considering current events. There was a time in American history when the discussion was relevant, when America was presented with the choice of being a free society based around individual liberties or tribal warfare. America chose tribalism when it enacted protections and incentives based around race in the form of repealing the freedom of association and instituting programs such as affirmative action. Ever since then whites have deluded themselves into thinking that they were still living in a free society when in actuality we had already entered the age of tribal warfare. The conflict we were warned about by Ayn Rand is already well underway and whites are the only group that isn't actively participating in this conflict as an organized group and are therefore loosing by default. The culture has turned anti-white for a reason. Unless things change and whites start participating in the game like all the other groups they will be the first to exit the contest. The demographic replacement of whites has already reached a critical point. human_murda 21 On 11/13/2018 at 11:59 PM, human_murda said: Also, Ayn Rand is gaining more and more popularity in India over time (the number of people who join this forum that come from India should attest to that fact). This is completely random: there's no organization representing or promoting Objectivism in India. I failed to mention: this is because of the spread of the English language in India. Perhaps, lack of interest in capitalism doesn't need to have any deep meaning. The reason could be something as unphilosophical as people learning English. I do know that there are a lot of Indians working in tech which is positively correlated with IQ and I do know that people from India appear to do very well for themselves when they come to the US. You don't hear about corporations offshoring IT jobs to Africa but you do hear about them offshoring them to India. Due to this. Not due to IQs. Regarding your analysis of Lynn and Vanhanen, I agree with what Eiuol previously said: There are good scientists and bad scientists. There are likely good and bad scientists on both sides of the argument. Proving the existence of one or more bad scientists doesn't automatically disprove an argument itself. Your reasoning is persuasively correct but not necessarily factually correct. How do you get data about the IQs of different parts/nations of the world (used to build up your argument), if not from Lynn and Vanhanen. On 12/10/2018 at 7:16 PM, human_murda said: I think its a multi-faceted issue in my opinion and your idea sounds reasonable at face value. Most literature about individual liberty is likely written in the English language so it makes sense for that to be a factor. I'd say the same about this as about my response above. What you're saying makes good sense but I don't see how you can conclusively exclude IQ altogether. Although I do believe that if we attached weights to the different causes, the cause you listed likely has a higher weight than IQ. Then again, what explains differences in decision making and public policy between India and African nations? Collective IQ differences are likely to be a factor along with cultural differences and other considerations. Check this out: https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf The thing about quoting data, and I've listed data before, is that it doesn't do anything to change the way most people think; at least those that have already made up their mind about an issue and aren't really open to entertaining new information. I'm not getting that vibe from you tough but there are some people that took part in this discussion that fall into this category. Not knocking anyone in particular, it's just the way the cognitive process works for us humans. Unless you have an open mind, facts are likely not going to persuade you. We are mostly selfish by nature and we're not about to let facts get in the way of our chosen belief system we're emotionally invested in. Simple as that. Edited December 14, 2018 by Azrael Rand 4 minutes ago, Azrael Rand said: Collective IQ differences are likely to be a factor along with cultural differences and other considerations. I mean, you haven't even explained how IQ differences will matter in the first place. You make wide claims that IQ would be necessary to understand capitalism and things like that, without a reason to think this is so. And then you haven't even answered what you would do about black people in the US, mixed race people, and how you would even go about deciding if somebody truly is a certain race. You spoke about immigration, but completely dodged any questions about what to do about people who are already citizens. We don't even need to get into what the cause of IQ differences is, because the differences exist whatever the case. It seems to me you prefer to double down on identitarian politics ("all the other races are doing it!") and abandon liberty.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511922

__label__wiki

The French Unionist Project Vive le Roi ! The Unionist Case The Salic Law Posted on March 23, 2019 September 23, 2019 by frenchunionistproject King Clovis dictating the Salic law The Salic law was actually an entire law code of the Salian Franks. Prior to this law code, the laws of the Franks were unwritten and relied upon the memories of jurists and elders1. In the 6th century King Clovis of the Franks issued a law code because he wanted something more reliable than unwritten law. Doing so put Clovis’s kingdom on par with the surrounding kingdoms of the time. One component of this code was its inheritance rules, which generally prohibited the inheritance of an estate to a woman. This was later expanded to allow female inheritance in the absence of sons. This, however, did not apply to royal succession, and the Salic law would be forgotten by the 14th century. Exclusion of Women from Royal Succession The succession to the crown had already become hereditary and was based on primogeniture, whereby the eldest son succeeded his fathers. This was a break from the Merovingian and Carolingian practice of distributing lands equally to royal sons, which led the the fracture of the Frankish Empire. It is noteworthy to state that all the French and Frankish monarchs had been male. In 1316, Louis X died, leaving behind a pregnant wife. The Queen gave birth to Jean I, but the infant died shortly thereafter, leaving Louis with no living male issue. His next oldest issue was Jeanne. The King Louis’ brother took the opportunity and had himself crowned as Philip V. Agnes of France, grandmother of Princess Jeanne and mother to the Duke of Burgundy, considered it a usurpation and demanded an assembly of the French aristocracy to decided the issue. Philip V agreed and called the Estates General of 1317, who then agreed with Philip and decided that a woman could not succeed to the throne. Remember, the Salic law code was lost to history at this point, so the exclusion of women was not called “Salic law.” Male Collaterality Another succession crisis came in 1328. Charles IV, the brother of Philip V, died with a pregnant queen. The nobles of France waited to see if it was a boy, who would be king, or a girl. It was a girl. Isabella, the She-Wolf of France claimed the throne on behalf of her son, Edward III of England. The French rejected this claim, declaring that one cannot pass on a claim one does not have. This rule became known as Male Collaterality, and was a logical consequence of the exclusion of women. Philip, Count of Valois became King Philip VI of France. Edward III initially accepted the accession of Philip VI, but after Edward was stripped of the Duchy of Aquitaine, Edward declared himself King of France, starting the Hundred Years’ War. Rediscovery The Salic law was rediscovered in 1358 by a monk, but no connection was made to royal succession. It would only be in 1410, when the Salic law was used by Jean de Montreuil against the claims of Henry IV of England, that the Salic law would be applied to royal succession. In time, the Salic law was often used or mentioned retroactively. Exclusion of Foreigners Around the 16th century, about which time jurists were conceiving of “fundamental laws,” jurists began to justify the Salic law as keeping the kingdom out of foreign hands. Pierre de Belloy wrote: Indeed, it must be considered that the reason for the law of France and other kingdoms, which the Salic law is kept, which excludes the female sex from the succession of the crown, is not only tested on the imbecility, and infirm condition of the sex, which is too often found also to the male sex: But mainly to prevent, that it does not fall in foreign hands, and that the kingdom is governed by other than by a Frenchman… [On the Salic Law. P. 85-86] Belloy then gives the reasoning why this is: Now it is quite certain that, without a Salic law, the Crown would have been exploited by an infinite number of non-French Princes [Princes non François], by the marriages of my daughters, daughters of France, who are married in a foreign nation, often in England, Spain, in Germany, in Lorraine, in other provinces of Europe… The jurist Claude de Seyssel had a similar opinion: And the first specialty that I find good there is that the kingdom goes by male succession, without being able to fall into the hands of a woman, according to the law that the French call “salic”, which is a very good thing. Because, falling in a feminine line, it comes into the hands and power [it can come into power] of a man of strange nation, which is pernicious and dangerous thing: yet that which comes from such a strange nation [the one who comes from strange nation]is other food and condition and has other mores, other language and other way of living than those of the country where he comes to dominate. [La Grand Monarchie de France (1558). P. 8. Claude de Seyssel] Arrêt le Maistre In 1593, the Duke of Mayenne ordered an Estates General to choose a Catholic monarch for France, as opposed to the Protestant Henri IV. Henri IV initially declared the Estates General illegal, since only the king could call such a body. But the King, realising peace could only come through consultation, called for a conference. Despite the protestations of many Leaguers, the estates accepted the King’s proposal.2 In May, the King’s intention to convert to Catholicism was announced. The wind was taken out of the League’s sails. Mayenne, under pressure from the Spanish, attempted to have the Estates General abrogate the Salic law and elect Infanta Isabella as Queen Regnant of France. Being a woman, the Infanta was invalid a priori, but the objection against her was because she was foreign, not the fact that she was a woman. The Estates General replied “our laws and customs prevent us from calling forward as king any prince not of our nation.” Ibid. On the 28th of June, the Parlement of Paris issued the famous Judgment of le Maistre, confirming this: JUDGMENT of the sitting parliament in Paris which annuls all treaties made or to be made which would call to the throne of France a foreign prince or princess, as contrary to the salic law and other fundamental times of the state. Further: …and that it is necessary to employ the authority which has been committed to him to prevent that, under pretext of religion, [the crown] be transferred in foreign hands against the laws of the kingdom… …said court declares all treaties made and to be made hereafter for the establishment of a foreign prince and princess of null effect and value, as done to the prejudice of the Salic law and other fundamental laws of the state. There is, therefore, a component of the Salic law that requires the king be a natural Frenchman. This is what we might call a “nationality” rule, even if such a term would never have been used at that time. From the election of Hugh Capet to the Revolution, the line of kings remained French, with all foreigners being rejected. We see the development of the Salic law and its justification as keeping France out of “foreign hands,” which would go on to be confirmed by the Parlement of Pairs in 1593. With the Spanish Bourbons becoming foreigners, the Salic law excluded them from the throne in 1883. So, the French throne, which is never vacant, passed to the House of Orleans with the death of the Count of Chambord in 1883. Katherine Drew. The Laws of the Salian Franks. David Buisseret. Henry IV: King of France. Posted in French MonarchyTagged Clovis, Salic law Refuting Guy Stair Sainty Crimes of the French Republic Alliance Royale Blog of Henri VII Blog of Jean IV Groupe d'Action Royaliste Nouvelle Action Royaliste Royalty Monarchy Anjouism (5) French Monarchy (35) Historical Documents (7) Other Royal Families (3) Site info (4)

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511927

__label__wiki

Category Archives: Russia Original article on massproletariat.info The present world situation is defined by a system of capitalist-imperialist relations, and the principal contradiction on the global scale is between imperialist states and oppressed peoples. In Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism Lenin put forward a Marxist analysis of the nature of capitalist-imperialism, and it is to this document that we shall refer, so as to understand the nature of the contemporary inter-imperialist conflict. It is important that we not fetishize armed conflict as the determining factor in assessing whether a country is an imperialist power. Lenin is quite clear that the military conflicts between imperialist powers are a result of the economic and political struggle between them. In his numerous discussions of World War I, he repeatedly referred to Carl von Clausewitz’s idea that “War is a continuation of politics by other means.”1 Therefore, we will repeat Lenin’s claim that “unless this [the economic essence of imperialism] is studied, it will be impossible to understand and appraise modern war and modern politics.” So, what then is the economic essence of imperialism? It is the concentration of capital in monopolies, the fusion of banking and industrial capital into finance capital, the export of capital abroad, and the struggle between imperialist powers to repartition the world markets (which eventually and inevitably leads to war between imperialist powers). Russia exhibits all of these features, and is therefore a capitalist-imperialist country. This article offers some analysis of the Russian state and its role in the inter-imperialist conflicts around the world. The Concentration of Capital in Russia In Russia there is an extreme concentration of capital, to a degree that exceeds the imperialist powers of Lenin’s time. As Maoists we should be clear, that contemporary Russian imperialism was built upon the concentration of capital that existed in the Social-Imperialist USSR. The vast majority of this capital was not destroyed after the collapse of the USSR, but rather reorganized and concentrated in a small number of hands. The US-led imperialist bloc tried to seize control of this formation, but was unable to, which allowed the new bourgeoisie in the USSR to transform, in part, into an independent national bourgeoisie, independent from foreign domination and able to pursue imperial aims. Based on the official statistics of the Russian state, the top 600 firms in Russia account for over 70% of Russia GDP.2 In Imperialism Lenin analyzed the concentration of production in a number of the imperialist countries at the time. Based on the statistics available to him, he demonstrated the economic basis of imperialism in the United States, where in 1909, the largest 3,060 firms accounted for 43.8% of the total GDP. From this it is clear that the concentration of capital in Russia today is much greater than it was in the US in the early 20th century. Thus, Russia clearly has the concentration of capital necessary to provide the economic foundation of imperialism. Finance Capital in Russia In Russian industry we can see a clear fusion of banking and industrial capital into finance capital. Lenin described this process: “As banking develops and becomes concentrated in a small number of establishments, the banks grow from modest middlemen into powerful monopolies having at their command almost the whole of the money capital of all the capitalists and small businessmen and also the larger part of the means of production and sources of raw materials in any one country and in a number of countries. This transformation of numerous modest middlemen into a handful of monopolists is one of the fundamental processes in the growth of capitalism into capitalist imperialism.” To demonstrate the degree of centralization of capital in the big German banks by 1913, Lenin showed that the ‘Big 9’ banks in Germany together controlled just under 50% of the total deposits in Germany. Today, Sberbank is the largest bank in Russia, and the 3rd largest bank in Central and Eastern Europe.3 It has an annual operating income of 28 billion USD, and deposits totaling 312 billion USD.4 This amounts to approximately 36% of the total deposits in Russia (849 billion USD5) concentrated in a single financial institution. The breakdown of the deposits, and their share of the total, of the five biggest banks (by total assets) in Russia today is as follows: So we can clearly see that finance capital is a powerful force in Russia, with large financial institutions concentrating large amounts of capital, and large percentages of all the capital in the country. What’s more the concentration of capital in Russia exceeds that of many of the imperialist powers in Lenin’s time. This concentration of capital in the big banks changes their role, from simply functioning as payment intermediaries to playing a key role in planning and directing the economy as a whole, deciding which resources to extract, which companies to fund, which to avoid, and so on. This necessarily arises due to the concentration of capital, and the decreasing availability of credit from any other sources. The executives (or at least the marketing team) of Sberbank are quite up-front about this on their ‘About’ page, saying that Sberbank is “the circulatory system of the Russian economy, accounting for one third of its banking system. The Bank provides employment and a source of income for every 150th Russian family.” and “the Bank is the key lender to the Russian economy and the biggest receiver of deposits in Russia.” Sberbank holds 44.9% of retail deposits, and issues 37.7% of retail loans and 32.7% of corporate loans in Russia.11 We can see clearly that finance capital exists in Russia, and is well-developed, with the majority of the banking market and capital controlled by a few very large firms which direct the affairs of the rest of the enterprises. As another example, consider the Russian state-owned gas company Gazprom, which is also the largest company in Russia by revenue. Gazprom was originally created in 1989 when the Soviet Ministry of Gas and Industry was privatized, and has grown significantly since that point. Gazprom has annual revenues in excess of $100 billion and has a significant financial and investment wing.12 As we see above, one of its financial subsidiaries, Gazprombank, has the third most deposits of any bank in Russia, indicating the degree to which banking and industrial capital are fused internal to Gazprom. Gazprom also has an effective monopoly in the gas industry in Russia (accounting for 83% of gas production in Russia, and 17% of the gas production in the whole world) and also has significant holdings in media, oil production, and other sectors. Gazprom is just one example of many finance-capital firms in Russia (others include LUKoil, the 10th largest oil company in the world13, and Sberbank). All of this definitively indicates that Russia also has the fusion of industrial and banking capital into monopoly finance-capital firms necessary to constitute an imperialist country. The Export of Capital by Russian Firms These large firms in Russia also export significant amounts of capital abroad. A few examples: Gazprom has subsidiaries in 36 countries outside of Russia, in 2016 Rosfnet (the 3rd largest company in Russia14) purchased a 98% stake in the India-based oil company Essar Oil for ~$13 billion,15 and overall Russian direct investment abroad exceeds $440 billion.16 While this pales in comparison the ~$5 trillion that the US has in foreign direct investment abroad, it still represents a significant export of capital. It is also important to consider the overall picture of capital flowing into and out of a country, summed up by a set of figures called international investment position, which captures the assets, such as direct investments, as well as stocks, bonds, and other investments which are not counted as ‘direct investment,’ and all liabilities. This figure shows that Russia currently has about $1.2 trillion invested abroad,17 with a ‘net’ IIP (balance of assets vs liabilities) of over $200 billion. This means that, on balance, Russian capitalists are net exporters of capital, and that, while the sums involved are modest compared to that of the US, it is clear that capital is being profitably exported around the world from Russia. As a concrete example of capital export we can look at the acquisitions that Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank, has made in the past few years. According to their website, Sberbank counts 70% of Russian population among its customers.18 This is clearly a massive market share, but the bank has its sights set on breaking into other markets and expanding its presence, especially in central and eastern Europe. To this end, in 2011 it acquired a 100% stake in Volksbank International AG19, an Austrian bank which subsequently changed its name to Sberbank Europe AG20. This transaction, conducted for between €585 and €64521 million, was Sberbank’s first acquisition outside of the former USSR. The CEO of Sberbank, Herman Gref, said of the deal that “This will give us access to the attractive and growing markets of Central and Eastern Europe, and it will serve as a platform for organic growth and further acquisitions in the region.”22He wasn’t exaggerating, since the Volksbank International group (with its subsidiaries) was counted among the top 10% financial institutions in several countries, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, and Slovenia. The next year, no doubt looking to diversify and push into other markets, Sberbank made a deal to purchase the Turkish bank DenizBank for $3.5 billion USD23, allowing for similar expansion in that market. Although Sberbank has also made significant domestic acquisitions, including paying $1 billion USD for the investment bank Troika Dialog in 201124, it is clear that expansion into foreign markets via acquisitions is the bank’s key strategy for expanding market share and ensuring consistent profits. The Struggle Between Imperialist Powers In recent years the contradictions between Russian imperialism and the US led imperialist bloc have sharpened. This is most evident in the Syrian Civil War, and the ongoing crisis in the Ukraine; however, it is also apparent in the shifting situation in Turkey, in the Italian and Hungarian governments’ opposition to the automatic renewal of sanctions against Russia, and in Rodrigo Duterte’s overtures to Moscow. All of these are concrete instances of the struggle between rival imperialist powers to redivide a world that has already been divided up. In particular, the shifting allegiances of client-states which were formally consolidated to the camp of US/European imperialism are a sign of the growing power of emerging imperialist states such as China and Russia. While there has been much discussion of the trend of globalization since 2000, Lenin was clear that by the beginning of the 20th century capitalism was a global system: “For the first time the world is completely divided up, so that in the future only redivision is possible, i.e., territories can only pass from one “owner” to another, instead of passing as ownerless territory to an owner.”25Monopoly-capitalist blocs, whose interests shape the foreign policy of imperialist states, have a major interest in expanding their access to markets and territory, with which in turn comes access to natural resources, labor power, etc. This necessarily leads to inter-imperialist struggle, the struggle to redivide and re-partition the world and its markets, since the world is finite and the imperialist hunger for cheap labour power, capital, and raw materials is limitless. Inter-imperialist conflict, at its most extreme, takes the form of world wars, which destroy huge quantities of productive capital and (in the two examples so far) have led to the death of many millions of people. However, world war is only the sharpest form of ‘politics by another means’ that occurs in inter-imperialist competition. Proxy-wars, annexation of territory, and expansionism are the constant foreign policy of imperialist states. This is visible in Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the ongoing warfare in Ukraine where Russian forces and Russian-backed forces are struggling to overthrow the US-aligned Ukrainian government. The struggle to repartition the world is also evident in Syria where the US and US-aligned forces are attempting to overthrow the Russia-supported Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad. However, war and annexations are not the only manifestations of inter-imperialist conflict over access to markets and resources,26 which plays out in many different ways, from free trade agreements, and exclusive grants of mineral and oil rights, to access to shipping lanes and economic sanctions. In fact, escalation to wars or proxy wars are preceded by economic competition. For the purposes of this document, we will consider competition in the natural gas industry. This competition underlies both the conflicts in Syria and the Ukraine. Gazprom is a major supplier of natural gas to Europe, and has a partial monopoly in Eastern Europe. In 2016 Gazprom exported 179.3 billion cubic meters of natural gas to Europe (a 12.5% increase over the previous year).27 Additionally, the Russian gas industry’s market share in Europe has increased 23% in 2010 to over 34% in 2017.28 This has facilitated closer economic ties between Russia and various European countries, and threatens the US-led imperialist bloc’s dominance in the region. To counteract this trend, the US worked with its allies in the Middle East to expand existing gas and oil pipelines, connecting them to Turkey and, through Turkey, to Europe. However, in 2009, Bashar al-Assad refused to sign an agreement which would facilitate the expansion of a natural gas pipeline from Qatar to Turkey, and the proposed expansions to existing oil pipelines stalled for similar reasons.29 At the same time, the US has been developing its internal natural gas industries and constructing pipelines to export this gas to European markets. The US and its allies have also imposed and continue to impose sanctions on the Russian state and Russian corporations. It was only after years of this sort of economic competition that the contradictions between these rival imperialist powers sharpened to the point of armed conflict.30 At present, this armed conflict is largely conducted through proxies, but could eventually escalate to outright conflict between these imperialist camps. In this regard, it is important to note that Russia has the sixth largest military in the world in terms of personnel (larger than even the United States)31, and the third largest military by budget.32Russia spends 4.9% of its GDP on its military every year, beating the US’ 3.3% spending.33Additionally, Russia has a huge reserve of nuclear weapons from the cold war era. All of this constitutes a significant military force. This large military, alongside the proxies that Russia supports with arms deals, training, and the like, are used by the Russian state in the military aspects of inter-imperialist competition. We have found it necessary to outline these points to elaborate on the relevance of Lenin’s definition of capitalist-imperialism today. Absent a genuine revolutionary force, there are three possibilities for nation-states under capitalist-imperialism. They can be imperialist powers (of one strength or another), comprador client-states, or failed states subject to the plunder of competing imperialist powers. Failure to understand Lenin’s ideas invariably leads to various social-chauvinist positions, whether it’s ignoring the ways that the Assad government oppresses the people of Syria and Kurdistan, or denying that China’s export of capital to Africa is imperialist profiteering built on national oppression and super-exploitation. This sort of social-chauvinism also leads some to negate the increasingly fascist character of the Indian state, which is currently leading a fairly open war on its own people. We have to be clear about the situation on a world level, and, as Lenin put it, practice “what is most important, that which constitutes the very gist, the living soul, of Marxism—a concrete analysis of a concrete situation,”34 lest our theory cease to be a guide for action, a tool for illuminating reality in a revolutionary way, and instead transform into a stale dogma, recited to justify social-chauvinism, imperialist-economism, and inactivity. When analyzing the contemporary international situation it is necessary to grapple with Lenin’s ideas and concretely apply them to particular situations. If we do not we will be unable to distinguish comprador forces, who are dominantly in the camp of the enemies of the people, from revolutionary national forces, who can, in particular situations, play a key role as part of a united front. We will be unable to distinguish true proletarian internationalism, e.g. the assistance China gave to the Korean people to counter US imperialism during the Korean war, from imperialist aggression and proxy-wars, e.g. the Russian support for the Assad government. As Lenin said in the preface to Imperialism: “Unless the economic roots of this phenomenon are understood and its political and social significance is appreciated, not a step can be taken toward the solution of the practical problem of the communist movement and of the impending social revolution.”35 The question of “who are our friends, who are our enemies?” is one of the most important questions we need to grapple with. It is our hope that this short document will demonstrate that the Russian state is not a friend of the people, but instead the representative of a bloc of monopoly-capitalists itching to secure “a bigger piece of the pie” through the incessant inter-imperialist struggle to redivide the world. Updated 7/2/17: Fixed minor typos. Updated 7/3/17: Corrected inaccurate statement describing Sberbank as the 3rd largest bank in Europe. Sberbank is the 3rd largest bank in Central and Eastern Europe, not Europe overall. Also fixed minor typos. c.f. War and Revolution, https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/may/14.htm ↩ Based on data from http://raexpert.ru/rankingtable/top_companies/2016/main/ ↩ http://www.thebanker.com/Top-1000/Top-1000-World-Banks-Sales-bring-changes-in-CEE-but-Russia-still-rules?ct=true ↩ http://www.sberbank.com/investor-relations/financial-results-and-presentations/key-data, retrieved 6-22-17, currency figures converted to USD from RUB ↩ https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/russia/total-deposits, retrieved 6-22-17 ↩ The VTB group also controls the 4th largest bank (VTB-24) as a wholly-owned subsidiary. VTB-24 has been omitted here since the VTB group counts the deposits of VTB-24 as part of its total. ↩ http://www.vtb.com/ir/glance/, retrieved 6-22-17, currency figures converted to USD from RUB ↩ http://www.gazprombank.ru/eng/ir/fin_stat/, retrieved 6-22-17, currency figures converted to USD from RUB ↩ http://alfabank.com/f/1/investor/financial_reports/financial_statements_ifrs/ab_IFRS_audited_report_2016.pdf, retrieved 6-22-17 ↩ https://ir.open.ru/en/info, retrieved 6-22-17, currency figures converted to USD from RUB ↩ http://www.sberbank.com/about, retrieved 6-23-17 ↩ http://www.chinapost.com.tw/business/company-focus/2015/04/30/434792/Gazproms-net.htm ↩ Based on data from http://fortune.com/global500 ↩ http://indianexpress.com/article/business/economy/brics-summit-2016-rosneft-partners-buy-essar-oil-for-13-billion-in-largest-fdi-deal-3084527/ ↩ CIA factbook ↩ http://data.imf.org/regular.aspx?key=60947518, retrieved 6-22-17 ↩ http://www.sberbank.com/about, retrieved 7-1-17 ↩ http://www.vsbank.ua/en/news/~sberbank, retrieved 7-1-17 ↩ http://banksdaily.com/info/vbi, retrieved 7-1-17 ↩ Between $668 and $737 million USD ↩ https://www.rt.com/business/sberbank-volksbank-acquisition-100-183/, retrieved 7-1-17 ↩ https://www.sberbank.at/press-releases/sberbank-announces-agreement-acquire-9985-denizbank, retrieved 7-1-17 ↩ http://uk.reuters.com/article/troika-sberbank-idUSLDE72A0E420110311, retrieved 7-1-17 ↩ Lenin, Imperialism, Ch. 6. Available online: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ch06.htm ↩ A forthcoming document will address how this competition is currently playing out in the conflict in Syria and Iraq. ↩ http://www.standard.net/Business/2017/03/01/Why-Gazprom-has-gained-market-share-in-Europe ↩ https://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/moscow/gazprom-sees-gas-share-in-europe-growing-further-26885243 and http://www.standard.net/Business/2017/03/01/Why-Gazprom-has-gained-market-share-in-Europe ↩ http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/moscow-rejects-saudi-offer-to-drop-assad-for-arms-deal.aspx?pageID=238&nid=52245 ↩ In our document on the Syrian Civil War, we provide more in depth analysis of the situation there as an instance of inter-imperialist struggle. ↩ International Institute for Strategic Studies (3 February 2014). The Military Balance 2014. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781857437225. p 180-192 ↩ “Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2016” (PDF). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. ↩ http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS, retrieved 6-24-17 ↩ Lenin, Collected Works, English ed., Moscow, 1974, Vol. 31, p. 166). Available online at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/cw/pdf/lenin-cw-vol-31.pdf ↩ Lenin, Imperialism, Preface to the German and French editions. Available online at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/pref02.htm ↩ Posted in Asia, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Exploitation, Class Struggle, Common Sense, Europe, Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Marxism-Leninism, Middle East, Polemics & Refutations, Russia, Russian Imperialism, Soviet Social-Imperialism, Syria, The Classics, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.), Theory, U.S. Imperialism, Ukraine, Vladimir Lenin Revisionism in Russia: Trotsky Against the Bolsheviks – Part Two: 1914-1917 Posted on April 2, 2017 | 1 comment This is the second part of a study of the development of revisionism in Russia, and covers the period from the outbreak of World War I in 1914 to the victory of the socialist revolution in November 1917. The First Imperialist War In August 1914, the First Imperialist War began. Almost from the outset, three trends manifested themselves in the labour movements of the belligerent countries: “In the course of the two and half years of war the international Socialist and labour movement in every country has evolved three tendencies. The three tendencies are: 1) The social-chauvinists, i.e., Socialists in words and chauvinists in action, people who are in favour of ‘national defence’ in an imperialist war. . .These people are our class enemies. They have gone over to the bourgeoisie… 2) The second tendency is what is known as the ‘Centre’, consisting of people who vacillate between the social-chauvinists and the true internationalists. All those who belong to the ‘Centre’ swear that they are Marxists and internationalists, that they are in favour of peace, of bringing every kind of ‘pressure’ to bear upon the governments, of ‘demanding’ that their own governments should ‘ascertain’ the will of the people for peace’, that they favour all sorts of peace campaigns, that they are for a peace without annexations, etc., etc. — and for peace with the social-chauvinists. The ‘Centre’ is for ‘unity’, the ‘Centre’ is opposed to a split. The ‘Centre’ is a realm of honeyed petty-bourgeois phrases of internationalism in word and cowardly opportunism and fawning on the social-chauvinists in deed. The fact of the matter is that the ‘Centre’ does not preach revolution; it does not carry on a wholehearted revolutionary struggle; and in order to evade such a struggle it resorts to the tritest ultra-‘Marxist’ excuses…. 3) The third tendency, the true internationalists, is most closely represented by the ‘Zimmerwald Left’…. It is characterised mainly by its complete break with both social-chauvinism and ‘Centrism’, and by its relentless war against its own imperialist government and against its own imperialist bourgeoisie.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution” in: “Selected Works’, Volume 6; London; l946; p. 63, 64, 65-66). Trotsky’s “The War and the International” On the outbreak of war, Trotsky was forced to leave Vienna and for two months he settled in Zurich, where he wrote “The War and the International,” which was published in November in “Golos” (The Voice), a Menshevik paper published in Paris. In this work Trotsky put forward the view that “the main obstacle to economic development’ was the existence the national state”: “The old national state .. has outlived itself, and is now an intolerable hindrance to economic development. . . .The outlived and antiquated national ‘fatherland’ has become the main obstacle to economic development . . . .The national states have become a hindrance to the development of the forces of production.” (L. Trotsky: Preface to “The War and the International”; London; 1971; p. vii, x, xii). Thus, declared Trotsky, the aim of the working class should be the creation of a ‘republican United States of Europe”: “The task of the proletariat is to create a far more powerful fatherland, with far greater power of resistance – the republican United States of Europe.” Lenin at first (in one document only) accepted the slogan of a “United States of Europe”: “The immediate political slogan of the Social-Democrats of Europe must be the formation of a republican United States of Europe.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The War and Russian Social-Democracy’ in: “Selected Works;’ Volume 5; Moscow; 1935; p. 129). By August 1915, however, the Bolsheviks, on Lenin’s initiative had decisively rejected this slogan, firstly, because it could, under capitalist society, only be reactionary: “From the point of view of the economic conditions of imperialism, . . the United States of Europe is either impossible or reactionary under capitalism. A United States of Europe under capitalism is equivalent to an agreement to divide up the colonies. Under capitalism, however, . . no other principle of division . . . . is possible except force. . . Division cannot take place except ‘in proportion to strength’, And strength changes in the course of economic development. Of course, temporary agreements between capitalists and between the powers are possible. In this sense, the United States of Europe is possible as an agreement between the European capitalists. . but what for? Only for the purpose of jointly suppressing socialism in Europe, of jointly protecting colonial booty against Japan and America. . . Under capitalism, the United States of Europe would mean the organisation of reaction to retard the more rapid development of America.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The United States of Europe Slogan’, in: “Selected Works,” Volume 5; London 1935; p. 139, 140, 141). and secondly because if regarded as a socialist slogan, it suggests that the victory of socialism was possible only on an all European scale: “Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence, the victory of socialism is possible, first in a few or even in one single capitalist country.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p.141). Lenin concludes: “It is for those reasons and after repeated debates that the editors of the central organ have come to the conclusion that the United States of Europe slogan is incorrect.'” (V.I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 141). That Trotsky did, in fact, link the Slogan of “a United States of Europe” with the concept, inherent in his “theory of permanent revolution,” that proletarian revolution could only be successful an an international scale, is shown by his reply to Lenin’s article: “The only more or less concrete historical argument advanced against the slogan of a United States of Europe was formulated in the Swiss ‘Sotsial-Demokrat’ in the following sentence: ‘Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism’. From this the ‘Sotsial-Domokrat’ draws the conclusion that the victory of socialism is possible in one country, and that therefore there is no reason to make the dictatorship of the proletariat in each separate country contingent upon the establishment of a United States of Europe. That capitalist development in different countries is uneven is an absolutely incontrovertible argument. But this unevenness is itself extremely uneven. The capitalist level of Britain, Austria, Germany or France is not identical. But in comparison with Africa and Asia all these countries represent capitalist ‘Europe’, which has grown ripe for the social revolution. That no country in its struggle must ‘wait’ for others, is an elementary thought which it is useful and necessary to reiterate in order that he idea of concurrent international action may not be replaced by the idea of temporising international inaction. Without waiting for the others, we begin and continue the struggle nationally, in the full confidence that our initiative will give an impetus to the struggle in other countries; but if this should not occur, it would be hopeless to think — as historical experience and theoretical considerations testify — that, for example, a revolutionary Russia could hold out in the face of a conservative Europe.” (L. Trotsky: Article in “Nashe Slovo” (Our Word), No. 87; April 12th., 1916, cited in: J. V. Stalin: “The October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists,” in: ‘Works”, Volume 6; Moscow; 1953; p. 390-1). In the autumn of 1916 Lenin reiterated his opposition to Trotsky’s slogan of a United States of Europe: “As early as 1902, he (i.e., the British economist John Hobson — Ed.) had an excellent insight into the meaning and significance of a ‘United States of Europe” (be it said for the benefit of Trotsky the Kautskyian!) and of all that is now being glossed over by the hypocritical Kautskyians of various countries, namely, that the opportunists (social-chauvinists) are working hand in hand with the imperialist bourgeoisie precisely towards creating an imperialist Europe on the backs of Asia and Africa.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘Imperialism and the Split in Socialism”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 11; London; 1943; p. 752). Trotsky, however, continued — even after the Russian October Revolution of 1917 — to hold that the construction of socialism in Europe was possible only on an all-European basis. In the postscript to a collection of articles published in 1922 under the title of “A Peace Programme,” he wrote: “The assertion reiterated several times in the ‘Peace Programme’ that a proletarian revolution cannot culminate victoriously within national bounds may perhaps seem to some readers to have been refuted by the nearly five years’ experience of our Soviet Republic. But such a conclusion would be unwarranted. . . We have not arrived, or even begun to arrive, at tho creation of a socialist society. . . Real progress of a socialist economy in Russia will become possible only after the victory of the proletariat in the major European countries.” (L. Trotsky: Postscript to ‘A Peace Programme , cited by: J. V. Stalin: “The Social-Democratic Deviation in our Party; in: “Works”, Volume 8; Moscow; 1954; p. 271-2). “Our Word” In November 1914, Trotsky left Switzerland for Paris to take up the post of war correspondent of the newspaper “Kievskaya Mysl” (Kievan Thought), which supported the war effort of the tsarist government. Settled in Paris, he joined the editorial staff of “Golos” (The Voice) , a newspaper published by a group of Mensheviks headed by Yuli Martov who, unlike the official Menshevik leadership which supported the war effort of the tsarist government, had adopted an attitude of verbal opposition to the war without seeking to organise active revolutionary struggle against the tsarist regime. “Golos” had commenced publication in September l914, and, when it was suppressed by the French government in January l9l5, it was replaced by “Nashe Slovo” (Our Word), on the editorial staff of which Trotsky continued to serve. The chief organiser of the paper was Vladimir Antonov-Ovseenko (a former tsarist officer who after the October Revolution became Director of the Political Administration of the Red Army) . Its Paris staff included, in addition to Trotsky, Anatoly Lunacharsky (who later became Commissar for Education), David Ryazanov (later director of the Marx-Engels Institute), Solomon Lozovsky (later head of the Red International of Labour Unions), Dmitri Manuilsky (later head of the Communist International) Grigori Sokolnikov (later Commissar for Finance), and the historian Mikhail Pokrovsky (later director of the Soviet State Archives). Its foreign correspondents included Grigori Chicherin (later Commissar for Foreign Affairs), Aleksandra Kollontai (later Commissar of Social Welfare), Karl Radek (later to hold a leading position in the Communist International), Moissei Uritsky, Khristian Rakovsky (the son of a Bulgarian landlord, later to become Prime Minister of the Soviet Ukraine), Ivan Maisky (later Soviet Ambassador to Britain), and the Anglo-Russian historian Theodore Rothstein (later Soviet Ambassador to Persia). 1915 – 1916: The Three Trends in the Russian Labour Movement The three trends described in an earlier section were represented in the Russian labour movement as follows: 1) The social-chauvinist trend was represented by: a) a group of Mensheviks headed by Aleksandr Potresov, around the journal “Nasha Zarya” (Our Dawn), published in St. Petersburg. “Nasha Zaraya” was suppressed by the tsarist government in October 1914, and its place was taken in January 1915 by “Nashe Dyolo” (Our Cause). “In Russia the fundamental nucleus of opportunism, the Liquidationist ‘Nasha Zarya’, became the fundamental nucleus of chauvinism.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Collapse of the Second International,” in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 308). b) a group of Mensheviks headed by Grigori Plekhanov and Grigori Alexinsky around the journal “Prizyv” (The Call) published in Paris. “The main theories of the social-chauvinists. . . are represented by Plekhanov.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 282). “Plekhanov has sunk into-nationalism, hiding his Russian chauvinism under Francophilism; so has Alexinsky.” (V. I. Lenin: “Position and Tasks of the Socialist International”, in: ibid.; p. 85-86). 2) The “Centrist” trend was represented by: a) The Menshevik “Organisation Committee” (O.C), headed by Pavel Axelrod, which in February 1915 began publication of “Izvestia” (News) of the Foreign Secretariat of the Organisation Committee. “This Centrist tendency includes . . the party of the Organisation Committee . . and others in Russia.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution,” in: “Selected Works,” Volume 6; London; 1935; p. 65). “Take . .the . manifesto of the 0.C (Organisation Committee-Alliance Editor). . . . 1) The manifesto does not contain a single statement which in principle repudiates national defence in the present war; 2) there is absolutely nothing in the manifesto which in principle would be inacceptible to the ‘defencists’ or social chauvinists; 3) there are a number of statements in the manifesto which are completely’identical’ with ‘defencism’: ‘The proletariat cannot remain indifferent to the impending defeat’; . . ‘the proletariat is vitally interested in the self-preservation of the country.'” (V. I. Lenin: “Have the O.C. and the Chkheidze Fraction a Policy of Their Own?”, in “Collected Works,” Viume 19; London; l942; p. 36, 37). “To cover up this political reality (i.e., social-chauvinism — Ed.) by Left phrases and quasi-Social-Democratic-ideology, is the actual political meaning of the . . activities of the Organisation-Committee. In the realm of ideology — the ‘Neither- victory nor defeat’ slogan; in the realm of practice — an anti-‘split’ struggle — this is the business-like . . programme of ‘peace’, with the ‘Nashe Dyelo’ and Plekhanov.” (V. I. Lenin: State of Affairs within Russian Social Democracy’, in: Collected Works”, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 204.) b) the Menshevik Duma fraction, headed by Nikolai Chkheidze. “This Centrist tendency includes . . Chkheidze and others in Russia.” “Chkheidze’s group confined itself to the parliamentary field. It did not vote appropriations, since it would have roused a storm of indignation among the workers. . . Neither did it protest against social-chauvinism.” (V. I. Lenin: “Socialism and War,” in: ibid.; p. 240). “Chkheidze uses the same chauvinist phrases about the ‘danger of defeat’, stands for . . ‘the struggle for peace’, etc., etc.” (V. I. Lenin: “Have the 0.C. and the Chkheidze Fraction a Policy of Their Own?”, in ‘Collected Works”, Volume 19; London; 19~2; p. 39). “(1) The ‘save the country” formula employed by Chkhejdze differs in no material respect from defencism; 2) the Chkheidze fraction never opposed Nr. Potresov and Co. . 3) the decisive fact: the fraction has never opposed participation in the War Industries Committees’. (V. I. Lenin: “The Chkheidze Fraction and its Role’, in: ibid.; p. 325). “To cover up this political reality (i.e., social-chauvinism — Ed.) by ‘Left ‘phrases and quasi-Social-Democratic ideology, is the actual political meaning of the legal activities of Chkheidze’s fraction.” (V. I. Lenin: “State of affairs within Russian Social-Democracy, in: “Collected “Works”, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 204). c) the group, headed by Trotsky, around “Nashe Slovo,” the policy of which will be discussed in the next sections. 3) The revolutionary, international trend was represented by the Central Committee of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, headed by Lenin. The theses which Lenin put forward in September 1914 from Berne (Switzerland), on the other hand, called on the work in classes of all belligerent countries actively to oppose the war and to seek to transform it into a civil war against ” their own” imperialists. “Transform the present imperialist war into civil war — is the only correct proletarian slogan.”‘ (V. I. Lenin: “The War and Russian Social Democracy,”‘ in: “Selected Works,” Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 130). The “Peace” Slogan-The First of Trotsky’s Two Slogans The policy put forward by Trotsky in the pages of “Nashe Slovo” in relation to the imperialist war may be summarised in two slogans: firstly, that of “revolutionary struggle for peace” (or “revolutionary struggle against the war,” called by Lenin the “peace slogan”: “Phrase-mongers like Trotsky (See No. 105 of the ‘Nashe Slovo’) defend, in opposition to us, the peace slogan.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The ‘Peace’ Slogan Appraised,” in: “Collected Works,'” Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 262). ‘Revolutionary struggle against the war ‘ . . is an example of the high-flown phraseology with which Trotsky always justifies opportunism.” (V. I. Lenin: “Defeat of One’s Own Government in the Imperialist War”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 5; London 1935; p. 3142). Lenin opposed the “peace” slogan throughout the war: “The peace slogan is in my judgment incorrect at the present moment. This is a philistine’s, a preacher’s, slogan. The proletarian slogan must be civil war.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to A. G. Shlyapnikov, October 17th., 1914, in: “Collected Works’, Volume 18; n.d.; p. 75). “Propaganda of peace at the present time, if not accompanied by a call for revolutionary mass action, is only capable of spreading illusions, of demoralising the proletariat by imbuing it with belief in the humanitarianism of the bourgeoisie, and of making it a plaything in the hands of the secret diplomacy of the belligerent countries. In particular, the ilea that a so-called democratic peace is possible without a series of revolutions is profoundly mistaken.” (V. I. Lenin: Conference of the Sections of the RSDLP Abroad,” in: “Selected Works”, Volume 5; London 1935; p. 135). “To accept the peace slogan per Se, and to repeat it, would be encouraging the ‘pompous air of powerless (what is worse hypocritical) phrasemongers’; that would mean deceiving the people with the illusion that the present governments, the present ruling ‘classes, are capable before they are . . eliminated by a number of revolutions of granting a peace even half way satisfactory to democracy and the working class. Nothing is more harmful than such a deception.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The Peace Question’, in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 266). In September 1915 Trotsky carried forward his opposition to the Leninist policy towards the war at the International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald (Switzerland). The Bolshevik resolution was rejected by a majority of the delegates, including Trotsky. As he expresses it himself: “Lenin was on the extreme left at the Conference. In many questions he was in a minority of one, even within the Zimmerwald left wing, to which I did not formally belong.” (L. Trotsky: “My Life”; New York; 1970; p. 250). In these circumstances, the Bolsheviks agreed to sign a compromise manifesto drafted by Trotsky: “The revolutionary wing, led by Lenin, and the pacifist wing, which comprised the majority of the delegates, agreed with difficulty on a conmon manifesto of which I had prpared the draft”. (L. Trotsky: ibid p. 250). The central point of this manifesto was “the struggle for peace”: “It is necessary to take up this struggle for peace, for a peace without annexations or war indemnities. . . .It is the task and the duty of the Socialists of the belligerent countries to take up this struggle with full force.” Manifesto Of the International Specialist Conference, Zimmerwald, cited in: V. I Lenin: Collected Works’, Vo1ume 18; London; Ibid.; p. 475). Lenin commented on this manifests after the conference: “Passing to ‘the struggle for peace’…here also we find inconsistency, timidity, failure to say everything that ought to be said. . . It does not name directly, openly and clearly the revolutionary methods of struggle.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The First Step’, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 343). “Neither Victory nor Defeat”- Trotsky’s Second Slogan Secondly, in opposition to Lenin’s declaration that a revolutionary struggle against “one’s own imperialists in wartime was facilitated by, and facilitated, the military defeat of “one’s own” imperialists in the war, Trotsky put forward the slogan of “Neither victory nor defeat!”: “‘Bukvoyed (i.e., Ryazonov — Ed.) and Trotsky defend the slogan ‘Neither victery nor defeat!” (V. I. Lenin: “Defeat Of One’s Own Governrnent in the Imperialist War”, in: Selected Works’, Volume 5; London 1935; p. 145-6). In an Open Letter addressed to the Bolsheviks in “Nashe Slovo” in the summer of l9l5, Trotsky denounced Lenin’s policy of “revolutionary defeatism” as: “An uncalled-for and unjustifiable concession to the political methodology of social-patriotism which substitutes for the revolutionary struggle against the war and the conditions that cause it, what, under present conditions, is an extremely arbitrary orientation towards the lesser evil.” (L. Trotsky: in: “Nashe Slovo”, No. 105, cited in V. I. Lenin: “Defeat of One’s Own Government in the Imperialist War”, in: ‘Selected Works”, Volume 5; London; l935; p. 142). Lenin replied to Trotsky’s Open Letter in August l9l5, in his article “Defeat of One’s Government in the Imperialist War”: “This is an example of the high-flown phraseology with which Trotsky always justifies opportunism. Making shift with phrases, Trotsky has lost his way amidst three pine trees. It seems to him that to desire Russia’s defeat means desiring Germany’s victory. . . To help people who are unable to think, the Berne resolution made it clear that in all imperialist ceuntries the proletariat must now desire the defeat of its own government. Bukvoyed and Trotsky preferred to evade this truth. . Had Bukvoyed and Trotsky thought a little, they would have realised that they adopt the point ‘of view of a war of governments and the bourgeoisie, i.e., that they cringe before the ‘political methodology of ‘social-patriotism’, to use Trotsky’s affected language. Revolution in wartime is civil war; and the transformation of war between governments into civil war is, on the one hand, facilitated by military reverses (‘defeats’) of governments; on the other hand, it is impossible really to strive for such a transformation without thereby facilitating defeat. The very reason the chauvinists. . .repudiate the ‘slogan’ of defeat is that this slogan alone implies a consistent appeal for revolutionary action against one’s own government in wartime. Without such action, millions of the r-r-revolutionary phrases like war against ‘war and the conditions, and so forth’ are not worth a penny. . . . To repudiate the ‘defeat’ slogan means reducing one’s revolutionary actions to an empty phrase or to mere hypocrisy. .. . The slogan “Neither victory nor defeat” . . is nothing but a paraphrase of the ‘defence of the fatherland’ slogan. . . . . On closer examination, this slogan will be found to mean ‘civil peace’, renunciation of the class struggle by the oppressed classes in all belligerent ‘countries, since class struggle is impossible without . . facilitating the defeat of one’s own country. Those who accept the slogan ‘Neither victory nor defeat’, can only hypocritically be in favour of the class struggle, of ‘breaking civil peace’; those in practice, renounce an independent proletarian policy because they subordinate the proletariat of all belligerent countries to the absolutely bourgeois task of safeguarding imperialist governments against defeat. . Those who are in favour of the slogan ‘Neither victory nor defeat’ are consciously or unconsciusly chauvinists, at best they are conciliatory petty bourgeois; at all events they are enemies of proletarian policy, partisans of the present governments, of the present ruling classes. . . . Those who stand for the slogan ‘Neither victory nor defeat’ are in fact on the side of the bourgeoisie and the opportunists, for they ‘do not believe’ in the possibility of international revolutionary action of the working class against its own governments, and they do not wish to help the development of such action which, though no easy task, it is true, is the only task worthy of a proletarian, the only socialist task.'” (V. I. Lenin: “Defeat of One’s Own Government in the Imperialist War”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 142-3, 145, 146-7). In April 1915 Rosa Luxemburg, in prison, wrote, under the pseudonym “Junius”, a pamphlet entitled ‘The Crisis of German Social Democracy.” It was published a year later, in April 1916. Rosa Luxemburg, like Trotsky opposed Lenin’s policy of “revolutionary defeatism“: “What shall be the practical attitude of social democracy in the present war? Shall it declare: since this is an imperialist war, since we do not enjoy in our country any socialist self-determination, its existence or non-existence is of no consequence to us, and we will surrender it to the enemy? Passive fatalism can never be the role of a revolutionary party like social democracy. . . . Yes, socialists should defend their country in great historical crises.” (R. Luxemburg: “The Crisis of German Social Democracy”, in: “Rosa Luxemburg Speaks’; Now York; 1970; p. 311, 314,). and like Trotsky, she put forward the slogan of “Neither victory nor defeat”: “Here lies the great fault of German social democracy….. . . It was their duty . to proclaim to the people of Germany that in this war victory and defeat would be equally fatal.” (R. Luxemburg: ibid.; p. 314). suggesting that the defence of the country “against defeat” should be carried on under the slogan she had consistently opposed as a leader of the Social-Democratic Party of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, the Slogan of “national self-determination”: “Instead of covering this imperialist war with a lying mantle of national self-defence, social democracy should have demanded the right of national self-determination seriously,” (R. Luxemburg: ibid.; p. 311-12). Lenin replied to Rosa Luxemburg’s pamphlet in his article “The Pamphlet by Junius”, published in August 1916: “We find the same error in Junius’ arguments about which is better, victory or defeat? His conclusion is that both are equally bad. . . This is the point of view not of the revolutionary proletariat, but of the pacifist petty bourgeois.. . . Another fallacious argument advanced by Junius is in connection with the question of defence of the fatherland. Junius . . falls into the very strange error of trying to drag a national programme into the present non-national war. It sounds almost incredible, but it is true. He proposes to ‘oppose’ the imperialist war with a national programme.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Pamphlet by Junius”; in: “Collected ‘Works’, Volume 19; London; 1942; p. 212, 207, 209). True, Rosa Luxemburg, unlike the open social-chauvinists, supported the concept of class struggle against one’s own government during the war, not, however, in relation to the slogan of “turn the imperialist war into civil war”, but as “the best defence against a foreign enemy”: “The centuries have proven that not the state of siege, but relentless class struggle . . is the best protection and the best defence against a foreign enemy.” Lenin commented: “In saying that class struggle is the best means of defence against invasian, Junius applied Marxian dialectics only half way, taking one step on the right road and immediately deviating from it. . . Civil war against the bourgeoisie is also a form of class struggle, and only this form of class struggle would have saved Europe (the whole of Europe, not only one country) from the peril of invasion. Junius came very close to the correct solution of the problem and to the correct slogan: civil war against the bourgeoisi for socialism; but, as if afraid to speak the whole truth, he turned back to the phantasy of a ‘national war’ in 1914, 1915 and 1916. . .. Junius has not completely rid himself of the ‘environment’ of the German Social-Democrats, even the Lefts, who are afraid to follow revolutionary slogans to their logical conclusion.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 210, 212). The Struggle against National Self-Determination The manifesto drafted by Trotsky which was adopted by the International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald (Switzerland) in September 1915, recognised the right of self-determination of nations as an “indestructible principle”: “The right of self-determination of nations must be the indestructible principle in the system of national relationships of peoples.” (Manifesto of the International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald, September 1915, in: V. I. Lenin: “Collective Works” , Volume 18, London; n .d.; p. 475) The Polish delegation at the conference (consisting of Karl Radek, Adolf Warski and Jacob Ganetsky) opposed recognition of the right of self determination of nations, but submitted a declaration on the national question which, in fact, recognised the right of self-determination of Poland, since it declared that the international working class: “Will break the fetters of national oppression and abolish all forms of foreign domination, and secure for the Polish people the possibility of all-sided, free development as an equal member in a League of Nations.” (Bulletin of the International Socialist Committee in Berne, No. 2; September 27th., 1915; p. 15). Lenin commented on this declaration: “There is no material difference between these postulates and the recognition of the right of nations to self-determination, except that their political formulation is still more diffuse and vague than the majority of the programmes and resolutions of the Second International. Any attempt to express these ideas in precise political formulae . . will prove still more strikingly the error committed by the Polish Social-Democrats in repudiating the self-determination of nations” (V. I. Lenin: “The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”; in: “Selected Works’, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 279-80). In October 1915 Karl Radek (under the pseudonym “Parabellum” wrote an article in the “Berner Tagwacht” (Berne Morning Watch entitled “Annexations and Social-Democracy,” in which, on behalf of the leadership of the Social-Democratic Party of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, he declared that: “We are opposed to annexations.” (K. Radek: “Annexations and Social-Democracy; cited in: V. I. Lenin: “The Revolutionary Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 282). but denounced the: “Struggle for the non-existent right to self-determination.” (K. Radek: ibid; p. 282). Lenin replied to Radek in November 1915 in his article “The Revolutionary Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”: “Our ‘struggle against annexations’ will be meaningless and not at all terrifying to the social-patriots if we do not declare that the Socialist of an oppressing nation who does not conduct propaganda, both in peace time and war time, in favour of the freedom of secession for the oppressed nations is not a Socialist and not an internationalist, but a chauvinist.”‘ (V. I. Lenin: “The Revolutionary Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, in: ‘Selected Works, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 287). In November 1915 Nikolai Bukharin and Grigori Pyatakov sent to the Central Committee of the RSDLP the theses, “The Slogan of the Right of Nations to Self-Determination,” written by Bukharin. The theses concluded: “We do not under any circumstances support the government of the Great Power that suppresses the rebellion or the outburst of indignatien of an oppressed nation; but at the same time, we ourselves do not mobilise the proletarian forces under the slogan ‘right of nations to self-determination’. In such a case, our task is to mobilise the forces of the proletariat of both nations (jointly with others) under the slogan ‘civil class war for socialism’, and conduct propaganda against the mobilisation of the forces under the slogan ‘right of nations to self-determination.'” (N. Bukharin: “The slogan of the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, cited in: V.I. Lenin: ‘Selected Works’, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 379-80). Lenin replied to Bukharin’s theses in March 1916 with theses of his own, entitled “The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”; “Victorious socialism must achieve complete democracy and, consequently, not only bring about the complete equality of nations, but also give effect to the right of oppressed nations to self-determination, i.e. the right to free political secession. Socialist Parties which fail to prove by all their activities now, as well as during the revolution and after its victory, that they will free the enslaved nations and establish relations with them on the basis of free union — a free union is a lying phrase without right to secession — such parties are committing treachery to socialism”. (V. I. Lenin: “The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, in: ‘Selected Works’, Volume 5; London; 1935 p. 267). Rosa Luxemburg, writing under the psedonym “Junius” in the pamphlet, “The Crisis of German Social-Democracy,” published in April 1916, declared that wars of national liberation were impossible under imperialism: “In the present imperialistic milieu there can be no wars of national self-defence.” (R. Luxemburg: ‘The Crisis of German Social-Democracy,” in: “Rosa Luxemburg Speaks”; New York; 1970; p. 305). Lenin commented in “The Pamphlet by Junius,” published in August 1916: “National wars waged by colonial and semi-eolonial countries are not only possible but inevitable in the epoch of imperialism. National wars must not be regarded as impossible in the epoch of imperialism even in Europe. The postulate that ‘there can be no more national wars’ is obviously fallacious in theory. . . But this fallacy is also very harmful in a practical political sense; it gives rise to the stupid propaganda for ‘disarmament’, as if no other war but reactionary wars are possible; it is the cause of the still more stupid and downright reactionary indifference towards national movements. Such indifference becomes chauvinism when members of ‘Great’ European nations, i.e., nations which oppress a mass of small and colonial peoples, declare with a learned air that ‘there can be no more national wars.”’ (V. I. Lenin: “The Pamphlet by Junius”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 19; London 1942; p. 204, 205, 206). In August 1916 Grigori Pyatakov wrote, under the pseudonyn “P. Kievsky,” an article entitled: “The Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination.” In this article, which was not published, Pyatakov denounced the slogan of the right of nations to self-determination on the grounds that: “This demand leads directly to social-patriotism.” (G. Pyatakov: “The Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self Determination, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “A Caricature of Marxism and ‘Imperialist Economism’” in Ibid; “Collected Works”, Volume 19; London 1942; p. 216). Lenin replied to Pyatakov’s argument in a long article “A Caricature of Marxism and ‘lmperialist Economics,’” written in October 1916 but not published until 1924: “In the present imperialist war, . . phrases about defence of the fatherland are deception of the people, for this war is not a national war. In a truly national war the words ‘defence of the fatherland’ are deception, and we are not opposed to such a war.” (V. I. Lenin: “Caricature of Marxism and ‘Imperialist Economism”, in ibid.; p. 217). Pyatakov insisted: “With regard to the colonies, we confine ourselves to a negative slogan, i.e., . . “Get out of the colonies.'” (G. Pyatakov: ibid.; p. 251) And Lenin replied: “Both the political and the economic content of the slogan ‘Get out of the colonies!” amounts to one thing. . Only: freedom of secession for the colonial nations; freedom to establish a separate state.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid; p. 252). The theoretical basis of Pyatakov’s opposition to national self-determination is summarised in his declaration that: “. . dualistic propaganda is substituted for the monistic action of the International.” (G. Pyatakov: ibid.; p. 241). To which Lenin replied: “Is the actual condition of the workers in the oppressing nations the same as that of the workers in the oppressed nations from the standpoint of the national problem? No, they are not the same. . .That being the case, what is to be said about P. Kievsky’s phrase: the ‘monistic’ action of the International? It is an empty, sonorous phrase, and nothing more. In order that the action of the International, which in real life consists of workers who are divided into those belonging to oppressing nations and those belonging to oppressing nations, may be monistic action, propaganda must be carried on differently in each case.” (V. I. Lenin: Ibid; p. 242-3) This “dualistic propaganda” had already been described by Lenin: “The Social-Democrats of the oppressing notions must demand the freedom of secession for the oppressed notions,. . The Social-Democrats of the oppressed nations, however, must put in the forefront the unity and the fusion of the workers of the oppressed nations with the workers of the oppressing nations.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Revolutionary Proletariat And the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 5; London 1935; p. 284) Lenin’s summary of Pyatakov’s article was devastating: “P. Kievsky. . totally fails to understand Marxism. Kievsky does not advance a single correct argument. The only thing that is correct in his article, that is, if there are no mistakes in the figures, is the footnote in which he quotes some statistics about banks.” (V. I. Lenin: A Caricature of Marxism and ‘Imperialist Economism'”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 19; London; 1942; p. 218, 262). In this struggle between the advocates of the right of self-determination of nations and its opponents, Trotsky adopted a characteristically centrist position: hypocritical support for the slogan but without support for its essential content, the right of secession: “Trotsky . . is body and soul for self-determination, but in his case too it is an idle phrase, for he does not demand freedom of secession for nations oppressed by the “fatherland” of the socialist of the given nationality.” (V. I. Lenin: “The ‘Peace Programme”, in “Collected Works”, Volume 19 London 1942; p. 66). “The Kautskyists hypocritically recognise self-determination – -in Russia this is the road taken by Trotsky and Martov. In words, both declare that they are in favour of self-determination, as Kautsky does. But in practice? Trotsky engages in his customary eclecticism. . . The prevailing hypocrisy remains unexposed, . .. namely, the attitude to be adopted towards the nation that is oppressed by ‘my’ nation. . . . A Russian Social-Democrat who ‘recognises’ self-determination of nations . . without fighting for freedom of Secession for the notions oppressed by tsarism is really an imperialist and a lackey of tsarism. Whatever the subjective ‘well-meaning’ intentions of Trotsky and Martov may be, they, by their evasions, objectively support Russian social-imperialism.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up’, in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 19; London; 1942; p. 305) Trotsky’s Conciliationism Lenin stood firmly for the organisational separation of revolutionary internationalism from both open and concealed (ie. Centrist) social-chauvinism: “To keep united with opportunism at the present time means precisely to subjugate the working class to ‘its’ bourgeoisie, to make an alliance with it for the oppression of other nations and for the struggle for the privileges of a great nation; at the same time it means splitting the revolutionary proletariat of all countries.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘Socialism and War’, in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 230-1). “We must declare the idea of unity with the Organisation Committee an illusion detrimental to the workers’ cause.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘And Now What?”, in: ibid.; p. 109). “We shall not be for unity with Chkheidze’s fraction (as desired both by Trotsky, by the 0rgansation Committee, and by Plekhanov and Co.; . for this would mean to cover up and defend the ‘Nashe Dyelo.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Aleksendro Kollontai, summer 1915, in: ibid.; p. 208). In contrast to Lenin, Trotsky stood consistently for the unity of what he termed the “internationalist” groups, a category which included the concealed social-chauvinists of the Centre (the Organisation Committee, the Menshevik Duma fraction and the group around Trotsky). At the beginning of 1915, “Nashe Slovo” addressed an appeal to the Bolshevik Central Committee and to the Menshevik Organisation Committee proposing a conference of all the groups which took a “negative attitude’ towards social-chauvinism. In its reply, dated March 1915, the Organisation Committee said: ‘To the conference must be invited the foreign representatives of all those party centres and groups which were . . present at the Brussels Conference of the International Socialist Bureau before the war.’ (Letter of Organisation Committee, March 12th., 1915, cited in: V. I. Lenin: The Question of the Unity of Internationalists”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 177). “Thus, the Organisation Committee declines on principle to confer with the internationalists, since it wishes to confer also with the social-patriots (it is known that Plekhanov’s and Alexinsky’s policies were represented at Brussels). We must not confer, it says, without the social-patriots, we must confer with them!” Nevertheless, Trotsky continued his efforts to bring about organisational unity between the Bolsheviks end the concealed social-chauvinists of the Centre. In June 1915 Trotsky wrote an Open Letter to the editors of the Bolshevik magazine “Kommunist”: published in No. 105 of “Nashe Slovo” in which he said: “I am proud of the conduct of our Duma members (the Chkheidze group); I regard them as the most important agency of internationalist education of the proletariat in Russia, and for that very reason I deem it the task of every revolutionary Social-Democrat to extend to them every support and to raise their authority in the International.” (L. Trotsky: Open Letter to the Editors of “Kommunist”, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; London; n.d., p. 435) Lenin commented on Trotsky’s unprincipled conciliationism in various articles: “The elements that are grouped around the ‘Nashe Slovo’ are vacillating between platonic sympathy for internationalism and a tendency for unity at any price with the “Nasha Zarya” and the Organisation Committee.” (V. I. Lenin: “Conference of the Foreign Sections of the RSDLP”, in: Collected Works, Volume 18; London; n .d.; p.150). “‘Nashe Slovo’ . . raises a revolt against social-nationalism while standing on its knees before it, since it fails to unmask the most dangerous defenders of the bourgeois current (like Kautsky); it does not declare war against opportunism but, on the contrary, passes it over in silence; it does not undertake, and does not point out, any real steps towards liberating socialism from its shameful patriotic captivity. By saying that neither unity nor a split with those who joined the bourgeoisie is imperative, the ‘Nashe Slovo’ practically surrenders to the opportunists.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Collapse of Platonic Internationalism”, in: ibid.; p.183). “Trotsky always, entirely disagrees with the social-chauvinists in principle, but agrees with them in everything in practice.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘State of Affairs within Russian Social-Democracy”, in: Ibid.; p. 205-6). “We shall not be for unity with Chkheidze’s fraction (As desired . .by Trotsky . .) for this would mean to cover up and defend the ‘Nashe Dyelo’… Roland-Holst, as well as Rakovsky . .and Trotsky too, are in my judgment all most harmful ‘Kautskyists’, inasmuch as they are all, in one form or another, for unity with the opportunists, . . are embellishing opportunism, they all (each in his way) advance eclecticism instead of revolutionary Marxism.” (V. I. Lenin: Letters to Aleksandra Kollontai, summer 1915, in: ibid.; p. 208, 209). “In Russia Trotsky . . fights for unity with the opportunist and chauvinist group “Nashe Zarya.'” (V. I. Lenin: ‘Socialism and War”, in: ibid.; p.232). “Martov and Trotsky in Russia are causing the greatest harm to the labour movement by their insistence upon a fictitious unity, thus hindering, the now ripened imminent unification of the opposition in all countries and the creation of the Third International.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The Tasks of the Opposition in France”, in: ‘Collected Works”, Volume 19; London; 1942; p. 32). “What are our differences with Trotsky?. . In brief — he is a Kautskyite, that is, he stands for unity with the Kautskyites in the International and with Chkheidze’s parliamentary group in Russia. We are absolutely against such unity.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Henrietta Roland-Holst, Morch 8th., 1916, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 43; Moscow; 1969; p. 515-16). “What a swine this Trotsky is — Left phrases and a bloc with the Right. . . He ought to be exposed.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Aleksendra Kollontai, February 17th., 1917, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 35; Moscow, 1966; p. 285). Kamenev’s Defence In November 1915 eleven leading members of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, including five deputies, were arrested at a conference near Petrograd and charged with being members of an organisation aiming at the overthrow of the existing political order. At their trial Lev Kamenev and two of the deputies declared in their defence that they did not accept the policy of the Party in so for as it enjoined members to work for the defeat of Russia in the war. “The trial of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Fraction . . has proven first, that this advanced detachment of revolutionary Social-Democracy in Russia did not show sufficient firmness at the trial. . To attempt to show solidarity with the social-patriot, Mr. Yordansky, as did Comrade Rosenfeld (i.e., Kamenev –Ed.) or to point out one’s disagreement with the Central Committee, is an incorrect method; this is impermissible from the standpoint of revolutionary Social-Democracy.” (V. I. Lenin: “What has the Trial of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Fraction Proven?”, in: “Works”, Volume 18; Moscow; n.d.; p. 151) 1916: The Attempt to Introduce Anarchist Ideas into the Party In 1916 Nikolai Bukharin wrote, under the pseudonym “Nota Bene,” an article entitled ‘The Imperialist Predatory State” in the magazine “The Youth International” (organ of the Bureau of the International League of Socialist Youth Organisations) , in which he said: “It is quite a mistake to seek the difference between Socialists and anarchists in the fact that the former are in favour of the state while the latter are against it. The real difference is that revolutionary Social-Democracy desires to organise social production on new lines, centralised, . . whereas decentralised, anarchist production would mean retrogression. . . .Social-Democracy. . must now more than ever emphasise its hostility to the state in principle.” (N. Bukharin: “The Imperialist Predatory State”, cited in: V. I. Lenin; ‘The Youth International”, in: Selected Works”, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 243, 244). “This is wrong. The author raises the question of the difference in the attitude of Socialists and anarchists towards the state, But he does not answer this question, but another, namely the difference in the attitude of Socialists and anarchists towards the economic foundation of future society. . . The Socialists are in favour of utilising the present state and its institutions in the struggle for the emancipation of the working class, and they also urge the necessity of utilising the State for the peculiar form of transition from capitalism to socialism. This transitional form is the dictatorship of the proletariat, which is also a state. The anarchists want to ‘abolish’ the state, to ‘blow it up’. The Socialists . . hold that the state will die out. Comrade Nota-Bene’s . . remark about the ‘state idea’ is entirely muddled. It is un-Marxian and un-socialistic.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Youth International’, in: ibid.; p. 243, 244). In April 1929 Stalin commented: “The well-known theoretical controversy which flared up in 1916 between Lenin and Bukharin on the question of the state . . is important in order to reveal Bukharin’s inordinate pretensions to teach Lenin, as well as the roots of his theoretical unsoundness on such important questions as the dictatorship of the proletariat. . . .Bukharin landed in a semi-Anarchist puddle. In Bukharin’s opinion the working class should be hostile in principle to the state as such, including the working-class state.” (J.V. Stalin: “The Right Deviation in the CPSU (B.)”, in: “Leninism”; London; 1942; p. 276, 277). 1916-1917: Trotsky Goes to America In September 1916 the French authorities, at the request of the tsarist government, banned “Nashe Slovo” and deported Trotsky to Spain. Although he did not participate in any political activity in Spain, after a few days he was arrested by the Spanish police and, in December, deported to the United States. He arrived in New York in January 1917. The Assassination of Rasputin During the war great influence was exercised over the tsar and tsarina by the monk Grigori Rasputin. In December 1916 a group of nobles, headed by the Grand Duke Dimitri Pavlovich, organised the assassination of Rasputin, believing that his influence was being used against the war effort. 1917: Trotsky in America In January 1917 Trotsky landed in New York, and joined the staff of a Russian magazine published there under the editorship of Nikolai Bukharin and Aleksandra Kollontai, -“Novy Nir” (New World). Typically, he formed a bloc with the right-wing members of the staff against the Left: “Trotsky arrived, and this scoundrel at once ganged up with the Right wing of ‘Novy Mir’ against the Left Zimmerwaldists!! That’s it!! That’s Trotsky for you!! Always true to himself – twists, swindles, poses as a Left, helps the Right, so long as he can.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Inessa Armand, February 19th., 1917, in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p.288) In “Navy Mir,” Trotsky continued to put forward his theory of “permanent revolution,” arguing that if the German working class failed to rise along with the Russian working class, the workers’ government of a revolutionary Russia must wage war against the German ruling class: “If the conservative social-patriotic organisation should prevent the German working class from rising against its ruling classes in the coming epoch, then of course the Russian working class would defend its revolution with arms in its hands. The revolutionary workers’ government would wage war against the Hohenzollerns, summoning the brother proletariat of Germany to rise against the common enemy.” (L. Trotsky: Article in “Novy Mir”, March 21st., 1917, cited in: L. Trotsky: “History of the Russian Revolution”; Volume 1; London; 1967; p. 438). The “February Revolution” From the first days of 1917 strikes spread throughout the main cities of tsarist Russia. By March 10th; these had developed in Petrograd into a political general strike, with the demonstrating workers carrying Bolshevik slogans: “‘Down with the tsar!,” “Down with the war!” and “Bread!” The practical work of the Bolshevik Party in Russia at this time was directed by the Bureau of the Central Committee, headed by Vyacheslav Molotov. On March 11th. the Bureau issued a manifesto calling for an armed uprising against tsarism and the formation of a Provisional-Government. On March 12th; an elected Soviet of Workers’ Deputies came into being in Petrograd as an action committee to carry out the uprising and in the following days Soviets were established in Moscow and other cities. On March 13th, the Petrograd Soviet revived its “Izvestia” (“News”). When the tsar ordered troops to suppress the rising by force, the soldiers — mostly peasant in uniform — refused to obey the orders of their officers and joined the revolutionary workers, thus bringing into being a revolutionary alliance of workers and peasants. The workers and soldiers now began to disarm the police and to arm themselves with their weapons. On March 14th, the Petrograd Soviet was expanded into a “Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies.” On March 15th. the tsar, Nicholas II, abdicated. The revolution of March 1917 (known as the “February Revolution” under the old-style calendar) had been accomplished by the workers and peasants. Its character was that of a bourgeois-democratic revolution directed against the tsarist autocracy. The Formation of the Provisional Government As soon as the capitalist class realised that the bourgeois-democratic revolution was unavoidable, they proceeded to manoeuvre in an effort to minimise its scope — and above all to prevent its development into a socialist revolution. On March 12th., the day after the tsar had dissolved the Fourth State Duma, its liberal capitalist members set up an “Executive Committee of the Imperial Duma,” headed by the President of the Duma, the monarchist landlord Mikhail Rodzyanko. On March 15th, this Executive Committee set up a “Provisional-Government,” headed by Prince Georgi Lvov as Prime Minister and including among its Ministers Pavel Miliukov (leader of the Constitutional Democrats) as Minister of Foreign Affairs, Aleksendr Guchkov (leader of the Octobrists) as Minister of War, and Aleksandr Karensky (a prominent Socialist-Revolutionary) as Minister of Justice. The capitalist class endeavoured for a few days to save the monarchy, by persuading the tsar to abdicate in favour of his brother Mikhail. But this proved untenable in view of popular feeling against the monarchy, and Mikhail abdicated on the following day, March 16th. The capitalists then turned their efforts to attempting to turn Russia into a capitalist parliamentary republic. On March 17th. the new government issued a manifesto “To the Citizens”; setting out its programme: “1. Complete and immediate amnesty for all political and religious offences, including terrorist acts, military revolts, agrarian insurrections, etc. 2.Freedom of speech, press, assembly, union, strikes, and the extension of all political liberties to persons in the military service within the limits required by considerations of technical military necessity. 3. Abolition of all feudal estate and national restrictions. 4. Immediate preparation for the convocation of a Constituent Assembly on the basis of universal, equal, direct and secret suffrage. This Constituent Assembly shall determine the form of State and the constitution of the country. 5. Formation of a people’s militia with elected officers subordinated to the organs of local self-government and taking the place of the police. 6. Elections to the local organs of self-government on the basis of universal, equal, direct and secret suffrage. 7. The troops who participated in the revolutionary movement are not to be disarmed and are to remain in Petrograd. 8. While maintaining a rigid military discipline in the service, all obstacles are to be eliminated preventing soldiers from exercising the public rights enjoyed by other citizens.” (Manifesto of Provisional Government, May 17th., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: Collected Works, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 348) “In its first proclamation to the people (March 17), the government uttered not a word about the main and basic question of the present moment, peace. It keeps secret the predatory treaties made by tsarism with England, France, Italy, Japan, etc. It wishes to conceal from the people the truth about its war programme, and the fact that it is for war, for victory over Germany. . . . The new government cannot give the people bread. And no amount of freedom will satisfy masses suffering hunger… The entire Manifesto of the new government . . .inspires me with the greatest distrust, for it consists only of promises, and does not carry into life any of the most essential measures that could and should be fully realised right now” (V. I. Lenin: Theses of March 17th, 1917; in ibid; p.24, 25). The Role of the Petrograd Soviet Although there was a large spontaneous element in the “February Revolution,” the Bolsheviks, played a leading role in the uprising itself. Despite this, in the majority of cases a majority of the members of the Soviets and of their Executive Committees were Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries; the Bolsheviks were, in the period following the “February Revolution” in a small minority in most of the Soviets, including those of Petrograd and Moscow. A number of factors were responsible for this position: the industrial working class had been diluted during the war by large numbers of peasants from the villages, while Bolshevik leaders such as Lenin and Stalin were in exile. As a result of this, on March 18th. the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet issued a proclamation calling upon the workers to support the capitalist Provisional Government. Lenin commented: “The proclamation issued by the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies … is a most remarkable document. It proves that the Petrograd proletariat, at the time it issued its proclamation, at any rate, was under the preponderant influence of the petty-bourgeois politicians. The proclamation declares that every democrat must ‘support’ the new government and that the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies requests and authorises Kerensky to participate in the Provisional Government. . .These steps are a classic example of betrayal of the cause of the revolution and the cause of the proletariat.” (V. I. Lenin: “Letters from Afar”‘, in: ibid.; p. 41, 42). At the same time the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet set up a “Contact Commission,” headed by Aleksandr Skobolev, the official aim of which was to maintain contact with, and “control”, the Provisional Government. Lenin summed up the political situation resulting from the February Revolution in the following words: “The first stage of the revolution . . , owing to the insufficient class consciousness and organisation of the proletariat, led to the assumption of power by the bourgeoisie.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 6; London; 1946; p. 22). The Political Line Of the Party in March 1917 The victory of the “February Revolution” created a new political situation in Russia which called for a new political line on the part of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party. As Stalin expressed it in November 1924: “This was the greatest turning point in the history of Russia and an unprecedented turning point in the history Of our Party. The old, pre-revolutionary platform Of direct overthrow of the government was clear and definite, but it was no longer suitable for the new conditions of struggle . . Under the now conditions of the struggle, the Party hod to adopt a new orientation. The Party (its majority) groped its way towards this new orientation.” (J. V. Stalin “Trotskyism or Leninism?”; in Works Volume 6; Moscow; 1953); p. 347, 348). At the time of the “February Revolution” the Bureau of the Control Committee of the RSDLP, centred in Petrograd, was led by Vyacheslav Molotov. On March 18th., 1917 the Bureau issued, in the name of the Central Committee, a manifesto to “All Citizens of Russia,” calling for the formation of a Provisional Revolutionary Government. “Citizens! The fortresses of Russian tsarism have.. fallen. . . . It is the task of the working class and the revolutionary army to create a Provisional Revolutionary Government which is to head the new republican order now in the process of birth. The Provisional Revolutionary Government must take it upon itself to create temporary laws defending all the rights and liberties of the people, to confiscate the lands of the monasteries and the landowners, the crown lands and the appanages, to introduce the 8-hour working day and to convoke a Constituent Assembly on the basis a universal, direct and equal suffrage, with no discrimination as to sex, nationality or religion, and with the secret ballot. The Provisional Revolutionary Government must take it upon itself to secure provisions for the population and the army; for this purpose it must confiscate all the stores prepared by the former government and the municipalities….. It is the task of the people and its revolutionary government to suppress all counter-revolutionary plots against the people. It is the immediate and urgent task of the Provisional Revolutionary Government to establish relations with the proletariat of the belligerent countries for the purpose 0f . . terminating the bloody war carnage imposed upon the enslaved peoples against their will. The workers of shops and factories, also the rising troops, must immediately elect their representatives to the Provisional Revolutionary Government. . . Forward under the red banner of the revolution! Long live the Democratic Republic! Long live the revolutionary working class! Long live the revolutionary people and the insurgent army!” (Manifesto of CC, RSDLP, March 18th., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”; Volume 20, Book 2; London; 1929; p. 378-79). The manifesto was published in the first issue of “Pravda,” which reappeared on the same day. Among the Bolsheviks liberated from exile in Siberia by the “February Revolution” were Josef Stalin and Lev Kamenev, both of whom returned to Petrograd. Kamenev joined the editorial board of “Pravda” on March 23rd., Stalin two days later on March 28th. Kamenev immediately upheld a chauvinist line on the war, contending like the Menshevik leaders that with the victory of the “February Revolution” the working class should adopt a position of “revolutionary defencism.” He wrote in “Pravda” of March 28th: “The soldiers, the peasants and the workers of Russia who went to war obeying the pull of the now overthrown Tsar. . have freed themselves; the Tsar’s banners have been replaced by the red banners of the revolution!. . . When an army faces an army, it would be the most absurd policy to propose to one of them to lay down arms and go home. This . .would be a policy of slavery which a free people would repudiate with scorn. No, we will firmly hold our posts, we will answer a bullet by a bullet and a shell with a shell. . . . A revolutionary soldier or officer, having overthrown the yoke of tsarism, will not vacate a trench to leave it to a German soldier or officer who has not mustered up courage to overthrow the yoke of his own government. We must not allow any disorganisation of the military forces of the revolution! …. Russia is bound by alliances to England, France and other countries. It cannot act on the questions of peace without them.” (L. Kamenev: “Without Secret Diplomacy”; cited in “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 2; London; 1929, p. 379; 380). Stalin rejected this policy of chauvinist “revolutionary defencism.” He wrote in “Pravda” on the following day, March 29th : “The present war is an imperialist war. Its principal aim is the seizure (annexation) of foreign, chiefly agrarian, territories by capitalistically developed states.. . . It would be deplorable if the Russian revolutionary democracy, which was able to overthrow the detested tsarist regime, were to succumb to the false alarm raised by the imperialist bourgeoisie”. (J. V. Stalin: “The War”, in: “Works”; Volume 3; Moscow; 1953; p.5; 7). The majority of the Bureau, headed by Stalin and Molotov, correctly saw the Provisional Government as an organ of the capitalist class, and the Soviets as the embryo of a Provisional Government. A resolution of the Bureau published in “Pravda” on April 8th declared: “The Provisional Government set up by the moderate bourgeois classes of society and associated in interests with Anglo-French capital is incapable of solving the problems raised by the revolution. Its resistance to the further extension and deepening of the revolution is being paralysed only by the growth of the revolutionary forces themselves and by their organisation. Their rallying centre must be the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies in the cities and the Soviets of Peasants’ and Agricultural Workers’ Deputies in the countryside as the embryo of a revolutionary government, prepared in the further process of development, at a definite moment of the revolution, to establish the full power of the proletariat in alliance with the revolutionary democracy.” (Resolution of Bureau of CC, RSDLP; cited in: N. Popov: “Outline History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union”‘, Part 1; London; n .d.; p. 353-54). However, in “groping” towards a correct political line in the new situation, the majority of the Bureau made a tactical error. Instead of putting forward the clear slogan of “All power to the Soviets!’, they adopted a policy of “putting pressure on the Provisional Government” to perform actions which, as an organ of the capital class, it was incapable of doing: “The solution is to bring pressure on the Provisional Government to make it declare its consent to start peace negotiations irnmediately. The workers, soldiers and peasants must arrange meetings and demonstrations and demand that the Provisional Government shall come out openly and publicly in an effort to induce all the belligerent powers to start peace negotiations immediately, on the basis of recognition of the right of nations to self-determination.” (J. V. Stalin: ibid.; p. 8). On which Lenin commented forthrightly the day after his return to Russia: “The “Pravda” demands that the government renounce annexations. To demand that a government of capitalists renounce annexations is balderdash.” (V. I. Lenin Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, April 17, 1917, in Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 98). This incorrect tactical line corresponded closely with the tactical line of Kamenev, who said: “Our slogan is — pressure on the Provisional Government with the aim of forcing it openly, before world democracy, and immediately to come forth with an attempt to induce all the belligerent countries forthwith to start negotiations concerning the means of stopping the World War.” (L. Kamenev: “Without Secret Diplomacy”, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”; Volume 20, Book 2; London; 1929; p. 380). Stalin himself analysed this mistaken tactical policy in November 1924: “The Party (its majority) groped its way towards this new orientation. It adopted the policy of pressure on the Provisional Government through the Soviets on the question of peace and did not venture to step forward at once from the old slogan of the dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry to the new slogan of power to the Soviets. The aim of this halfway policy was to enable the Soviets to discern the actual imperialist nature of the Provisional Government on the basis of the concrete questions of peace and in this way to wrest the Soviets from the Provisional Government. But this was a profoundly mistaken position, for it gave rise to pacifist illusions, brought grist to the mill of defencism, and hindered the revolutionary education of the masses. At that time I shared this mistaken position with the Party comrades and fully abandoned it only in the middle of April, when I associated myself with Lenin’s theses.” (J. V. Stalin: “Trotskyism or Leninism” , in: Works”, Volume 3; Moscow; 1953; p. 348). Lenin Returns to Russia As soon as the “February Revolution” broke out, Lenin began attempts to return to Russia. The governments of the Allied powers refused him permission to travel through their countries but eventually, as a result of negotiations between Fritz Platten, Secretary of the Swiss Socialist Party, and the German government, 32 Russian political emigres (19 of which were Bolsheviks, among them Lenin) were permitted to travel through Germany in a sealed railway carriage accorded extra-territorial rights. The German government, of course, calculated that the return of these revolutionaries to Russia would be detrimental to the Russian war effort. Lenin arrived in Petrograd on the evening of April 16th; and was greeted by an enthusiastic crowd of workers and soldiers. On the following day he reported to the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet on the circumstances of his journey through Germany. Lenin’s “April Theses” Later on April 17th., Lenin spoke at a meeting of the Bolshevik delegates to the First Congress of Soviets, presenting his theses on the new situation in Russia following the “February Revolution” — the “April Theses.” The main points of these theses were as follows: 1. The “February Revolution” has brought into being the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry in the shape of the Soviets of Workers’and Soldiers’ Deputies. “The Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies’ — here you have ‘revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry’ already realised in life.” (V. I. Lenin: “Letters on Tactics”; in ‘Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 120). 2. But alongside the Soviets there came into being out of the “February Revolution” the Provisional Government, representing the interests of the capitalist class. ‘The Provisional Government of Lvov and Co. is a dictatorship . . based . . on seizure by force accomplished by a definite class, namely, the bourgeoisie.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution”., in: ibid.; p. 133). 3. Thus, out of the “February Revolution” has arisen a temporary condition of dual power, of two rival governments. “What has made our revolution so strikingly unique is that it has established dual power . . . What constitutes dual power? The fact that by the side of the Provisional Government, the government of the bourgeoisie, there has developed another, as yet weak; embryonic, but undoubtedly real and growing government — the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies.” (V. I. Lenin: “On Dual Power”, in: ibid.; p. 115). “There is not the slightest doubt but that such a combination cannot last long. There can be no two powers in a state. One of them is bound to dwindle to nothing, and the entire Russian bourgeoisie is already straining all its energies everywhere and in every possible way in an endeavour to weaken, to set aside, to reduce to nothing the Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, to create one single power for the bourgeoisie.'” (V. I. Lenin: “The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution”; in: ibid.;p. 133) 4. Despite its weakness, it is the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry (the Soviet embryonic government) which alone at present possesses effective machinery of force (in the shape of the armed workers and revolutionary soldiers). “In Petrograd the power is actually in the hands of the workers and soldiers; the new government does not use violence against them, and cannot do so because there is no police, there is no army seperated from the people, there is no all-powerful officialdom placed above the people.” (V. I. Lenin “‘Letters on Tactics”, in ibid.; p. 121). 5. Nevertheless, the leaders of the Soviets are placing this machinery of force at the disposal of the Provisional Government, and seeking to liquidate the democratic dictatorship of the working-class and peasantry. “By direct agreements with the bourgeois Provisional Government and by a series of actual concessions to the latter, the Soviet power has surrendered and is surrendering its position to the bourgeoisie.” (V. I. Lenin “On Dual Power, in ibid.; p. 116). 6. This has been possible because of the inadequate class consciousness and organisation of the workers and peasants, which has been influenced by petty-bourgeois ideological pressure: “The reason (i.e., for the surrender of power to the capitalist class — Ed.) is in the lack of organisation and class consciousness among the workers and peasants.” “Russia is now in a state of ebullition. Millions of people, politically asleep for ten years, politically crushed by the terrible pressure of tsarism and slave labour for landowners and manufacturers, have awakened and thrown themselves into politics. Who are these millions of people? Mostly small proprietors, petty bourgeois. . . .A gigantic petty-bourgeois wave has swept over everything, has overwhelmed the class-conscious proletariat not only numerically but also ideologically.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 1321). 7. After the “February Revolution” the war remains an imperialist war, and the effort of the Provisional Government remains a reactionary one which the Party must continue to oppose. “Under the new government of Lvov and Co., owing to the capitalist nature of this government, the war on Russia’s part remains a predatory imperialist war.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, April 17, 1917, in Ibid; p. 95). 8. The Party must not, therefore, make the slightest concession to “revolutionary defencism” and must dissociate itself from all who foster revolutionary defencism.” “In our attitude towards the war not the slightest concession must be made to ‘revolutionary defencism.'” (V. I. Lenin; ibid.; p. 95). 9. The capitalist Provisional Government is incapable of solving the fundamental social problems of the workers and poor peasantry. ‘The government of the Octobrists and Cadets, of the Guchkovs and Miliukovs, could give neither peace nor bread, nor freedom, even if it were sincere in its desire to do so.” (V. I. Lenin: “Letters from Afar”, in: ibid., p. 34) 10. Therefore the revolution must be carried forward to a new stage by the working class in alliance with, and leading, the poor peasantry. “The present situation in Russia . . represents transition from the first stage of the revolution . . to its second stage which is to place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest strata of the peasantry.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies,.April 17, 1917, in Ibid.; p. 97). 11. The Provisional Government needs to be overthrown, but it cannot be overthrown at present. “The Provisional Government . . should be overthrown, for it is an oligarchical, bourgeois, and not a people’s government. . it cannot be overthrown now; . . generally speaking, it cannot be ‘overthrown’ by any ordinary method, for it rests on the ‘support’ given to the bourgeoisie by the second government — the Soviet of ‘Workers ‘ Deputies, which is the only possible revolutionary government directly expressing the mind and the will of the majority of workers and peasants.” (V. I. Lenin: “On Dual Power”, in: ibid; p. 116-17). 12. The next step in the revolution is, therefore, to convince the working class and poor peasantry to throw off the domination of the Soviets by the compromising petty bourgeois elements and to transform them into their organs of power. “Any one who, right now, immediately and irrevocably, separates the proletarian elements of the Soviets . . from the petty bourgeois elements, provides a correct expression of the interests of the movement.” (V. I. Lenin: “Letters on Tactics’, in: ibid.; p. 126). “It must be explained to the masses that the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies is the only possible form of revolutionary government and that, therefore, our task is, while this government is submitting to the influence of the bourgeoisie, to present a patient, systematic, and persistent analysis of its errors and tactics, an analysis especially adapted to the practical needs of the masses. While we are in the minority, we carry on the work of criticism and of exposing errors, advocating all along the necessity of transferring the entire power of state to the Soviets of Workers’ Deputies.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, April 17, 1917, in: ibid; p. 99). 13. So long as the Soviets control an effective machinery of force and the Proviosional Government does not, this process of transferring all power to the Soviets may be accomplished peacefully. “The essence of the situation (i.e., from March 12th. to July 17th., 1917 — Ed.) was that the arms were in the hands of the people, and that no coercion was exercised over the people from without. That is what opened up and ensured a peaceful path for the development of the revolution. The slogan ‘All power to the Soviets’ was a slogan for a peaceful development of the revolution, which was possible between March 12 and July 17.” (V. I. Lenin: “On Slogans”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 6; London; 19216; p. 167-68). 14. Thus, the former slogan ‘Turn the imperialist war into civil war” is now for the time being incorrect: “We advocated the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war — are we not going back on ourselves? But the first civil war in Russia has ended. . . In this transitional period, as long as the armed force is in the hands of the soldiers, as long as Miliukov and Guchkov have not resorted to violence, this civil war, as far as we are concerned, turns into peaceful, prolonged and patient class propaganda. We discard this slogan for the time being, but only for the time being.” (V. I. Lenin: Report on the Current Situation”, in: ibid.; p. 95, 96). 15. The aim of transferring all power to the Soviets is to set up a Russian Soviet Republic, a state of the working class and peasantry. “Not a parliamentary republic – a return to it from the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies would be a step backward – but a republic of Soviets of Workers’, Agricultural Labourers’ and Peasants’ Deputies througout the land, from top to bottom.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, April 17th., 1917, in: “Collected Works”, Volume. 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 99). 16. The formation of this Soviet Republic will be a major step in the direction of socialism: however, its immediate programme will not be the introduction of socialism, but the establishment of control by the Soviets over production and distribution: “The Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies must seize power not for the purpose of building an ordinary bourgeois republic, nor for the purpose of introducing Socialism immediately. The letter could not be accomplished. . . They must seize power in order to take the first concrete steps towards introducing Socialism.” (V. I. Lenin: Report On the Political Situation, 7th. Conference of RSDLP, in: ibid.; p. 283) “Not the ‘introduction’ of Socialism as an immediate task, but the immediate placing of the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies in control of social production and distribution of goods.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ end Soldiers’ Deputies, April 17th., 1917,in: ibid.; p. 101). “Abolition of the police, the army, the bureaucracy. All officers to be elected and to be subject to recall at any time, their salaries not to exceed the average wage of a competent worker. . Confiscation of all private lands. Nationalisation of all lands in the country, and management of such lands by local Soviets of Agricultural Labourers’ and Peasants’ Deputies. A separate organisation of Soviets of Deputies of the poorest peasants. Creation of model agricultural establishments out of large estates. . . . . . Immediate merger of all the banks in the country into one general national bank, over which the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies should have control.” (V. I. Lenin: “On the Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 108). 17. The term “social-democratic” has been so brought into disrepute by the social-chauvinists that the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party should change its name to the Russian Communist Party. “We must call ourselves the Communist Party — just as Marx and Engels called themselves Communists…. The majority . . of the Social-Democratic leaders are betraying Socialism….. The masses are distracted, baffled, deceived by their leaders….. Should we aid and abet that deception by retaining the old and worn-out party name, which is as decayed as the Second International? . . It is high time to cast off the soiled shirt, it is high time to put on clean linen.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 154, 156, 157). 18. The “Zimmerwald International”‘ has already broken down as a result of its persistent centrism; the Party must withdraw from it (except for purposes of information) and found a new revolutionary Third International. ‘The chief fault of the Zimmerwald International, the cause of its breakdown (for from a political and ideological viewpoint it has already broken down), was its vacillation, its indecision, when it came to the most important practical end all-determining question of breaking completely with the social-chauvinists and the old social-chauvinist International. . . We must break with this International immediately. We ought to remain in Zimmerwald only to gather information. It is precisely we who must found, right now, without delay, a new, revolutionary proletarian International.” (V. I. Lenin ibid.; p. 151, 152). To sum up, Lenin held that, politically, the “February Revolution” was a bourgeois-democratic revolution which transferred power from the tsarist autocracy to the dual power of the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry (in the shape of the Soviets) and of the capitalist class (in the shape of the Provisional Government). Politically, therefore, the ‘February Revolution” represented the completion of the bourgeois-democratic revolution: “Before the March revolution of 1917, state power in Russia was in the hands of one old class, namely, the feudal noble landlord class, headed by Nicholas Romanov. After that revolution, state power is in the hands of another class, a new one, namely, the bourgeoisie…. The passing of state power from one class to another is the first, the main, the basic principle of a revolution, both in the strictly scientific and in the practical meaning of that term. To that extent, the bourgeois or the bourgeois democratic, revolution in Russia is completed. But at this point we hear the noise of objectors, who readily call themselves ‘old Bolsheviks’ : Haven’t we always maintained, they say, that a bourgeois-democratic revolution is culminated only in a ‘revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’? . . . . The Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies’ –here you have ‘revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry’ already realised in life.” (V. I Lenin: ‘Letters on Tactics’ in: ibid.; p. 119, 120) Economically and socially, however, particularly in so far as the agrarian revolution (the transfer of the land to the working peasantry) is concerned, the “February Revolution” did not complete the bourgeois-democratic revolution, Economically and socially, the bourgeois-democratic revolution was not completed until the “October Revolution”, the political content of which was proletarian-socialist. “Is the agrarian revolution, which is a phase of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, completed? On the contrary, is it not a fact that it has not yet been?” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 119-120). “The bourgeois-democratic content of the revolution means purging the social relations (systems and institutions) of the country of mediavalism, serfdom, feudalism. . . . ‘We solved the problems (i.e., economic and social problems — Ed.) of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in passing, as a ‘by-product’ of the main and real proletarian-revolutionary socialist work.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Fourth Anniversary of the October Revolution”; in: “Selected Works”; Volume 6; London; 1946; p. 501; 503. Lenin thus maintained that the Bolshevik strategy and tactics relating to the first, bourgeois-democratic stage of the revolutionary process in Russia had been confirmed by the “February Revolution”, but in a “more multicoloured” Way than could have been anticipated: “The Bolsheviks’ slogans and ideas have been generally confirmed by history; but as to the concrete situation, things have turned out to be different, more original, more unique, more multicoloured than could have been anticipated by any one.” (V. I. Lenin: “Letters on Tactics”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 120). Trotsky and the “Ideological Rearmament” of the Bolshevik Party After the “October Revolution” the question naturally arose among Trotsky’s disciples as to how it had come about that the socialist revolution in Russia had been brought about in accordance with a political line advanced by Lenin, who had consistently opposed Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution.” Trotsky’s answer was simple, if completely mythical: in May 1917 the Bolshevik Party, on Lenin’s initiative, had “rearmed itself” ideologically by accepting Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution”; thus history had “confirmed” the correctness of Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution”: “Bolshevism under the leadership of Lenin (though not without internal struggle) accomplished its ideological rearmanent on this most important question in the spring of 1917, that is, before the seizure of power.” (L. Trotsky: Note in “The Year 1905;”(January 1922), cited in: L. Trotsky: ‘The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p. 236). “Precisely in the period between January 9 and the October strike (in 1905 — Ed.) the author formed those opinions, which later received the name: ‘theory of the permanent revolution’ . . . . . This appraisal was confirmed as completely correct, though after a lapse of twelve years.” (L. Trotsky: Forward to “The Year 1905” (January 1922), cited in: L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 235). “I by no means consider that in my disagreements with the Bolsheviks I was wrong on all points.. . . I consider that my assessment of the motive forces of the revolution was absolutely right.. . . My polemical articles against the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks . . devoted to an analysis of the internal forces of the revolution and its prospects . . I could republish even now without amendment, since they fully and completely coincide with the position of our Party, beginning with 1917.” (L. Trotsky: Letter to N.S. Olminsky, December 1921 cited in: N. S. Olminsky: Foreword to “Lenin on Trotsky” (1925), cited in: J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report an “The Social–Democratic Deviation in Our Party’, l5th Conference of CPSU (B.), November 3rd., 1926; in “Works”;, Volume 3; Moscow; 1954;p. 349-50). In fact, of course, Lenin took pains to dissociate himself from Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution” after his return to Russia in April 1917: “Trotskyism: ‘No Tsar but a workers’ government’. This, surely is wrong.” (V. I. Lenin: Report on the Political Situation, Petrograd City Conference of the RSDLP, April 27th, 1917, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929, p. 207). “Had we said: ‘No Tsar, but a Dictatorship of the Proletariat’ — it would have meant a leap over the petty bourgeoisie.” (V.I. Lenin: Concluding Remarks in Connection with the Report on the Political Situation, 7th. Conference of the RSDLP, May 7th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 287). Lenin did not put forward in April 1917 the strategy of direct advance to the dictatorship of the working class (in alliance with the poor peasantry) as a corrected strategy for the realisation of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. On the contrary, the bourgeois-democratic revolution, as the first stage of the revolutionary process in Russia, had already been realised, politically, in the “February Revolution.” The strategy of direct advance to the dictatorship of the working class (in alliance with the poor peasantry) was put forward as a new strategy for the new situation following the “February Revolution,” a new strategy for the second stage of the revolutionary process. As Lenin expressed it in his “April Theses”: “The present situation in Russia. . .represents a transition from the first stage of the revolution to its second stage which is to place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest strata of the peasantry.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, April 17th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 97). Trotsky’s myth — that Lenin put forward in April 1917 a “corrected” strategy for the realisation of the bourgeois–democratic revolution similar to that embodied in Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution” — is based on a denial of the fact that the ‘February Revolution” constituted, politically, a bourgeois-democratic revolution. In his “History of the Russian Revolution,” Trotsky admits this fact: ‘The insurrection triumphed. But to whom did it hand over the power snatched from the monarchy? We come here to the central problem of the February revolution. Why and how did the power turn up in the hands of the liberal bourgeoisie?” (L. Trotsky: “History of the Russian Revolution”, Volume 1; London; 1967; p. 155). But in his “The Permanent Revolution,” Trotsky deliberately confuses the political bourgeois-democratic revolution of March with the bourgeois-democratic revolutionary economic and social changes that followed the revolution of November in order to present the latter as a “bourgeois-democratic revolution” which resulted in the dictatorship of the proletariat: ‘The bourgeois-democratic revolution was realised during the first period after October. . But, as we know, it was not realised in the form of a democratic dictator-ship (i.e., of the working class and peasantry –but in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat.. . . .The two lines, the ‘permanent’ and Lenin’s . . were completely fused by the October Revolution.” (L. Trotsky: “The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p. 229, 234). In November 1926 Stalin was justifiably sarcastic about Trotsky’s claim that in May 1917 the Party had “rearmed itself” with Trotsky’s theory of ‘permanent revolution”: ‘Trotsky cannot but know that Lenin fought against the theory of permanent revolution to the end of his life. But that does not worry Trotsky. It turns out . . that the theory of permanent revolution ‘fully and completely coincided with the position of our Party, beginning with 1917’. . .. But …how could Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution have coincided with the position of our Party when it is known that our Party, in the person of Lenin, combated this theory all the time? . . Either our Party did not have a theory of its own, and was later compelled by the course of events to accept Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution; or it did have a theory of its own, but that theory was imperceptibly ousted by Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution, ‘beginning with 1917’. . . . Surely the Bolsheviks had some theory, some estimate of the revolution, some estimate of its motive forces. etc?. . . . What happened to Leninism, to the theory of Bolshevism, to the Bolshevik estimate of our revolution and its motive forces, etc.?……. And so, once upon a time there were people known as the Bolsheviks who somehow managed, ‘beginning’ with 1903, to ‘weld’ together a party, but who had no revolutionary theory. So they drifted and drifted, ‘beginning’ with 1903, until somehow they managed to reach the year 1917. Then, having espied Trotsky with his theory of permanent revolution,’ they decided to ‘rearm themselves’ and ‘having rearmed themselves’, they lost the last remnants of Leninism, of Lenin’s theory of revolution, thus bringing about the ‘full coincidence’ of the theory of permanent revolution with the ‘position’ of our Party. That is a very interesting fairy-tale, comrades. It, if you like, is one of the splendid conjuring tricks you may see at the circus. But this is not a circus; it is a conference of our Party. Nor, after all, have we hired Trotsky as a circus artist.” (J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report “The Social-Democratic Deviation in our Party”, l5th. Conference of CPSU (B.), November 3rd., 1926, in: “Works”, Volume 3; Moscow; 1954; p. 350, 351, 353-54). The Opposition to Lenin’s Theses Within the Party the principal opposition to Lenin’s “April Theses” was led by Trotsky’s brother-in-law Lev Kamenev. On April 21st, 1917, Kamenev published in “Pravda” an article– entitled “Our Differences” in which he denounced Lenin’s “personal opinion” as “unacceptable” on the grounds that he was advocating an immediate socialist revolution before the bourgeois-democratic revolution had been completed. “In yesterday’s issue of the ‘Pravda’ Comrade Lenin published his ‘theses’. They represent the personal opinion of Comrade Lenin. . . The policy of the “Pravda” was clearly formulated in the resolutions prepared by the Bureau of the Central Committee. . . . Pending new decisions of the Central Committee and of the All-Russian Conference of our Party, those resolutions remain our platform which we will defend . . against Comrade Lenin’s criticism.. . As regards Comrade Lenin’s general line, it appears to us unacceptable inasmuch, as it proceeds from the assumption that the bourgeois-democratic revolution has been completed and it builds on the immediate transformation of this revolution into a socialist revolution. . . . In a broad discussion we hope to carry our point of view as the only possible one for revolutionary Social-Democracy in so far as it wishes to be and must remain to the very end the one and only party of the revolutionary masses of the proletariat without turning into a group of Communist propagandists.” (L. Kamenev: “Our Differences”; cited in: V. I. Lenin: Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 380-81) Lenin replied: “There are two major errors in this. 1. The question of a ‘completed bourgeois-democratic revolution is stated wrongly. . . . . Reality shows us both the passing of the power into the hands of the bourgeoisie (a ‘completed’ bourgeois-democratic revolution of the ordinary type) and, by the side of the actual government, the existence of a parallel government which represents the ‘revolutionary- democratic-dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’. . . Is this reality embraced in the old Bolshevik formula of Comrade Kamenev which says that ‘the bourgeois democratic revolution is not completed’? No, the formula . . is dead. . . . Anyone who is guided in his activities by the simple formula ‘the bourgeois-democratic revolution is not completed’ vouchsafes, as it were, the certainty of the petty bourgeoisie being independent of the bourgeoisie…. In doing so, he at once helplessly surrenders to the-petty bourgeoisie. . . . The mistake made by Comrade Kamenev is that in 1917 he only sees the past of the revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry. In reality, however, its future has already begun, for the interests and the policy of the wage earners and the petty proprietors have already taken different lines.. . . . This brings me to the second mistake in the remarks of Comrade Kamenev quoted above: He reproaches me, saying that my line ‘builds’ on the immediate transformation of this bourgeois-democratic revolution into a socialist revolution. This is not true. . . . I declared in plain language that in this respect I only build on ‘patient’ explaining (is it necessary to be patient to bring about a change which can be realised ‘immediately’).” (V. I. Lenin: “Letters on Tactics”; in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20 , Book 1 London; 1929; p. 125, 126, 127). An opposition group in the Moscow City Committee, headed Aleksei Rykov and Viktor Nogin, opposed the basis of Lenin’s theses on the grounds that Russia was too industrially undeveloped for socialist construction: “Comrade Rykov says that Socialism must first come from other countries with greater industrial development. But this is not so. It is hard to tell who will begin and who will end. This is not Marxism, but a parody on Marxism.” (V. I. Lenin: Concluding Remarks in Connection with the Report on the Political Situation, May 7th. Conference of RSDLP, May 7th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 287). Another group of members of the Party – including I. P. Goldenberg, V. Bazarov, B. V. Avilov and Y N. Steklov, — left the Bolshevik Party altogether in protest against Lenin’s theses and founded the paper “Novaya Zhizn” (New Life), which supported the unification of Bolsheviks, Mensheviks and “Novaya Zhizn”-ists into a single party based on the openly Menshevik view that the Socialist revolution “Must be preceded by a more or less prolonged period of capitalism.” At the Petrograd City Conference of the Party, held from April 27th; to May 5th; 1917, a resolution in support of the political line laid down in Lenin’s “April Theses” was carried. The “April Days” On May 1st., 1917 (April 18th ; under the old style calendar) Foreign Minister Pavel Miliukov sent a note to the Allied Governments emphasising the determination of the Provisional Government to carry the war to a victorious conclusion and to remain loyal to the tsarist government’s treaties with the Allies. ‘The declarations of the Provisional Government naturally cannot offer the slightest cause to assume that the accomplished upheaval will result in a weakening of Russia’s role in the common struggle of the Allies. Quite the contrary. The effort of the whole people to carry the World War through to a decisive victory has only been strengthened. . Naturally, the Provisional Government. . . in protecting the rights of our fatherland, will hold faithfully to the obligations which we have assumed towards our allies. . The government is now, as before, firmly convinced, that the present war will be victoriously concluded in complete accord with the Allies.” (Provisional Government, Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Note to Allied Governments of May 1st., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 371). The publication of the note within Russia gave rise to mass demonstrations in Petrograd over the next four days, in which armed soldiers took a prominent part — attempting at times to occupy public buildings. Among the demonstrators the slogans “Down with Miliukov” and “Down with Guchkov” were raised everywhere. The Central Committee of the Party was concerned that this spontaneous movement might develop along insurrectionary lines which, in the existing situation, could only harm the revolutionary movement; on May 4th., therefore, it adopted a resolution drafted by Lenin calling upon all Party members to exert every effort to keep the demonstrations peaceful: “Party agitators and speakers must refute the despicable lies that we threaten with civil war. . . At the present moment, when the capitalists and their government cannot and dare not use violence against the masses . . any thought of civil war is naive, senseless, monstrous. . . . All Party agitators, in factories, in regiments, in the streets, etc. must advocate these views and this proposition (i.e., withdrawal of support by the Soviets from the Provisional Government — Ed.) by means of peaceful discussions and peaceful demonstrations, as well as meetings everywhere.” (V. I. Lenin: Resolution of CC, RSDLP, May 4th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 245, 246). These demonstrations proved sufficient to force the resignation of Guchkov as Minister of War May 13th; and of Miliukov as Minister of Foreign Affairs on May 15th. On May 14th the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet voted in favour of a coalition Provisional Government, in which the Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary parties would be formally represented. The First Coalition Provisional Government came into being on May 18th with Prince Georgi Lvov continuing as Prime Minister. Aleksandr Tereshchenko replaced Miliukov as Minister of Foreign Affairs; Aleksandr Kerensky and Viktor Chernov (of the Socialist Revolutionaries) became Minister of War and Minister of Agriculture respectively; Aleksandr Skobelev and Iraklii Tseretelli (of the Mensheviks) became Minister of Labour and Minister of Posts and Telegraphs respectively. In the following month Lenin commented on the formal entry of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries into the Provisional Government: ‘The entrance of Tseretelli, Chernov and Co. into the cabinet has changed to an insignificant degree only the form of the compact between the Petrograd Soviet and the government of the capitalists. .. Day by day it becomes ever clearer that Tseretelli, Chernov and Co. are simply hostages of the capitalists, have become the sides of the capitalists who are actually stifling the revolution; Kerensky has sunk to the point where he uses violence against the masses. . .The Coalition Cabinet represents only a transition period in the development of the basic class contradictions in our revolution. . . This cannot last very long.” (V. I. Lenin: Postcript to Pamphlet ‘The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 159, 160). The Seventh Conference of the RSDLP The Seventh Conference of the Russian Social-Democrotic Labour Party (the “April Conference”) was held in Petrograd from May 7th. to 12th., 1917, attended by 133 voting delegates representing 80,000 Party members. The Report on the Political Situation was given by Lenin, and the opposition to Lenin’s political line was led by Lev Kamenev and Aleksei Rykov. Kamenev directed his main attack against the slogan ‘Down with the Provisional Government!'”, implying that this was a Leninist slogan whereas it had been put forward during the “April Days” by the Petrograd Committee of the Party in violation of the line of the Central Committee. In place of this (for the moment) incorrect slogan, Kamenev urged that the Party should put forward the completely unrealistic demand for control of the Provisional Government by the Soviets. “We say that the slogan ‘Down with the Provisional Government’ is an adventurer’s slogan. That is why we have advocated peaceful demonstrations. . . The Petrograd Committee, however, turned a trifle to the Left. In a case of this sort, such a step was a grave crime. Now about control. . . . . .Comrade Kamenev . . views control as a political act. . . We do not accept control… The Provisional Government must be overthrown, but not now, and not in the ordinary way.” (V. I. Lenin: Concluding Remarks in connection with the Report on the Political Situation, 7th. Conference RSDLP, May 7th., 1917, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 285-86, 287). Rykov opposed Lenin’s political line on the grounds that Russia was too industrially undeveloped to move towards a socialist revolution. “Comrade Rykov. . . . says that Socialism must come first from other countries with greater industrial development. But this is not so. It is hard to tell who will begin and who will end. This is not Marxism, but a parody on Marxism.” By a majority the congress approved a series of resolutions endorsing the Leninist line. The Leninist political line on the national question in particular, that the Party must advocate the right of oppressed nations to self-determination to the point of secession — was presented in the Report on the National Question given by Stalin. This slogan was opposed by Felix Dzherzhinsky and Yuri Piatakov, the latter demanding: “The only effective method of solving it (i.e., the national question — Ed.) is the method of a socialist revolution under the slogan ‘Down with boundaries.’ for only thus can one do away with imperialism –this new factor leading to a sharpening of national oppression. Whereas (1) ‘the right of nations to self-determination’ . . is a mere phrase without any definite meaning; …. and whereas (2) this phrase is interpreted as meaning much more than is thought of in the ranks of revolutionary Social-Democracy,. . . . the Conference . . assumes that paragraph 9 of our programme (i.e., support for the right of nations to self-determination — Ed.) should be eliminated.” (Y. Piatakov: Resolution on National Question submitted to 7th. Conference, RSDLF; cited in: V. I.Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 2; London; 1929; p.411, 412). “Ever since 1903, when our Party adopted its programme, we have been encountering the desperate opposition of the Poles. . . And the position of the Polish Social-Democracy is as strange and monstrous an error now as it was then. These people wish to reduce the stand of our Party to that of the chauvinists.. . . In Russia we must stress the right of separation for the subject nations, while in Poland we must stress the right of such nations to unite. The right to unite implies the right to separate. . . . Comrade Piatakov’s standpoint is a repetition of Rosa Luxemburg’s standpoint . . Theoretically he is against the right of separation. . What Comrade Piatakov says is incredible confusion.. . .When one says that the national question has been settled, one speaks of Western Europe. Comrade Piatakov applies this where it does not belong, to Eastern Europe, and we find ourselves in a ridiculous position. . . . Comrade Piatakov simply rejects our slogan. The method of accomplishing a socialist revolution under the slogan ‘Down with the boundaries’ is an utter absurdity. . . We maintain that the state is necessary, and the existence of a state presupposes boundaries. Even the Soviets are confronted with the question of boundaries . . .What does it mean, ‘Down with the boundaries’? This is the beginning of anarchy . . . He who does not accept this point of view is an annexationist, a chauvinist.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech on the National Question, 7th. Conference RSDLP, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 310, 312, 313, 314). The conference discussed the question of the Party’s participation in the Third (and last) “Zimmerwald Conference,” due to be held in Stockholm (Sweden) in May 1917 (but later postponed until September). In his “April Theses” Lenin had already demanded a break with the “Zimmerwald International”, proposing that the Party should remain within it only for purposes of information. At the conference, however, this policy was opposed by a considerable body of delegates headed by Grigori Zinoviev, who proposed: “Our party remains in the Zimmerwald bloc with the aim of defending the tactics of the Zimmerwald Left Wing there. . . .The conference decides to take part in the international conference of the Zimmerwaldists scheduled for May 31 and authorises the Central Committee to organise a delegation to that conference.” (Resolution on “The Situation within the International and the Tasks of the RSDLP”, 7th. Conference RSDLP, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 2; London; 1929; p. 407). Zinoviev’s resolution was carried by the conference against the opposition of Lenin, who described Zinoviev’s tactics as: “..arch-opportunist and pernicious.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at 7th. Conference, RSDLP, cited in: “History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)”; Moscow; 1941; p. 189) The conference also discussed the question of the Party’s participation in an “international socialist conference” to discuss “peace terms”, also scheduled for Stockholm in May. On May 6th, the Danish Social-Democrat Frederik Bergjberg had personally addressed the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet on the “Stockholm Conference”. The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries had accepted the invitation to participate in the conference; the Bolsheviks had rejected the invitation. The question was placed on the agenda of the conference at the request of Viktor Nogin, who proposed that a Bolshevik delegation should attend the “Stockholm Conference.” “I cannot agree with Comrade Nogin . . Back of this whole comedy of a would-be Socialist congress there are actually the political maneuvers of German imperialism. The German capitalists use the German social-chauvinists for the purpose of inviting the social-chauvinists of all countries to the conference. because they want to fool the working masses. . . . .Borgjberg is an agent of the German government.. . .We must expose this whole comedy of the Socialist conference, expose all these congresses as comedies intended to cover up the deals made by the diplomats behind the backs of the masses.” (V. I. Lenin: Speech on the Proposed Calling of an International Socialist Conference, 7th. Conference RSDLP, May 8 1917, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 287, 288, 290). The conference adopted a resolution along these lines. The conference adopted a series of resolutions in accordance with Lenin’s political line: “On the War”, ”On the Attitude towards the Provisional Government”; “On the Agrarian Question”; “’On a Coalition Cabinet”, “’On Uniting the Internationalists against the Petty-bourgeois Defencist Bloc’”, “On the Present Political Situation” ; and “On the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies.” The Conference elected a new Central Committee, consisting of Lenin, Stalin, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Nilyutin, Nogin, Sverdlov, Smilga and Fedorov, and instructed it to bring up to date the programme of the Party adopted in 1903. The First Congress of Soviets The First All-Russian Congress of Soviets was held in Petrograd from June l6th to July 6th., 1917. Of the 790 delegates, only 103 (13%) were Bolsheviks, and the congress was dominated by the Mensheviks and Social-Revolutionaries. The congress, against Bolshevik opposition, adopted resolutions in favour of: participation in the Provisional Government, “defence of the fatherland” in the imperialist war; the military offensive at the front demanded by the Allied powers; and the war loan (“Liberty Loan”). On June 21st; the Central Committee of the RSDLP decided to call a peaceful demonstration for June 23rd; under the slogans: ‘Down with the Capitalist Ministers!'” and “All Power to the Soviets!”. The Congress of Soviets, on the initiative of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, immediately adopted a resolution prohibiting the demonstration on the pretext that: “We know that the hidden counter-revolutionaries are making ready to take advantage of your demonstration.” (Resolution of First Congress of Soviets, June 21st., 1917, cited by V. I, Lenin: ‘Disquieting Rumours”, in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 20, Book 2 London; 1929; p. 41). In the early hours of the morning of June 22nd; the Central Committee, on Lenin’s initiative, called off the planned demonstration. On June 24th, Lenin explained the reasons for this decision to a meeting of the Petrograd Committee of The Party: “The dissatisfaction of the majority of the comrades with the calling off of the demonstration is quite legitimate, but the Central Committee could not act otherwise for two reasons: First, we received a formal prohibition of all demonstrations from our semi-official government : second, a plausible reason was given for this prohibition. . . . . Even in simple warfare it sometimes happens that for strategic reasons it is necessary to postpone an offensive fixed for a certain date.. . . . It was absolutely necessary for us to cancel our arrangements. This has been proved by subsequent events.'” (V. I. Lenin: Speech at the Session of the Petrograd Committee of the RSDLP, June 24th., 1917, in: ibid.: p.245). The “subsequent events,” referred to by Lenin were the holding, earlier on the same day, of a united session of the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet, the Presidium of the Congress of Soviets and the Fraction Committees of the parties represented at the Congress. Iraklii Tseretelli, Menshevik Minister of Posts and Telegraphs in the Provisional Government, denounced the Bolshevik demonstration that had been planned for June 23rd. as “a plot to overthrow the Provisional Government by force”; he demanded that the Bolsheviks be expelled from the Soviets and that the arms in the hands of the workers be taken from them. The Bolshevik delegates walked out of the congress in protest at Tseretelli’s speech, and issued a declaration in which they declared: “We have not renounced for a single moment in favour of a hostile majority of the Soviet our right, independently and freely, to utilise all liberties for the purpose of mobilising the working masses under the banner of our proletarian class party. . . What is planned is the disarming of the revolutionary vanguard — a measure that has always been resorted to by the bourgeois counter-revolution. . . . Citizen Tseretelli and those who direct him are hardly ignorant of the fact that never in history have the working masses given up without struggle the arms they had received at the hand of the revolution. Consequently, the ruling bourgeoisie and its ‘Socialist’ Ministers are provoking civil war. . and they are aware of what they are doing. . . . We expose before the All-Russian Congress and the masses of the people . . this attack on the revolution that is now being prepared. . . . The revolution is passing through a moment of supreme danger. We call upon the workers to be firm and watchful.” (Declaration of Bolshevik Fraction to All-Russian Congress of Soviets, June 24th., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: ibid.: p. 416). However, rank-and-file pressure compelled the Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary leaders of the Soviet on June 25th. to call a demonstration for July 1st. in the name of the Congress of Soviets. About 400,000 workers and soldiers took part in the demonstration in Petrograd on this day, and, to the horror of the compromising leaders of the Soviets, 90% of the banners bore the slogans put forward by the Bolsheviks: “Down with the Ten Capitalist Ministers!, and “All Power to the Soviets!’ The Congress elected a Central Executive Committee and instructed it to convene a new congress within three months. Trotsky Returns to Russia When news of the “February Revolution” reached America, Trotsky made inmediate arrangements to return to Russia. Sailing from New York in a Norwegian ship at the end of March, he was taken off the ship at Halifax (Canada) by British naval police and confined for a month in an internment camp for German prisoners of war at Amherst. At the end of April he was released from internment, and resumed his journey. Landing in Norway, he crossed Scandinavia to reach Petrograd on May 17th., 1917. He went almost immediately to the Smolny Institute, a former private school for girls which was now the head-quarters of the Petrograd Soviet. In view of his leading role in the Soviet of 1905, he was made an associate member of the Executive of the Soviet, without the right to vote. He joined a group called the “Inter-Regional Organisation” (Mezhrayontsi), which had been founded in 1913 and to the publications of which he had contributed from abroad. The Inter-Regional Organisation was a centrist group, which prided itself on being neither Bolshevik nor Menshevik, and its influence was confined to a few working-class districts of Petrograd. In the early summer of 1917 its leading members included Anatoly Lunacharsky, David Riazanov, Dmitri Manuilsky, Mikhail Pokrovsky, Adolphe Joffe and Lev Karahkhan. Now Trotsky took a leading role in the organisation, and in founding its organ ‘Vperyod’ (Forward). According to Trotsky, “Whoever lived through the year 1917 as a member of the central kernel of the Bolsheviks knows that there was never a hint of any disagreement between Lenin and me from the very first day. . . . From the earliest days of my arrival, I stated . . . . . that I was ready to join the Bolshevik organisation immediately in view of the absence of any disagreements whatever but that it was necessary to decide the question of the quickest possible way of attracting the ‘Mezhrayontsi’ organisation into the party. . . . Among the membership of the “Mezhrayontsi” organisation there were elements which tried to impede the fusion, advancing this or that condition, etc.” (L. Trotsky: “The Stalin School of Falsification”; New York; 1972; p. 5, 6). According to Lenin, however, Trotsky himself was precisely one of the ‘elements which tried to impede fusion.’ On May 23rd., a meeting took place between representatives of the Bolsheviks (including Lenin) and representatives of the Inter-Regional Organisation (including Trotsky) to explore the possibility of fusion. As Trotsky’s biographer puts it: “At the meeting of 23 May he (i.e., Lenin — Ed.) asked Trotsky and Trotsky’s friends to join the Bolshevik party immediately. He offered them positions on the leading bodies and on the editorial staff of ‘Pravda’. He put no conditions to them. He did not ask Trotsky to renounce anything of his past; he did not even mention past controversies. . . . Trotsky would have had to be much more free from pride than he was to accept Lenin’s proposals immediately. He and his friends should not be asked to call themselves Bolsheviks. . . They ought to join hands in a new party, with a new name, at a joint congress of their organisations.” (I. Deutscher: “The Prophet Armed: Trotsky; 1879-1921”; London; 1970; p. 257-8). Lenin’s own notes of the meeting say: “Trotsky (who took the floor out of turn immediately after me) . . . . I cannot call myself a Bolshevik. . . . We cannot be asked to recognise Bolshevism. . . The old factional name is undesirable.” (V. I. Lenin: “Leniniskii Sbornik” (Lenin Miscellany) Volume 4; Moscow; 1925; p. 303). The meeting, therefore, broke up without reaching any agreement. Not until August, three months before the October Revolution, did the Inter-Regional Organisaion join the Bolshevik Party, while Trotsky was in prison! The Resignation of the Cadet Ministers On July 16th, 1917, the Ministers belonging to the Constitutional-Democratic Party (the ‘Cadets”) resigned from the Government. Lenin pointed out that: “. . by leaving, they say, we present an ultimatum. . . . To be without the Cadets, they aver, means to be without the ‘aid’ of world-wide Anglo-American capital.” (V. I. Lenin: “What could the Cadets Count on when leaving the Cabinet?”, in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 16). The effect of this ultimatum was to face the Menshevik Ministers in the Provisional Government with the choice of either participating in the attempted suppression of the working class and poor peasantry or of allying themselves with the revolutionary working class and peasantry – which their whole political outlook would make them fear to do: “Either suppress such a class by force — as the Cadets have been preaching since May 19 — or entrust yourself to its leadership. . . The Tsteretellis and Chernovs, they think would not do that, they would not dare.’ They will yield to us.’ . . . The calculation is correct.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 15, 16). The “July Days” The resignation of the Cadet Ministers from the government on July 16th. stimulated on the following day mass demonstrations of armed workers and soldiers outside the headquarters of the Petrograd Soviet, under the slogans “All Power to the Soviets.” In the evening of July 17th a Bolshevik revolution in the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets calling for the transfer of all power to the Soviets was rejected. On the next day, July 18th., “Pravda” published an appeal from the Bolsheviks calling for an end to the demonstrations: “For the present political crisis, our aim has been accomplished. We have therefore decided to end the demonstration. Let each and every one peacefully and in an organised manner bring the strike and the demonstration to a close.” (Proclamation of the CC of the RSDLP July 18th.,. 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; n.d., p. 300). Later, in September 1917, Lenin analysed the reasons why it would have been incorrect to have attempted to turn the armed demonstration of the ‘July Days’ into an insurrection: “On July 16-17 . . there were still lacking the objective conditions for a victorious uprising. 1. ‘We did not yet have behind us the class that is the vanguard of the revolution. We did not yet have a majority among the workers and soldiers of the capitals. . . 2. At that time there was no general revolutionary upsurge of the people . . . 3. At that time there were no vacillations on a serious, general, political scale among our enemies and among the undecided petty bourgeoisie. . . .. 4. This is why an uprising on July 16-17 would have been an error; we would not have retained power either physically or politically.. . . . Before the Kornilov affair, the army and the provinces could and would have marched against Petrograd.” (V. I. Lenin: “Marxism and Uprising”, in: “Collected Works “, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 225-226). The Order for the Arrest of Lenin On July 18th., 1917 the newspaper “‘Zhivoye Slovo” (Living Word) published a statement from Grigori Alexnsky asserting that he had documentary evidence that Lenin was “a spy in the pay of German imperialism.” On the same day military cadets wrecked the printing plant and editorial offices of “Pravda,” preventing the publication of Lenin’s reply to the slander. On July 19th government troops occupied the headquarters of the Central Committee of the Party, and the government issued an order for the arrest of Lenin, Zinoviev and Kameonev. A movement demanding that Lenin surrender to the arrest order was led by Trotsky. As Trotsky’s sympathetic biographer Isaac Deutscher expresses it: “Lenin . . made up his mind that he would not allow himself to be imprisoned but would go into hiding… Trotsky took a less grave view and Lenin’s decision seemed to him unfortunate. . . he thought that Lenin had every interest in laying his record before the public, and that in this way he could serve his cause better than by flight, which would merely add to any adverse appearances by which people might judge him.” (I. Deutscher: “The Prophet Armed: Trotsky: 1879-1921”; London; 1970; p. 274). To this demand Lenin replied: “Comrades yielding to the ‘Soviet atmosphere’ are, often inclined towards appearing before the courts. Those who are closer to the working masses apparently incline towards not appearing.. . The court is an organ of power. . . . The power that is active is the military dictatorship. Under such conditions it is ridiculous even to speak of ‘the courts’. It is not a question of ‘courts’, but of an episode in the civil war. This is what those in favour of appearing before the courts unfortunately do not want to understand. . . . Not a trial but a campaign of persecution against the internationalists, this is what the authorities need. . Let the internationalists work underground as far as it is in their power, but let them not commit the folly of voluntarily appearing before the courts’.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Question of the Bolshevik Leaders appearing before the Courts”, in ibid.; p. 34, 35). The Bolshevik viewpoint on the question of the attitude to be adopted towards the warrant of arrest issued for the Bolshevik leaders was put at the Sixth Congress of the Party in August by Stalin: “There is no guarantee that if they do appear they will not be subjected to brutal violence. If the court were democratically organised and if a guarantee were given that violence would not be committed it would be a different matter.” (J. V. Stalin: Speech in Reply to the Discussion on the Report of the Central Cornittee, 6th. Congress RSDLP, in: “Works”, Volume 3; Moscow; 193; p. 182). Feeling that his political reputation was suffering because no warrant had been issued for his own arrest, Trotsky wrote an Open Letter to the Provisional Government pleading that he too should be made liable to arrest: “On 23 July, four days after Lenin had gone into hiding, Trotsky therefore addressed the following Open Letter to the Provisional Government: ‘Citizen Ministers — You can have no logical grounds for exempting me from the effect of the decree by dint of which Lenin, Zinoviev and Kamenev are subject to arrest. . . You can have no reason to doubt that I am just as irreconcilable an opponent of the general policy of the Provisional Government as the above-mentioned Comrades’.” (I. Deutscher: ibid.; p. 276-77). The Provisional Government obliged Trotsky by arresting him on August 5th, and incarcerating him in the Kresty prison from which he was released on bail on September 17th. The New Political Situation following the “July Days” On July 20th, 1917 Prince Lvov resigned as Prime Minister of the Provisional Government, and on the following day his place was taken by Aleksandr Kerensky (Socialist-Revolutionary). On July 22nd, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets, against Bolshevik opposition, adopted a resolution of confidence in the Provisional Government as a government of defence of the revolution. At this time Lenin analysed the new political situation following the “July Days” as follows: 1. As a result of the treachery of the Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary leaders, dual power had ceased to exist; effective state power passed into the hands of a military dictatorship of the counter-revolutionary capitalist class: “‘The counter-revolution has become organised and consolidated, and has actually taken state power into its hands. . . .The leaders of the Soviets as well as of the Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik Parties, with Tseretelli and Chernov at their head, have definitely betrayed the cause of the revolution by placing it in the hands of the counter-revolutionists and transforming themselves, their parties end the Soviets into fig-leaves of the counter-revolution. . . . .Having sanctioned the disarming of the workers and the revolutionary regiments, they have deprived themselves of all real power.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Political Situation”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 36-37). “The turning point of July 17 consisted in just this, that after it the objective situation changed abruptly. Thc fluctuating state of power ceased, the power having passed at a decisive point into the hands of the counter-revolution. . . After July 17, the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, hand in hand with the monarchists and the Black Hundreds,, has attached to itself the petty-bourgeois Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, partly by intimidating them, and has given over actual state power . . into the hands of a military clique.” (V. I. Lenin: “‘On Slogans”, in: ibid.; p. 44-45.) 2. Thus, the possibility of the peaceful development of the revolution by the winning of a majority for revolutionary socialism in the Soviets no longer exists: “The struggle for the passing of power to the Soviets in due time, is finished. The peaceful course of development has been rendered impossible.. . . . . At present power can no longer be seized peacefully. It can be obtained only after a victory in a decisive struggle against the real holders of power at the present moment, namely, the military clique.. . . .This power must be overthrown.” (V. I. Lenin: “On Slogans”, in: ibid.; p. 44, 45-46, 47). 3. Thus, the slogan of “All Power to the Soviets”, which was correct in the period when the peaceful development of the revolution, is no longer correct and should be abandoned: “The slogan of all power passing to the Soviets was a slogan of a peaceful development of the revolution, possible in April, May, June and up to July 18-22, i.e., up to the time when actual power passed into, the hands of the military dictatorship. Now this slogan is no longer correct.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Political Situation, in: ibid.; p. 37). “This slogan would be a deception of the people. It would spread among it the illusion that to seize power, the Soviets even now have only to wish or to decree it.” (V. I Lenin: “On Slogans”, in: ibid.; p. 45) 4. Even if slogans were given a clear revolutionary content, it would be an incorrect call for “All Power To the Soviets!” – because after the overthrow of the capitalist military dictatorship power, power will not pass to the present impotent and treacherous Soviets, but to revolutionary Soviets, which do not as yet exist: “Soviets can and must appear in this now revolution, but not the present Soviets, not organs of compromise with the bourgeoisie, but organs of a revolutionary struggle against it. . . . The present Soviets . . resemble a flock of sheep brought to the slaughter-house, pitifully bleating when placed under the knife. . . The slogan of the power passing to the Soviets might be construed as a ‘simple’ call to let power pass into the hands of the present Soviets, and to say so, to appeal for this, would at present mean to deccive the people. Nothing is more dangerous than deception.” (V. I. Lenin: “On Slogans”, in: ibid.; p. 49). The Second Coalition Provisional Government On July 25th, 1917 Kerensky issued a decree reintroducing capital punishment at the front, and three days later ordered the suppression of ‘Pravda” and other Bolshevik papers. On July 29th, General Lavr Kornilov was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the army, replacing General Aleksel Brusilov. On July 31st, Kerensky issued a decree dissolving the Finnish Sejm (Parliament), which had on July 19th, passed a bill for the autonomy of Finland. On August 6th., the second coalition Provisional Government was formed, with Aleksandr Kerensky as Prime Minister and Minister of War and including Ministers from the Cadets, the Mensheviks and the Socialist-Revolutionaries. Lenin commented on the formation of the new government as follows: “Let the Party loudly and clearly proclaim to the people the whole truth: that we are experiencing the beginnings of Bonapartism; that the ‘new’ government is merely a screen to conceal the counter-revolutionary Cadets and military clique which have power in their hands; that the people will not get peace, the peasants will not get the land, the workers will not get the eight-hour day, the hungry will not get bread, without complete liquidation of the counter-revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Beginning of Bonapartism”, in “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d; p. 78-79). The Sixth Congress of the Party The Sixth Congress of the RSDLP took place secretly in Petrograd from August 8th – 16th, 1917, attended by 157 voting delegates representing 40,000 members. In Lenin’s absence, both the Report of the Central Committee and the Report on the Political Situation were given by Stalin. In the latter, Stalin said: “Some comrades say that since capitalism is poorly developed in our country, it would be utopian to raise the question of a socialist revolution.. . It would be rank pedantry to demand that Russia should ‘wait’ with socialist changes until Europe ‘begins’. That country “begins” which has the greater opportunities. . . .Overthrow of the dictatorship of the imperialist bourgeoisie — that is what the immediate slogan of the Party must be. The peaceful period of the revolution has ended. A period of clashes and explosions has begun.. . . The characteristic feature of the moment is that the counter-revolutionary measures are being implemented through the agency of ‘Socialists’. It is only because it has created such a screen that the counter-revolution may continue to exist for another month or two. But since the forces of revolution are developing, explosions are bound to occur, and the moment will come when the workers will raise and rally around them the poorer strata of the peasantry, will raise the standard of workers’ revolution and usher in an era of socialist revolution in Europe.” (J. V. Stalin: Report on the Political Situation, Sixth Congress RSDLP, in: ‘Works”, Volume 3; Moscow; 1953; p. 185, 186, 189, 190). Nikolai Bukharin put forward in the discussion on the Report on the Political Situation a theory of the further development of the revolution based on Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution.” Bukharin held that the revolution in its further development, would consist of two phases, the first phase being essentially a peasant revolution, the second phase that of a revolution of the working class in which the peasant would not be the ally of the working class, in which the only ally of the Russian working class would be the working classes of Western Europe, that is: “The first phase, with the participation of thc peasantry anxious to obtain land; the second phase, after the satiated peasantry has fallen away, the phase of the proletarian revolution, when the Russian proletariat will be supported only by proletarian elements and by the proletariat of Western Europe.'” (N. Bukharin: Speech at 6th. Congress, RSDLP, cited in: N. Popov: “Outline History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Part 1; London; n.d.; p. 383). Stalin opposed Bukharin’s theory as “not properly thought out” and “fundamentally wrong”: “What is the prospect Bukharin held out? His analysis is fundamentally wrong. In his opinion, in the first stage we are moving towards a peasant revolution. But it is bound to concur, to coincide with a workers’ revolution. It cannot be that the working class, which constitutes the vanguard of the revolution, will not at the same time fight for its own demands. I therefore consider that Bukharin’s scheme has not been properly thought out. The second stage, according to Bukharin, will be a proletarian revolution supported by Western Europe, without the peasants, who will have received land and will be satisfied. But against whom would this revolution be directed? Bukharin’s gimcrack scheme furnishes no reply to this question”. (J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report on the Political Situation, 6th. Congress, RSDLP; in ibid.; p. 196). Evgenii Preobrazhensky moved an amendment to the congress resolution on the political situation, an amendment also based on an aspect of Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution.” He proposed that the seizure of power should be undertaken: “For the purpose of directing it towards peace and, in the event of a proletarian revolution in the West, towards socialism.” (E. Preobrazhensky: Amendment to Resolution on the Political Situation, 6th. Congress RSDLP, cited in H. Popov: ibid.; p. 381). Stalin strongly opposed this amendment: “I am against such an amendment. The possibility is not excluded that Russia will be the country that will lay the road to socialism. . . We must discard the antiquated idea that only Europe can show us the way.” (J. V. Stalin: Reply to Preobrazhensky on Clause 9 of the Resolution “On the Political Situation”, 6th. Congress RSDLP, in: ibid.; p. 199, 200). Preobrazhensky’s amendment was rejected, and the resolution adopted by the congress declared: “The correct slogan at the present time can be only complete liquidation of the dictatorship of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie. Only the revolutionary proletariat, provided it is supported by the poorest peasantry, is strong enough to carry out this task. . . . The task of those revolutionary classes will then be to strain every effort to take state power into their own hands and direct it, in alliance with the revolutionary proletariat of the advanced countries, towards peace and the Socialist reconstruction of society.” (Resolution on the Political Situation, 6th. Congress RSDLP, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; n.d.; p. 304). The congress approved a resolution on the economic situation, the main points of which were the confiscation of the landed estates, the nationalisation of the land, the nationalisation of the banks and large-scale industrial enterprises, and workers’ control over production and distribution. It also approved resolutions on the trade union movement and on youth leagues, setting out the aim that the Party should win the leading influence in all these bodies. It also endorsed Lenin’s decision not to appear for trial: “Considering that the present methods of persecution by the police and secret service and the activities of the public prosecutor are re-establishing the practices of the Shcheglovitov regime, . . and feeling that under such conditions there is absolutely no guarantee either of the impartiality of the court procedure, or even of the elementary safety of those summoned before the court.” (Resolution on the Failure of Lenin to Appear in Court, 6th. Congress RSDLP, cited in: V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 312). The congress also adopted new Party Rules, based on the principles of democratic centralism, and admitted the Mezhrayontsi (the Inter-Regional Organisation) into the Party. In this way Trotsky, as a member of the Inter-Regional Organisation, became a member of the Bolshevik Party while himself in prison, less than three months before the “October Revolution.” Finally, the congress issued a Manifesto to all the workers, soldiers and peasants of Russia, which ended: “Firmly, courageously and calmly, without giving in to provocations, gather strength and form fighting columns! Under the banner of the Party, proletarians and soldiers! Under our banner, oppressed of the villages! “Long live the revolutionary proletariat!” “Long live the alliance of the workers and Down with the counter-revolution and its ‘Moscow Conference’ !” “Long live the workers’ world revolution!” “Long Live the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks)!”” (Manifesto of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, Sixth Congress, cited in ibid.; p. 316-317). The “Stockholm Conference” As has been said, the 7th Conference of the Party in May had resolved that the Party should not participate in the “international socialist conference in Stockholm (scheduled originally for May but postponed till the autumn) but should expose it as a manoeuvre of the German social-chauvinists. On August 19th , however, Lev Kamenev said in the Central Executive Committee of the Soviets: “Now when our revolution has retreated to the second line of trenches, it is fitting to support this conference. Now, when the Stockholm Conference has become the banner of the struggle of the proletariat against imperialism, . . we naturally must support it.” L. Kamenev: Speech to CEC, August 19th., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; nd; p. 290). Lenin denounced Kamenev’s statement with indignation: “What right had Comrade Kamenev to forget that there is a decision of the Central Committee of the Party against participating at Stockholm? If this decision has not been abrogated by a congress or by a new decision of the Central Committee, it is law for the Party. . . . Not only had Kamenev no right to make this speech, but . . he directly violated the decision of the Party; he spoke directly against the Party. . . . Kamenev . . did not mention that the Stockholm Conference will include social-imperialists, that it is shameful for a revolutionary-Social-Democrat to have anything to do with such people. . . .To go to confer with social-imperialists, with Ministers, with hangmen’s sides in Russia — this is a shame and a betrayal. . . . . Not a revolutionary banner, but a banner of deals, compromises, forgiveness for social-imperialism, bankers’ negotiations concerning the division of annexations — this is the banner which is really beginning to wave over Stockholm. . . . We have decided to build the Third International. We must accomplish this in spite of all difficulties, Not a step backward to deals with social-imperialists and renegades from Socialism.'” (V. I. Lenin: “On Kamenev’s Speech in the Central Executive Committee concerning the Stockholm Conference”, in: ibid.; p94; 95, 96). The following month, Lenin returned to his attack upon the Stockholm Conference: “The Stockholm Conference . . failed. Its failure was caused by the fact that the Anglo-French imperialists at present are unwilling to conduct peace negotiations, while the German imperialists are willing.. . . The Stockholm Conference is known to have been called and to be supported by persons who support their governments. . .. The ‘Novaya Zhizn’ deceives the workers when it imbues them with confidence ~ the social-chauvinists. . . We, on the other hand, turn away from the comedy enacted at Stockholm by the social-chauvinists and among the social-chauvinists, in order to open the eyes of the masses, in order to express their interests, to call them to revolution, . . for a struggle on the basis of principles and for a complete brook with social-chauvinism. . . . The Stockholm Conference, even if it takes place, which is very unlikely, will be an attempt on the part of the German imperialists to sound out the ground as to the feasibility of a certain exchange of annexations.” (V. I. Lenin: “On the Stockholm Conference”, in: ibid; p. 121, 123, 124, 125). In fact, the “Stockholm Conference” never took place, owing to the refusal of the British and French Governments to allow their social-chauvinists to attend. The Moscow State Conference On the initiative of Aleksandr Kerensky, a “State Conference” was held in the Bolshoi Theatre, Moscow, from August 25th to 28th, 1917. The conference was dominated by representatives of the landlords and bourgeoisie, including a number of prominent generals, with a minority of Soviet representatives in the shape of Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries. The Petrograd Soviet and provincial Soviets were not invited to send delegates. The conference was opened by Kerensky, who declared that the fundamental tasks of the Provisional Government were the continuation of the war, the restoration of order in the army and the country, and the organisation of a stable power. The principal speech was made by General Lavr Kornilov, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, while General Aleksei Kaledin, speaking in the name of the Don Cossacks, put forward the following programme: 1) politics to be forbidden in the army; 2) all Soviets and army committees to be abolished; 3) the Declaration of the Rights of the soldiers to be abolished; 4) full authority to be restored to the officers. Prior to the opening of the conference, Stalin had characterised it as follows: “The counter-revolution needs a parliament of its own, a centre of its own; and it is creating it.. . . The conference to be convened in Moscow on August 25 will inevitably be transformed into an organ of counter-revolutionary conspiracy against the workers, . . against the peasants, . . and against the soldiers . .. into an organ of conspiracy camouflaged by the ‘socialist talk’ of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, who are supporting the conference.” (J. V. Stalin: “Against the Moscow Conference”, in: “Works”, Volume 3; Moscow; 1953, p. 208, 209). A resolution of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, published on August 21st called on all Party organisations: “First, to expose the conference convening in Moscow as an organ of the conspiracy of the counterrevolutionary bourgeoisie against the revolution; second, to expose the counter-revolutionary policy of the S-R’s, and Mensheviks who are supporting this conference; third, to organise mass protests of workers, peasants and soldiers against the conference.” (Resolution of CC of RSDLP on the Moscow Conference, cited in V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; n.d.; p. 318). The Moscow Trade Union Council, under Bolshevik leadership, called a successful one-day general strike in the city in protest at the convening of the conference. The Kornilov Revolt On September 3rd , the Latvian capital Riga was surrendered to the German armies. A powerful campaign was then launched in all the media controlled by the counter-revolutionary capitalist class blaming the fall of Riga on the demoralisation of the soldiers brought about by Bolshevik propaganda and agitation. The Bolsheviks replied that this was not the reason for the fall of Riga, but that the city had been deliberately surrendered to the German armies in order to provide a pretext for a counter-revolutionary conspiracy: “After the Moscow Conference came the surrender of Riga and the demand for repressive measures….The counter-revolution needed a ‘Bolshevik plot’ in order to clear the way for Kornilov. . . .The counter-revolutionary higher army officers surrendered . . Riga in August in order to exploit the ‘defeats’ at the front for the purpose of achieving the ‘complete’ triumph of counter-revolution.” (J. V. Stalin: “We Demand!”, in: “Works”, Volume 3; Moscow; 1953; p. 277, 278). On September 5th negotiations took place at army headquarters at the front between Commander-in-Chief General Lavr Kornilov and Boris Savinkoy, Deputy Minister of War in the Provisional Government, at which, on Kerensky’s instructions, Savinkov requested Kornilov to despatch army units to Petrograd: “On the instructions of the Prime Minister, I requested you (Kornilov) to send the Cavalry Corps to ensure the establishment of martial law in Petrograd and the suppression of any attempt at revolt.” (B. Savinkov: Statement cited in J. V. Stalin: “The Plot against the Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 367). On September 7th. General Kornilov ordered an army corps, some Cossack detachments and the so-called ‘savage Division’ to move on Petrograd. The orders given to the commander of this force, General Krymov, were to occupy the city, disarm the units of the Petrograd garrison which joined the Bolshevik movement, disarm the population of Petrograd and disperse the Soviets. “Occupy the city, disarm the units of the Petrograd garrison which joined the Bolshevik movement, disarm the population of Petrograd and disperse the Soviets.. . . . On the execution of this mission General Krymov was to send a brigade reinforced with artillery to Oranienbaum, which on its arrival was to call upon the Kronstadt garrison to dismantle the fortress and to cross to the mainland.” (L. Kornilov: Explanatory Memorandum, cited in: J. V. Stalin: ibid.;p. 367). The aim of the military coup was to set up a dictatorial government headed by Kornilov, with the participation of Aleksandr Kerensky (as Vice-Chairman), Boris Savinkov, Generel Mikhail Alekseev, and Admiral Aleksandr Kolchak. (Ibid.; p. 370) As Stalin commented later: “A compact was concluded (i.e., between the Provisional Government and General Kornilov — Ed.) to organise a conspiracy against the Bolsheviks, that is, against the working class, against the revolutionary army and the peasantry. It was a compact for conspiracy against the revolution! That is what we have been saying from the very first day of the Kornilov revolt”. (J. V. Stalin: “Comments”, in: ibid.; p. 350). “The Kerensky Government not only knew of this diabolical plan, but itself took part in elaborating it and, together with Kornilov, was preparing to carry it out. . The ‘Kornilov affair’ was not a ‘revolt’ against the Provisional Government, . . but a regular conspiracy against the revolution, an organised and thoroughly planned conspiracy. . . . Its organisers and instigators were the counter-revolutionary elements among the generals, representatives of the Cadet Party, representatives of the ‘public men’ in Moscow, the more ‘initiated’ members of the Provisional Government, and — last but not least! — certain representatives of certain embassies. . . .Kornilov had the support of the Russian and the British and French imperialist bourgeoisie.” (J. V. Stalin: ‘The Plot against the Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 367, 373, 379). On September 8th, “demand” was sent to Kerensky in the name of Kornilov demanding that the former hand over dictatorial powers to the General. On the same day the “Cadet” Ministers resigned from the Provisional Government. On the following day Kerensky — compelled for political reasons to keep his participation in the plot secret –issued an “appeal” to the population for “resistance” to Kornilov, and appointed Savinkov as Governor-General of Petrograd under a state of siege. On September 10th , on the initiative of the Bolsheviks a broad Committee for Struggle against Counter-Revolution was set up in the capital. Detachments of armed workers (“Red Guards”) were formed for the defence of the city, and agitators (mostly Bolshevik soldiers) were sent to meet the advancing troops. The work of these agitators, in the existing circumstances, proved so successful that by September 12th, virtually all the rank-and-file soldiers had deserted Kornilov. The political line put forward by Lenin in connection with the Kornilov “revolt” was to organise active struggle against the main enemy, the Kornilov forces, while on a campaign of exposure of the Kerensky government: “We will fight, we are fighting against Kornilov, even as Kerensky’s troops do, but we do not support Kerensky. On the contrary, we expose his weakness. There is the difference. . . . We are changing the form of our struggle against Kerensky. . . We shall not overthrow Kerensky right now; we shall approach the task of struggling against him in a different way, namely, we shall point out to the people (which struggles against Kornilov) the weakness and vacillation of Kerensky.” (V. I. Lenin “Letter to the Central Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, September 12th., 1917 in “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n .d., p. 137, 138). On September l4th, General Krymov committed suicide, and, on the initiative of Kerensky, a five-man government called a “Directory” was set up as a new Provisional Government. As Stalin commented: “A Directory was the political form the Kornilov-Kerensky ‘collective dictatorship’ was to have been clothed in. It should now be clear to everyone that in creating a Directory after the failure of the Kornilov ‘revolt’ Kerensky was establishing this same Kornilov dictatorship by other means.” (J. V. Stalin: ‘The Plot against the Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 370). The Kornilov revolt, together with the completely successful struggle led by the Bolsheviks against it, gave a great stimulus to the development of the socialist revolutionary forces. “The Kornilov revolt was an attempt on the very life of the revolution. That is unquestionable. But in attempting to kill the revolution and stirring all the forces of society into motion, it thereby, on the one hand, gave a spur to the revolution, stimulated it to greater activity and organisation, and, on the other hand, revealed the true nature of the classes and parties, tore the mask from their faces and gave us a glimpse of their true countenances. We owe it to the Kornilov revolt that the almost defunct Soviets in the rear and the Committees at the front instantaneously sprang to life and became active. It is a fact that even the five-man ‘Directory’ set up by Kerensky had to dispense with official representatives of the Cadets.” (J. V. Stalin: “The Break with the Cadets, in: ibid.; p. 296, 297) The Political Situation Following the Kornilov “Revolt” As a result of the collapse of the Kornilov “revolt”, the Provisional Government found itself for the moment virtually without any state machinery of force at its disposal. In those circumstances Lenin declared on September 4th , that for a short time — perhaps only for a few days– the revolution could advance peacefully by the formation (under the revived slogan of “All Power to the Soviets”) of a Menshevik and Socialist Revolutionary Soviet Government. “There has now arrived such a sharp and original turn in the Russian revolution that we, as a party, can offer a voluntary compromise — true, not to the bourgeoisie, our direct and main class enemy, but to our nearest adversaries, the ‘ruling’ petty-bourgeois democratic parties, the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks. . . . . . The compromise on our part is our return to the pre-July demand of all power to the Soviets, a government of S-Rs and Mensheviks responsible to the Soviets. Now, and only now, perhaps only for a few days or for a week or two, such a government could be created and established in a perfectly peaceful way. In all probability it could secure a peaceful forward march of the whole Russian Revolution, and unusually good chances for big strides forward by the world movement towards peace and towards the victory of Socialism. Only for the sake of this peaceful development of the revolution — a possibility that is extremely rare in history and extremely valuable . . — can and must the Bolsheviks, partisans of a world revolution, partisans of revolutionary methods, agree to such a compromise, in my opinion. The compromise would consist in this that the Bolsheviks .. . would refrain from immediately advancing the demand for the passing, of power to the proletariat and the poorest peasants, from revolutionary methods of struggle for the realisation of this demand. The condition which is self-evident . . would be full freedom of propaganda and the convocation of the Constituent Assembly without any new procrastination.” (V. I. Lenin: “On Compromises”. in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 153-4). Two days later, on September 16th Lenin concluded that the time in which a peaceful development of the revolution might occur had probably already passed: “Perhaps those few days during which a peaceful development was still possible, have already passed. Yes, to all appearances they have already passed.” (V. I. Lenin; ibid.; p. 157). With the defeat of the Kornilov “revolt,” the political situation changed rapidly, as has been said. The incident had exposed completely the counter-revolutionary character of the Provisional Government and of the Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary leaders. The masses of workers and peasants swung overwhelmingly behind the Bolsheviks. A section of the Mensheviks (the so-called “Internationalists”) and a section of the Socialist-Revolutionaries (the so-called ‘Left-Socialist-Revolutionaries”) departed the open counter-revolutionary leaders and forged a practical bloc with the Bolsheviks. The incident also brought a great revival to the Soviets, and their bolshevisation. On September 13th the Petrograd Soviet adopted a revolutionary resolution moved by the Moscow Soviet followed suit on September 18th. In these circumstances, the Party revived the slogan of “All Power to the Soviets!” “‘All Power to the Soviets!’ – such is the slogan of the new movement.” (J. V. Stalin “All Power to the Soviets!'” ; in: “Works”, Volume 2 Moscow; 1953; p. 320). On September 22nd, the Mensheviks, Socialist-Revolutionary Presidium of the Petrograd Soviet, headed by Nicholas Chkheidze, resigned, and on September 24th, Trotsky was elected chairman of the Petrograd Soviet. Trotsky’s “Proportional Representation’ In his presidential address to the Petrograd Soviet on September 24th, Trotsky said: “We shall conduct the work of the Petrograd Soviet in a spirit of lawfulness and of full freedom for all parties. The hand of the Presidium will never lend itself to the suppression of a minority.” (L. Trotsky: Presidential Address to Petrograd Soviet, September 24th , 1917, cited in: I. Deutscher: “The Prophet Armed: Trotsky: 1879-1921”; London; 1970; p. 287). Thus, in the name of “protecting the rights of the minorities” under ‘proportional representation’, on the initiative of Trotsky the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, now in a minority in the Soviet, were voted back on to the Presidium, “Despite Lenin’s objections, all parties were represented in the new Presidium of the Soviet in proportion to their strength.” (I. Deutscher: ibid.; p. 287). Lenin denounced with indignation: “such glaring errors of the Bolsheviks as giving seats to the Mensheviks in the Presidium of the Soviets, etc.” (V. I. Lenin “The Crisis Has Matured”, in ‘Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d. ; p. 278) . Lenin Calls for Insurrection At the end of September Lenin wrote to the Central Committee, the Petrograd Committee and the Moscow Committee of the Party demanding the immediate preparation of a revolutionary insurrection: “Having obtained a majority in the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies of both capitals, the Bolsheviks can and must take power into their hands. … The majority of the people is with us. . .. Why must the Bolsheviks assume power right now? Because the impending surrender of Petrograd will make our chances a hundred times worse. . . What we are concerned with is not the ‘day’ of the uprising…. What matters is that we must make the task clear to the Party, place on the order of the day the armed uprising in Petrograd and Moscow (including their regions) . . . No apparatus? There is an apparatus: the Soviets and democratic organisations. . . It is precisely now that to offer peace to the people means to win. Assume power at once in Moscow and in Petrograd. . we will win absolutely and unquestionably”. (V. I. Lenin: “The Bolsheviks Must Assume Power”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 221, 222, 223). A day or so later Lenin followed the above letter with a further letter to the Central Committee: “We have back of us the majority of a class that is the vanguard of the revolution, the vanguard of the people, and is capable of drawing the masses along. We have back of us a majority of the people.. . . . We have the advantageous position of a party which knows its road perfectly well. . . . . . Victory is assured to us, for the people are now very close to desperation, and we are showing the whole people a sure way out. . . We have before us all, the objective prerequisites for a successful uprising. . Delay is impossible. The revolution is perishing. Having put the question this way, having concentrated our entire fraction in the factories and barracks, we shall correctly estimate the best moment to begin the uprising. And in order to treat uprising in that Marxist way, i.e., as an art, we must at the same time, without losing a single moment, organise the staff of the insurrectionary detachment; designate the forces; move the loyal regiments to the most important points; surround the Aleksandrinsky Theatre; occupy Peter and Paul Fortress; arrest the general staff and the government; move against the military cadets, the Savage Division, etc., such detachments as will die rather than allow the enemy to move to the centre of the city; we must mobilise the armed workers, call them to a last desperate bottle, occupy at once the telegraph and telephone stations, place our staff of the uprising at the central telephone station, connect it by wire with all the factories, the regiments, the points of armed fighting, etc,” (V. I. Lenin: “Marxism and Uprising”, in: ibid.; p. 226, 227, 228-9). The Central Committee Meeting of October 28th The two letters of Lenin discussed in the last section were debated at a meeting of the Central Committee of the Party on October 28th. The Committee took a hesitant attitude towards Lenin’s demand that an insurrection be placed on the immediate order of the day. Stalin’s motion that the letters should be sent to the most important organisations for discussion by them was held over until the next meeting. Kamenev’s motion that: “The Central Committee, having considered the letters of Lenin, rejects the practical propositions contained in them.” (Minutes of CC, RSDLP, September 28th., 1917, cited in V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 300). Was, however, rejected. The Question of the Zimmerwald Conference The Seventh Conference of the RSDLP, in May 1917, had decided in favour of the representation of the Party at the Third Zimmerwald Conference in Stockholm planned for the end of May but postponed until September. In September Lenin pressed the view that the decision to continue further participation in “rotten Zimmerwald” had been a mistake and urged that the Party’s delegation should not take part in the conference but should call a conference of the left Zimmerwaldists, without the Centrists: “It is now perfectly clear that it was a mistake not to leave it (i.e., Zimmerwald — Ed.) . . .We must leave Zimmerwald immediately. . ..When we leave rotten Zimmerwald, we must decide immediately, at the plenary session of September 16, 1917, to call a conference of the Lefts.” (V. I. Lenin: “On The Zimmerwald Question”; in: “Collected Works”, Volume 2, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 150). The “Democratic Conference”‘ From September 27th to October 5th , 1917 the Provisional Government convoked a “Democratic Conference” in the Aleksandrinsky Theatre, Petrograd. Its aim was to try to provide a basis of support for the government in the new situation following the defeat of the Kornilov “revolt.” It was, of course, completely unrepresentative. As Lenin pointed out: “The Democratic Conference does not represent the majority of the revolutionary people, but only the conciliatory petty-bourgeois top layer.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Bolsheviks Must Assume Power”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 221). The Bolsheviks were represented at the conference, and on October lst, submitted a long declaration calling for the formation of a revolutionary Soviet government with the following programme: “1. The abolition of private property in landowners’ land without compensation and its transfer to the management of peasant committees…. 2. The introduction of workers’ control over both production and distribution on a state-wide scale, the centralisation of banking, control over the banks and the nationalisation of the most important industries, such as oil, coal, and metals; universal labour duty; immediate measures to demobilise industry; and organisation of supplying the village with industrial products at fixed prices. The merciless taxation of large capital accumulations and properties and the confiscation of war profits for the purpose of saving the country from economic ruin. 3. Declaring secret agreements to be void, and the immediate offer of a universal democratic peace to all the peoples of the belligerent nations. 4. Safeguarding the rights of all nationalities inhabiting Russia to self-determination. The immediate abolition of all repressive measures against Finland and the Ukraine.” (Declaration of Bolshevik Fraction at Democratic Conference, cited in V. I. Lenin “Collected Works”;, Volume 21, Book 2;London; n.d.; p. 321-22). and demanding the following immediate measures: “1. Stopping all repressions directed against the working class and its organisations. Abolition of capital punishment at the front and the re-establishment of full freedom of agitation and of all democratic organisations within the army. Cleansing the army of counter-revolutionary elements. 2. Commissars and other officials to be elected by local organisations. 3. General arming of the workers and the organisation of a Red Guard. 4. Dissolution of the State Council and the State Duma. The immediate convening of the Constituent Assembly. 5. Abolition of all the privileges of the estates (of the nobility, etc.), c)mplete equa1~ty of rights for all citizens. 6. Introduction of the eight-hour day and of a comprehensive system of social insurance.” (Ibid; p. 322). After repeated inconclusive votes, the conference declared in favour of a coalition government but without participation of the Cadets. Kerensky, however, declined to abide by the decision of the conference he had himself organised, and on October 8th, formed a new coalition government which included several individual members of the Cadet Party. The most important act of the conference was to set up a “Provisional Council of the Republic,” known as the “Pre-Parliament,” by which the capitalist class aimed to divert the less politically developed workers and poor peasants from the path of revolution to the path of parliamentary democracy.” The Pre-parliament was intended to substitute itself for the Soviets. In an article published on October 7th, two days after the conference ended, Lenin summed it up as follows: “In the Soviets, the S-Rs and Mensheviks have lost their majority. They therefore have had to resort to a fraud: to violate their pledge to call a new congress of the Soviets after three months; . . to fix up a ‘Democratic’ Conference. . . .The leaders are basing themselves on a minority, in defiance of the principles of democracy. Hence the inevitability of their frauds.” (V.I. Lenin: “Heroes or Frauds”; in: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 244, 245). The Boycott of the Pro-parliament Already by the last day of the “Democratic Conference”, October 5th , Lenin had become convinced that, in view of the development of the revolution, it had been a mistake for the Bolsheviks to participate in this “hideous fraud”: “The more one reflects on the meaning of the so-called Democratic Conference,…the more firmly convinced one becomes that our Party has committed a mistake by participating in it. . . .A new revolution is obviously growing in the country, a revolution . . of the proletariat and the majority of the peasants, the poorest peasantry, against the bourgeoisie, against its ally, Anglo-French finance capital, against its governmental apparatus headed by the Bonapartist Kerensky. We should have boycotted the Democratic Conference; we all erred by not doing so.” (V. I. Lenin: “From a Publicist’s Diary”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 1;. London; n.d. p. 249, 253). On this basis, Lenin proceeded to fight for a policy of boycotting the new fraud, the Pre-parliament: “This pre-parliament . . is in substance a Bonapartist fraud. . . . The tactics of participating in the pre-parliament., are incorrect. They do not correspond to the objective interrelation of classes, to the objective conditions of the moment.. We must boycott the pre-parliament. We must leave it and go to the Soviets of Workers’, Soldiers’ and Peasants’ Deputies, to the trade unions, to the masses in general . . .We must give them a correct and clear slogan to disperse the Bonapartist gang of Kerensky with his forged pre-parliament.” (V.I. Lenin ibid.; p. 252–253). However, before Lenin’s letter had been received, on October 3rd the Central Committee of the Party had convened a meeting of the Central Committee extended to include members of the Petrograd Committee and the Bolshevik delegates to the Democratic Conference. Stalin and Trotsky reported in favour of boycotting the Pre-parliament, while Lev Kamenev and Viktor Nogin reported in favour of participation, and were supported by David Riazanov and Aleksei Rykov. The conference adopted a resolution in favour of participation by 77 votes to 50. On October 6th , Lenin demanded a reversal of this decision: “Trotsky was for the boycott. Bravo, Comrade Trotsky! Boycottism was defeated in the fraction of the Bolsheviks who came to the Democratic Conference. Long live the boycott! We cannot and must not reconcile ourselves to participation under any condition. We must at all costs strive to have the boycott question solved in the plenum of the Central Committee and at an extraordinary party congress. . There is not the slightest doubt that in the ‘top’ of our Party we note vacillations that may become ruinous, because the struggle is developing.” The Central Committee of the Party did, in fact, convene a Party Congress for October 30th., 1917. In his theses intended for this congress, Lenin wrote: “The participation of our Party in the ‘preparliament’ . . is an obvious error and a deviation from the proletarian-revolutionary road. . . . When the revolution is thus rising, to go to a make-believe parliament, concocted to deceive the people, means to facilitate this deception, to make the cause of preparing the revolution more difficult. . . . The Party congress, therefore, must recall, the members of our Party from the pre-parliament, declare a boycott against it.”‘ (V. I. Lenin: ‘Theses . . for a Resolution and Instructions to Those Elected to the Party Congress”, in: ‘Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; nd.; p. 61). However, the convocation of the congress proved unnecessary, and was cancelled by the Central Committee. On October 18th, the Central Committee adopted a resolution to boycott the pre-parliament, against only one dissentient vote. The dissentient, Lev Kamenev, asked that a statement by him be attached to the minutes of the meeting: “I think that your decision to withdraw from the very first session of the ‘Soviet of the Russian Republic’ predetermines the tactics of the Party during the next period in a direction which I personally consider quite dangerous for the Party.” (L. Kamenev: Statement to CC, RSDLP, October 18th., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: in: “Collected Works”; Volume 21; Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 302). On the opening day of the Pre-parliament, October 20th., Trotsky read a declaration on behalf of the Bolsheviks: “We, the fraction of Social-Democrats-Bolsheviks, declare: with this government of traitors to the people and with this council of counter-revolutionary connivance we have-nothing in common. We do not wish to cover up, directly or indirectly, not even for a single day, that work which is being carried out behind the official screen and which is fatal to the people. . . In withdrawing from the Provisional Council we appeal to the vigilance and courage of the workers, soldiers and peasants of all Russia. We appeal to the people. All power to the Soviets! All the land to the people! Long live the immediate, honourable, democratic peace! Long live the Constituent Assembly! “ (Declaration of the Bolshevik Fraction Read in the Pre-parliament, October 20th 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London n.d.; p. 324). The Bolsheviks then walked out of the Pre-parliament. The Central Committee Meeting of October 23rd Two days after the Bolsheviks walked out of the Pre-parliament, there took place, on October 23rd, the famous session of the Central Committee of the Russian Social-Democratic Party at which the decision to launch the insurrection was taken. Twelve of the twenty-one members of the CC were present, including Lenin disguised in wig and spectacles. The minutes of the meeting recorded the main points only of Lenin’s statement: “Lenin states that since the beginning of September a certain indifference towards the question has been noted. He says that this is inadmissible, if we earnestly raise the slogan of seizure of power by the Soviets. It is, therefore, high time to turn attention to the technical side of the question. Much time has obviously been lost. Nevertheless, the question is very urgent and the decisive moment is near. . . . The absenteeism and the indifference of the masses can be explained by the fact that the masses are tired of words and resolutions. The majority is now with us. Politically, the situation has become entirely ripe for the transfer of power.” (Minutes of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, October 23, 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, B k 2; London; n.d.; p. 106). Lenin then moved a resolution which ended: “Recognising thus that an armed uprising is inevitable and the time perfectly ripe, the Central Committee proposes to all the organisations of the Party to act accordingly and to discuss and decide from this point of view all the practical questions.” (Resolution of Central Committee, RSDLP, October 23rd 1917, cited in: ibid; p; 107). The resolution was carried by ten votes to two – the dissentients being Grigori Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev. The Campaign of Kamenev and Zinoviev against the Central Committee’s Decision on the Insurrection On October 24th, Lev Kamenev and Grigori Zinoviev sent a joint memorandum to the principal organisations of the Party attacking the Central Committee’s decision of the previous day to launch an insurrection: “The Congress of Soviets has been called for November 2. . . It must become the centre of the consolidation around the Soviets of all proletarian and demi-proletarian organisations. . . As yet there is no firm organisational connection between these organisations and the Soviets. . . But such a connection is in any case a preliminary condition for the actual carrying out of the slogan “All power to the Soviets?. . . . Under these conditions it would be a serious historical untruth to formulate the question of the transfer of power into the hands of the proletarian party in the terms: either now or never. No. The party of the proletariat will grow.. . . And there is only one way in which the proletarian party can interrupt its successes, and that is if under present conditions it takes upon itself to initiate an uprising and thus expose the proletarians to the blows of the entire consolidated counter-revolution, supported by the petty-bourgeois democracy. Against this pernicious policy we raise our voices in warning.” (G. Zinoviev & L. Kamenev Statement to Party Organisations October 24th, 1917, cited in V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; nd.; p. 332). A few days later the statement was distributed in leaflet form in Petrograd. Trotsky’s “Soviet Constitutionalism” Trotsky’s opposition to Lenin’s call to insurrection was more subtle than that of Kamenev and Zinoviev. Whereas the latter openly opposed Lenin’s demands for immediate preparations for insurrection, Trotsky supported these demands in words. He insisted however, in the name of “Soviet constitutionalism” that the actual call to insurrection should be issued not by the Petrograd Soviet, and certainly not by the Party, but by the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets. “Trotsky was approaching the problem from his new point of vantage as President of the Petrograd Soviet. He agreed with Lenin on the chances and the urgency of insurrection. But he disagreed with him over method, especially over the idea that the party should stage the insurrection in its own name and on its own responsibility. He took less seriously than Lenin the threat of an immediate counter-revolution. Unlike Lenin, he was confident that the pressure of the Bolshevik majority in the Soviets would not allow the old Central Executive to delay much longer the All-Russian Congress. . . . . . Lenin . . refused to let insurrection wait until the Congress convened, because he was convinced that the Menshevik Executive would delay the Congress to the Greek Calends, and that the insurrection would never take place as it would be forestalled by a successful counter-revolution.. . . The difference between Lenin and Trotsky centred on whether the rising itself ought to be conceived in terms of Soviet constitutionalism. The tactical risk inherent in Trotsky’s attitude was that it imposed certain delays upon the whole plan of action… Lenin . . viewed Trotsky’s attitude in the matter of insurrection with uneasiness, and even suspicion. He wondered whether, by insisting that the rising should be linked with the Congress of the Soviets, Trotsky was not biding his time and delaying action until it would be too late. If this had been the case, then Trotsky would have been, from Lenin’s viewpoint, an even more dangerous opponent than Kamenev and Zinoviev, whose attitude had at least the negative merit that it was unequivocal and that it flatly contradicted the whole trend of Bolshevik policy. Trotsky’s attitude, on the contrary, seemed to follow from the party’s policy and therefore carried more conviction with the Bolsheviks; the Central Committee was in fact inclined to adopt it. In his letters, Lenin therefore sometimes controverted Trotsky’s view almost as strongly as Zinoviev’s and Kamencv’s, without, however, mentioning Trotsky by name. To wait for the rising until the Congress of Soviets, he wrote, was just as treasonable as to wait for Kerensky to convoke the Constituent Assembly, as Zinoviev and Kamenev wanted to do.” (I. Deutscher: “The Prophet Armed Trotsky: 1879-1921”; London; 1970; pp. 290-291, 294-95). Lenin’s objections to Trotsky’s line on this question were twofold: Firstly: it would mean dangerous delay in calling the insurrection; Secondly: since the calling of the Second Congress of Soviets was constitutionally in the hands of the Central Executive Committee (C.E.C) – elected at the First Congress of Soviets in June and dominated by Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries — it would mean permitting counterrevolutionaries, and not the revolutionary vanguard Party, to “fix the date of the insurrection,” or even to postpone it indefinitely. In this connection, it must be remembered that the First Congress of Soviets had instructed the C.E.C. to summon a new congress “within three months”, i.e. not later than September. The C.E.C however, justifiably fearing that the Bolsheviks would have a majority at the congress, violated this instruction. Only under the extreme pressure of the Bolsheviks at the time of the Democratic Conference did the C.E.C. reluctantly agree to convoke the congress for November 2nd . On October 31st, however, it postponed the congress to November 7th. Lenin saw Trotsky’s line as either — and he left the question open – “absolute idiocy” or “complete betrayal”, and he attacked it continuously up to the moment of the insurrection itself: On October 10th: “The general political situation causes me great anxiety . . The government has an army, and is preparing itself systematically. And what do we do? We only pass resolutions. We lose time. We set ‘dates’ (November 2, the Soviet Congress – is it not ridiculous to put it off so long? Is it not ridiculous to rely on that?” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to I.T. Smilga, October 10th., 1917; in: ‘Collected Works’, Volume 21, Book 1; London; n.d.; p. 265). “Yes, the leaders of the Central Executive Committee are pursuing tactics whose sole logic is the defence of the bourgeoisie and the landowners. And there is not the slightest doubt that the Bolsheviks, were they to allow themselves to be caught in the trap of constitutional illusions, of ‘faith’ in the Congress of Soviets. . . . of waiting’ for the Congress of Soviets, etc. — that such Bolsheviks would prove miserable traitors to the proletarian cause. . . . The crisis has matured. The whole future of the Russian Revolution is at stake. The whole honour of the Bolshevik Party is in question…We must . . admit the truth, that in our Central Committee and at the top of our Party there is a tendency in favour of awaiting the Congress of Soviets, against the immediate seizure of power, against an immediate uprising. We must overcome this tendency or opinion. Otherwise the Bolsheviks would cover themselves with shame forever; they would be reduced to nothing as a party. For to miss such a moment and to ‘await’ the Congress of Soviets is either absolute idiocy or complete betrayal.. . . To ‘await’ the Congress of Soviets is absolute idiocy, for this means losing weeks, whereas weeks and even days now decide everything. . . To ‘await’ the Congress of Soviets is idiocy, for the Congress will give nothing, it can give nothing!. . . First vanquish Kerensky, then call the Congress. The victory of the uprising is now secure for the Bolsheviks . . if we do not ‘await’ the Soviet Congress. . . . To refrain from seizing power at present, to ‘wait’, to ‘chatter’ in the Centra1 Committee, to confine ourselves . . to ‘fighting for the Congress’ means to ruin the revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The Crisis has Matured”, in: ibid.; p. 275, 276, 277, 278). Only when Lenin took the extreme step of resigning from the Central Committee in order to fight for his line in the lower organs of the Party (on October 12th) did a majority accept Lenin’s line on this question: “I am compelled to tender my resignation from the Central Committee which I hereby do, leaving myself the freedom of propaganda in the lower ranks of the Party and at the Party Congress. For it is my deepest conviction that if we ‘await’ the Congress of Soviets and let the present moment pass, we ruin the revolution.” Although Lenin withdrew his resignation when the Central Committee voted for a boycott of the Pre-parliament, Trotsky continued to fight for his line and Lenin continued to fight against it: On October 16-20: “Events indicate our task so clearly to us that hesitation actually becomes a crime.. . . To ‘wait’ under such conditions is a crime. The Bolsheviks have no right to wait for the Congress of Soviets; they must take power immediately. To wait for the Congress of Soviets means to play a childish game of formality, a shameful game of formality; it means to betray the revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to the Central Committee, Moscow Committee, Petrograd Committee, and the Bolshevik Members of the Petrograd and Moscow Soviets, October 16-20, 1917; in: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; n.d.; p. 69). On October 21st: “We must not wait for the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, which the Central Executive Committee may postpone till November; we must not tarry.. . . Near Petrograd and in Petrograd — this is where this uprising can and must be decided upon and carried out . . as quickly as possible….Delay means death.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Bolshevik Comrades Participating in the Regional Congress of the Soviets of the Northern Region, October 21st., 1917,in: ibid.; p. 91). On November 6th.; (i.e, on the eve of the insurrection): “The situation is extremely critical. It is as clear as can be that delaying the uprising now really means death. With all my power I wish to persuade the comrades that now everything hangs on a hair, that on the order of the day are questions that are not solved by conferences, by congresses (even by Congresses of Soviets), but only . . by the struggle of armed masses. The bourgeois onslaught of the Kornilovists, the removal of Verkhovsky, show that we must not wait. We must at any price, this evening, tonight, arrest the Minister, having disarmed (defeated if they offer resistance) the military cadets, etc. We must not wait! We may lose everything!. . . History will not forgive delay by revolutionists who could be victorious today (and will surely be victorious today!), while they risk losing much tomorrow, they risk losing all. If we seize power today, we seize it not against the Soviets but for them. It would be a disaster or formalism to wait for the uncertain voting of November 7. The people have a right and a duty to decide such questions not by voting but by force.. . . . The government is tottering. We must deal it the death blow at any cost. To delay action is the same as death.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to the Members of the Central Committee, November 6th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 144-145). Trotsky later felt it expedient to deny the charge that he had sought to accommodate the insurrection to the Second Congress of Soviets: “We should search in vain among the minutes or among any memoirs whatever, for any indication of a proposal of Trotsky to ‘accommodate the insurrection necessarily to the Second Congress of Soviets.'” Elsewhere in the same work, however, Trotsky makes his own position at the time quite clear. He reports his declaration ‘In the name of the Petrograd Soviet” on November 1st: “I declare in the name of the Soviet that no armed actions have been settled upon by us….The Petrograd Soviet is going to propose to the Congress of Soviets that they seize the power.” (L. Trotsky: Speech to Petrograd Soviet, November 1st., 1917; cited in: L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 102, 103). and comments: “The Soviet was sufficiently powerful to announce openly its programme of state revolution and even set the date.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 103). Trotsky also reports his speech at an emergency session of the Petrograd Soviet on November 6th., 1917 (the day before the insurrection began): “An armed conflict today or tomorrow is not included in our plan — on the threshold of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets. We think that the Congress will carry out our slogan with greater power and authority'” (L. Trotsky: Speech in Petrograd Soviet, November 6th., 1917, cited in: L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 331-2). Stalin later referred to: “the mistake made by the Petrograd Soviet in openly fixing and announcing the date of the uprising. (November 7).” (J.V. Stalin: “Trotskyism or Leninism? , in: “Works”, Volume 6; Moscow, 1953; p. 362). To which Trotsky replied: “Where, and when, and from which side, did the Soviet publish abroad the date of the insurrection?” and answers himself: “It was not the insurrection, but the opening of the Congress of Soviets, which was publicly and in advance set for the 7th. . . ‘It flowed from the logic of things’, we wrote subsequently, ‘that we appointed the insurrection for November 7th.’ ..On the second anniversary of the revolution the author of this book, referring, in the sense just explained, to the fact that: ‘the October insurrection was, so to speak, appointed in advance for a definite date, for November 7th., and was accomplished upon exactly that date’, added: “We should seek in vain in history for another example of an insurrection which was accommodated in advance by the course of things to a definite date.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 333-34). Thus Trotsky, here was admitting the justice of Lenin’s comment: “To ‘call’ the Congress of Soviets for November 2, in order to decide upon the seizure of power — is there any difference between this and a foolishly “appointed” uprising?” (V. I. Lenin: “The Crisis has Matured”, in: ‘Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book l, London; n.d.; p. 277). According to Trotsky, Lenin’s original plan for the insurrection (to which he adhered up to November 6th.) was that it should be called “‘in the name of the Party,” and endorsed by the Congress of Soviets when this met: Lenin’s plan, he says: “presupposed that the preparation and completion of the revolution were to be carried out through party channels and in the name of the party, and afterwards the seal of sanction was to be placed on the victory by the Congress of Soviets.” (L. Trotsky: “Lessons of October”; London; 1971; p. 45). “In the first weeks he (i.e. Lenin — Ed.) was decidedly in favour of the independent initiative of the Party.” (L. Trotsky: “History of the Russian Revolution”;, Volume 3; London; 1967; p.265-6). And Trotsky complains, for example, of the resolution drafted by Lenin which was also approved by the Central Committee at its meeting on October 23rd: “The task of insurrection he presented directly as the task of the party. The difficult task of bringing its preparation into accord with the Soviets is as yet not touched upon. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets does not get a word.” (L. Trotsky: ibid; p. 143). Trotsky “kindly” attributes Lenin’s “wrong estimates” to his absence from Petrograd”: “Lenin, who was not in Petrograd, could not appraise the full significance of this fact (i.e., the invalidation by the Petrograd Soviet of Kerensky’s order transferring two-thirds of the garrison to the front –Ed.) . . . . Lenin’s counsel . . flowed precisely from the fact that in his underground refuge he had no opportunity to estimate the radical turn.” (L. Trotsky: “Lessons of October” London; 1971; p. 47-48). “Lenin’s isolation . . deprived him of the possibility of making timely estimates of episodic factors and temporary changes.. . . If Lenin had been in Petrograd and had carried through at the beginning of October his decision in favour of an immediate insurrection without reference to the Congress of Soviets, he could undoubtedly have given the carrying out of his own plan a political setting which would have reduced its disadvantageous features to a minimum. But it is at least equally probable that he would himself in that case have come round to the plan actually carried out.” (L. Trotsky: “History of the Russian Revolution”, Volume 3; London; 1967; p. 327-8). In fact, Lenin’s basic plan was that the insurrection should be planned, timed and led by the Party, through either the Petrograd or the Moscow Soviet — both of which were now led by the Party — but not through the Second Congess of Soviets, the calling of which was dependent upon the Central Executive Committee led by Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries. As Stalin comments: “According to Trotsky, it appears that Lenin’s view was that the Party should take power in October ‘independently’ of and behind the back of the Soviet’. Later in, criticising this nonsense, which he ascribes to Lenin, Trotsky ‘cuts capers’ and finally delivers the following condescending utterance: “That would have been a mistake”. Trotsky is here uttering a falsehood about Lenin, he is misrepresenting Lenin’s views on the role of the Soviets in the uprising. A pile of documents can be cited showing that Lenin proposed that power be taken through the Soviets, either the Petrograd or the Moscow Soviets, and not behind the back of the Soviets.” (J.V. Stalin: “Trotskyism or Leninism?”, in: ‘Works’, Volume 6; Moscow; 1953; p. 359-60). Trotsky’s myth goes on to say that the Central Committee “rejected Lenin’s plan for the insurrection” and “adopted Trotsky’s plan that the insurrection should be called by the Second Congress of Soviets. Only on the evening of November 6th , according to Trotsky was Lenin convinced of the “incorrectness” of his “conspiratorial plan”; “The Central Committee did not adopt this (i.e., Lenin’s — Ed.) proposal the insurrection was led into Soviet channels.” (L. Trotsky: ‘Lessons October; London 1971; p. 45). “When he (i.e., Lenin — Ed ) arrived in Smolny (i.e., on the evening November 6th , the day before the insurrection — Ed.) . . I understood that only at that moment had he finally become reconciled to the fact that we had refused the seizure of power by way of a conspirative plan.” (L. Trotsky: “History of the Russian Revolution”, Volume 3; London,.1967; P. 345) As Stalin points out, however, the Central Committee of the Party did not adopt Trotsky’s plan that the insurrection should be called by the Second Congress of Soviets. In fact, the insurrection had been carried through before the Congress met. “Lenin proposed that power be taken before November 7th, for two reasons. Firstly, because the counter-revolutionaries might have surrendered Petrograd (i.e., to the German armies — Ed ) at any moment, which would have drained the blood of the developing uprising. Secondly, because the mistake made by the Petrograd Soviet in openly fixing and announcing the day of the uprising (November 7) could not be rectified in any other way than by actually launching the uprising before the legal date set for it. The fact of the matter is that Lenin regarded insurrection as an art, and he could not help knowing that the enemy, informed about the date of the uprising (owing to the carelessness of the Petrograd Soviet) would certainly try to prepare for that day. Consequently, it was necessary to forestall the enemy, i.e., without fail to launch the uprising before the legal date. This is the chief explanation for the passion with which Lenin in his letters scourged those who made a fetish of the date — November 7. Events show that Lenin was absolutely right. It is well known that the uprising was launched prior to the All Russian Congress of Soviets. It is well known that power was actually taken before the opening of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, and it was taken not by the Congress of Soviets, but by the Petrograd Soviet, by the Revolutionary Military Committee. The Congress of Soviets merely took over power from the Petrograd Soviet. That is why Trotsky’s lengthy arguments about the importance of Soviet legality are quite beside the point.” (J. V. Stalin: ibid; p. 362). The Extended Central Committee Meeting of October 29th On October 29th., 1917 an extended session of the Central Committee of the RSDLP was held, in which participated representatives of the Petrograd Committee, the Petrograd Regional Committee, the Military Organisation, the Bolshevik Fraction of the Petrograd Soviet, trade unions and factory committees. Lenin reported on the Central Committee meeting of October 23rd, and read the resolution on insurrection adapted by that meeting. Representatives then reported on the situation existing, in their particular sectors. In the discussion on the present situation, the resolution was strongly opposed by Lev Kamenev and Grigori Zinoviev. Kamenev said: “This resolution . . shows how not to carry out an uprising: during this week nothing has been done.. . . The results for the week indicate that there are no factors favouring a rising. . We have no apparatus for an uprising; our enemies have a much stronger apparatus, and it has probably further increased during this week. . . In preparing for the Constituent Assembly we do not at all embrace the road of parliamentarism. . . Two tactics are fighting here: the tactic of conspiracy and the tactic of faith in the moving forces of the Russian Revolution.” (L. Kamenev: Speech at Extended Meeting of CC, RSDLP, October 29th., 1917; in: Minutes, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2: London; n.d.; p. 337). Zinoviev said: “The Constituent Assembly will take place in an atmosphere that is revolutionary to the highest degree. Meanwhile, we shall strengthen our forces. The possibility is not eliminated that we, together with the Left S-Rs, shall be in the majority there. ….We have no right to risk, to stake everything on one card.. . . . If the congress takes place on the 2nd, we must propose that it should not disband until the constituent assembly convenes. There must be a defensive, waiting tactic. . . It is necessary to reconsider, if possible, the resolution of the CC. . We must definitely tell ourselves that we do not plan an uprising within the next five years.” (G. Zinoviev: Speech at Extended Meeting of CC, RSDLP, October 29th., 1917, in Ibid; p. 36, 337). Stalin spoke strongly in favour of confirmation of the Central Committee resolution of October 23rd., and this was finally done by 19 votes against 2 — the dissentients again being Kamenev and Zinoviev. The Central Committee then continued in session alone, and set up a Military Centre of the Central Committee consisting of Stalin, Sverdlov, Bubnov, Dzerzhinsky and Uritsky. After the meeting had concluded, Kamenev sent a letter to the Central Committee tendering his resignation from it: “Not being able to support the point of view expressed in the latest decisions of the CC which define the character of its work, and considering that this position is leading the party of the proletariat to defeat, I ask the CC to recognise that I am no longer a member of the CC.” (L. Kamenev: Letter to CC, RSDLP, October 29th., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: Ibid. ; p. 260). The Congress of Soviets of the Northern Region From October 24-26th , 1917 the Congress of Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies of the Northern Region took place in Petrograd. Since the overwhelming majority of the delegates were Bolsheviks and Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Central Executive Committee of the Soviets — still dominated by Mensheviks and Right Socialist-Revolutionaries — declared the congress unofficial, and the small Menshevik fraction declared themselves present “for purposes of information only.” The congress declared itself in favour of the immediate transfer of power to the Soviets, the immediate transfer of land to the peasants, an immediate offer of peace and the convening of the Constituent Assembly at the appointed time. On October 29-30th Lenin – wrote a long, “Letter to Comrades” in which he refuted point by point the arguments of Kamenev and Zinoviev against the immediate launching of an insurrection. On October 31st, Kamenev, on behalf of Zinoviev and himself, published a statement in the newspaper “Novaya Zhizn” (New Life) in which he declared that they felt themselves obliged: “To declare themselves against any attempt to take the initiative of an armed uprising which would be doomed to defeat and which would have the most dangerous effect on the party, the proletariat, the fate of the revolution. To stake everything on the card of an uprising within the next few days would be tantamount to making a step of desperation”; (L. Kamenev: “L. Kamenev About the Uprising”, in “Novaya Zhizn”, October 31st., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 261). Lenin thundered immediately at the treachery of the “strikebreakers of the Revolution”: “On the eve of the critical day . . two ‘outstanding Bolsheviks’ attack an unpublished decision of the Party centre in the non-Party press, in a paper which as far as this given problem is concerned goes hand in hand with the bourgeoisie against the workers’ party. . . . I will fight with all my power both in the Central Committee and at the congress to expel them both from the Party. I cannot judge from afar how much damage was done to the cause by the strike-breaking action in the non-Party press. Very great practical damage has undoubtedly been caused. To remedy the situation, it is first of all necessary to re-establish the unity of the Bolshevik front by excluding the strike-breakers.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to the Members of the Bolshevik Party, October 31st., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 129-30, 131). On the following day he wrote to the Central Committee of the Party: “A self-respecting Party cannot tolerate strike-breaking and strike-breakers in its midst. This is obvious. The more we think about Zinoviev’s and Kamenev’s appearance in the non-Party press, the more obvious it becomes that their action has all the elements of strike-breaking in it. We cannot refute the gossipy lie of Zinoviev and Kamenev without doing the cause still more harm. Therein lies the boundless meanness, the absolute treacherousness of these two persons, that in the face of the capitalists they have betrayed the strikers’ plans. For once we keep silent in the press, everybody will guess how things stand. . . . . There can be and must be only one answer to this: an immediate decision of the Central Committee saying that: ‘Recognising in Zinoviev’s and Kamenev’s appearance in the non-Party press all the elements of strikebreaking, the Central Committee expels both from the Party’. . . . The more ‘outstanding’ the strike-breakers, the more imperative it is to punish them immediately with expulsion.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to the Central Committee of the RSDLP, November 1st, 1917; in ibid. p. 133, 135, 136). The Central Committee Meeting of November 2nd. At its meeting on November 2nd., the Central Committee accepted Kamenev’s resignation from the CC. It adopted a resolution to the effect: “that no member of the CC shall have the right to speak against the adopted decisions of the CC,” (Minutes of Meeting of CC, RSDLP, November 2nd., 1917, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 21, Book 2; London; n.d.; p. 261). and a more specific resolution imposing: “Upon Kamenev and Zinoviev the obligation not to make any statements against the decisions of the CC and the line of work laid out by it.” (Ibid.; p. 261). The Insurrection On November 5th , the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet appointed commissars for all the military detachments under its command. On the same day the Peter and Paul fortress, the last important obstacle to insurrection, declared for the Petrograd Soviet. In the early morning of November 6th, the Provisional Government attempted to launch a counter-offensive against the revolutionary forces by issuing orders for the arrest of the members of the Revolutionary Military Committee and for the suppression of the central organ of the Bolsheviks, “Rabochy Put” (Workers Path). By 10 a.m. detachments of Red Guards had placed a guard on the printing plant and editorial offices of the newspaper, and at 11 a.m. the paper came out with a call for the immediate overthrow of the Provisional Government. In the late evening of November 6th, Lenin arrived at the Smolny which, as the headquarters both of the Petrograd Soviet and of the Bolshevik Party, had become the directing centre of the insurrection. Throughout the night, revolutionary soldiers and workers came to the Smolny and were armed with weapons supplied by the army units from the city’s arsenals. From dawn on November 7th revolutionary troops and Red Guards occupied the Petrograd railway stations, post offices, telegraph offices, telephone exchanges, government offices and the state bank The Pre-Parliament was dispersed. The cruiser “Aurora,” controlled by revolutionary sailors, trained its guns on the Winter Palace, the only territory remaining to the Provisional Government. During the day the Revolutionary Military Committee issued a manifesto: “To the Citizens of Russia” drafted by Lenin: “The Provisional Government has been overthrown. The power of state has passed into the hands of the organ of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, the Revolutionary Military Committee, which stands at the head of the Petrograd Proletariat and garrison. The cause for which the people have fought – the immediate proposal of a democratic peace, the abolition of landed proprietorship, workers’ control over production and the creation of a Soviet government — is assured. Long live the revolution of the workers, soldiers, and peasants!” (V. I. Lenin: “Manifesto of Revolutionary Military Committee of the Petrograd Soviet, November 7th , 1917, in: V. I. Lenin & J. V. Stalin: “‘1917: Selected Writings and Speeches”; Moscow; 1938; p. 613). In one respect the manifesto was slightly premature, for it was not until the evening of November 7th. that revolutionary workers, soldiers and sailors took the Winter Palace by storm and arrested those members of the Provisional Government who had not fled (Kerensky had escaped earlier in the day by car, accompanied by a U.S. Embassy car flying the Stars and Stripes). At 11 p.m. on November 7th the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets opened in the Smolny. As Stalin points out: “It is well known that the uprising was launched prior to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets. It is well known that power was actually taken before the opening of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, and it was taken not by the Congress of Soviets, but by the Petrograd Soviet, by the Revolutionary Military Committee. The Congress of Soviets merely took over power from the Petrograd Soviet.” (J. V. Stalin: “Trotskyism Or Leninism?”, in: “Works”, Volume 6; Moscow; 1953; p. 362). The Role of Trotsky in the October Revolution As Stalin points out, Trotsky, as President of the Petrograd Soviet and of its Revolutionary Military Committee, played an important role in thc”October Revolution”: “I am far from denying Trotsky’s undoubtedly important role in the uprising.. . . .It cannot be denied that Trotsky fought well in the period of October . . But Trotsky was not the only one who fought well in the period of October. Even people like the Left Socialist revolutionaries, who then stood side by side with the Bolsheviks, also fought well.” (J. V. Stalin: “Trotskyism or Leninism?”, in: “Works’, Volume 6; Moscow; 1933; p. 342, 344). In his myth about the “October Revolution,” however, Trotsky was concerned to underestimate the leading role of the Party in the revolution, to underestimate the role of Lenin (whose tactics for the insurrection were, he alleges, incorrect), and to overestimate the role of the Military Revolutionary Committee Of the Petrograd Soviet and of himself as Chairman of that Committee. Thus, Trotsky quotes with obvious approval one of the earlier editions of Lenin’s “Collected Works,” in which the editors say in a note on Trotsky: “After the Petrograd Soviet went Bolshevik he was elected its President and in that capacity organised and led the insurrection of November 7th.” (Cited by: L. Trotsky “History of the Russian Revolution”, Volume 3; London; 1967; p. 344). The amendment of this estimation is, alleges Trotsky, due to the fact that: “The bureaucratic revision of history of the party and the revolution is taking place under Stalin’s direct supervision.” (L. Trotsky. Ibid.; p. 343). Stalin certainly denied the “special role” of Trotsky in the “October Revolution” claimed by Trotsky and his supporters: “The Trotskyites are vigorously spreading rumours that Trotsky inspired and was the sole leader of the October uprising. . Trotsky himself, by consistently avoiding mention of the Party, the Central Committee and the Petrograd Committee of the Party, by saying nothing about the leading role of these organisations in the uprising and vigorously pushing himself forward as the central figure in the October uprising, voluntarily or involuntarily helps to spread the rumours about the special role he is supposed to have played in the uprising…. …I must say, however, that Trotsky did not play any special role in the October uprising, nor could he do so; being chairman of the Petrograd Soviet, he merely carried out the will of the approrpiate Party bodies, which directed every step that Trotsky took. On October 29 (at a meeting of the Central Committee of the Party — Ed.) a practical centre was elected for the organisational leadership of the uprising. Who was elected to this centre? The following five: Sverdlov, Stalin, Dzerzhinzky, Bubnov, Uritsky. The functions of this practica1 centre: to direct all the practical organs of the uprising in conformity with the directives of the Central Committee. Thus, as you see, something ‘terrible’ happened at the meeting of the Central Committee, i.e , ‘strange to relate’ the ‘inspirer’, the ‘chief figure’, the ‘sole 1eader’ of the uprising, Trotsky, was not elected to the practica1 centre, which was called upon to direct the uprising. . . And yet, strictly speaking, there is nothing strange about it, for neither in the party, nor in the October uprising, did Trotsky play any special role, nor could he do so, for he was a relatively new man in our Party in the period of October… He, like all the responsible workers, merely carried out the will of the Central Committee and of its organs. . . This talk about Trotsky’s special role is a legend that is being spread by obliging ‘Party’ gossips. This of course, does not mean that the October uprising did not have its inspirer. It did have its inspirer and leader, but his was Lenin, and none other than Lenin, that same Lenin whose resolutions the Central Committee adopted when deciding the question of the uprising, that same Lenin who, in spite of what Trotsky says, was not prevented by being in hiding from being the actual inspirer of the uprising. . . . What sort of a ‘history’ of October is it that begins and ends with attempts to discredit the chief leader of the October uprising, to discredit the Party, which organised and carried out the uprising? Trotsky by his literary pronouncements is making another (yet another!) attempt to create the conditions for substituting Trotskyism for Leninism.” (J. V. Stalin: ‘Trotskyism or Leninism?”, in: “Works,” Volume 6; Moscow; 1953; p. 341-3, 363, 364). Trotsky, in his reply, confirms Stalin’s charge that he is concerned to underestimate the leading role of the Party in the insurrection. He admits that “the practical centre” of the Central Committee was set up: “at Lenin’s suggestion” (L. Trotsky: ‘History of the Russian Revo1ution;”, Volume 3; London; 1967 p. 339). But he denies that it or any other party organ guided the insurrection. The insurrection, he declares, was guided by the Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet, with Trotsky as its chairman, alone: “The Military Revolutionary Committee from the moment of its birth had the direct leadership not only of the garrison, but of the Red Guard. . .. No place remained for any other directing centre….There was but one revolutionary centre, that affiliated with the Soviet — that is, the Military Revolutionary Committee.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.) p. 340, 341). The Character of the “October Revolution” Lenin characterised the “October Revolution” as a proletarian-socialist revolution in its main, political content — since by it the working class in alliance with, and leading, the peasantry seized political poor from the capitalist class. But he characterised it as a bourgeois-democratic revolution in its’ economic content — since it completed the bourgeois-democratic revolutionary tasks which the “February Revolution” did not carry out. “The immediate and direct aim of the revolution in Russia was a bourgeois-democratic aim, namely to destroy the relics of medievalism and abolish them completely….We brought the bourgeois-democratic revolution to completion has done before. We are progressing towards the socialist revolution, consciously, deliberately and undeviatingly, knowing that no Chinese wall separates it from the bourgeois-democratic revolution…. But…we solved the problems of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in passing, as a “by-product” of the main and real proletarian-revolutionary socialist work.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Fourth Anniversary of the October Revolution”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 6; London; 1946; p. 500; 501; 503.) “The October Revolution overthrew the bourgeoisie and transferred power to the proletariat but did not immediately lead to: the completion of the bourgeois revolution, in general and: the isolation of the kulaks in the countryside, in particular – these were spread over a certain period of time but this does not mean that our fundamenta1 slogan at the second stage of the revolution – “together with the poor peasantry, against capitalism in town and country, while neutralising the middle peasantry, for the power of the proletariat” – — was wrong . . . . The strategic slogans of the Party can be appraised only from the point of view of a Marxist analysis of the class forces and of the correct disposition of the revolutionary forces. . . . . Is it possible for the overthrow of the power of the bourgoisie and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat to be effected within the framework of the bourgeois revolution? . . . How can it be asserted that the kulaks (who, of course, are also peasants) could support the overthrow of the bourgoisie and the transfer of power to the proletariat’? . .. . . One of the main tasks of the October Revolution was to complete the bourgeois revolution. . . .and since the October Revolution did complete the bourgeois revolution it was bound to meet with the sympathy of all the peasants . . But can it be asserted on these grounds that the completion of the bourgeois revolution was not a derivative phenomenon in the course of the October Revolution but its essence or its principal aim? . . . And if the main theme of a strategic slogan is the question of the transfer of power from one class to another, is it not clear from this that the question of the completion of the bourgeois revolution by the proletarian power must not be confused with the question of overthrowing the bourgeoisie and achieving this proletarian power, i.e., with the question that is the main theme at the second stage of the revolution? . In order to complete the bourgeois revolution it was necessary in October: first to overthrow the power of the bourgeoisie and to set up the power of the proletariat, for only such a power is capable of completing the bourgeois revolution. But in order to set up the power of the proletariat in October it was essential to prepare and organise for October the appropriate political army, an army capable of overthrowing the bourgeoisie and of establishing the power of the proletariat, and there is no need to prove that such a political army could be prepared and organised by us only under the slogan: Alliance of the proletariat with the poor peasantry against the bourgeoisie, for the dictatorship of the proletariat.” (J. V. Stalin: “The Party’s Three Fundamental Slogans on the Peasant Question”, in “Works”; Volume 9; Moscow; 1954; p. 208-09; 210, 211-12). For the autumn of 1913, however, the continuing revolution developed uninterruptedly into a proletarian-socialist revolution in its economic content. “Until the organisation of the Committees of Poor Peasants, i.e., down to the summer and even the autumn of 1918, our revolution was to a large extent a bourgeois revolution . . . But from the moment the Committees of Poor Peasants began to be organised, our revolution became a proletarian revolution. . It was only when the October revolution in the countryside began and was accomplished in the summer of 1913 that we found our real proletarian base; it was only then that our revolution became a proletarian revolution in fact, and not merely by virtue of proclamations, promises and declarations.” (V. I. Lenin: Report of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist (Bolsheviks) at the Eighth Party Congress, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1943; 10. 37, 33). “In November 1917 we seized power together with the peasantry as a whole. This was a bourgeois revolution in as much as the class war in the rural districts had not yet developed.” (V. I. Lenin: “Work in the Rural Districts”, in: ibid.; p. 171). From the foundation of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party to November 1917, the efforts of the revisionists in Russia were directed towards preventing the socialist revolution from taking place, making use in the main of open political opposition, couched in pseudo-Marxist phraseology, either to the revolution itself or to the policies necessary to bring the revolution about. These efforts of the revisionists, dealt with in this report, met with failure. The socialist revolution took place in November 1917. From the socialist revolution in November 1917 to the summer of 1932, the efforts of the revisionists in Soviet Russia were directed towards preventing the construction of socialism from being brought about, making use in the main of open political opposition, couched in pseudo-Marxist-Leninist phraseology, either to the construction of socialism itself or to the policies necessary to bring about the construction of socialism. These efforts of the revisionists, to be dealt with in a later report, met with failure. A socialist society was completely — though not completely securely for all time – constructed in the Soviet Union. In the period from the summer of 1932 to the mid-1960s, the efforts of the revisionists in the Soviet Union were directed towards restoring a capitalist society, making use in the main of conspiratorial methods of political opposition. These efforts of the revisionists, to be dealt with in a later report, met with success. Today in the Soviet Union the dictatorship of the working class has been liquidated and all the essentials of a state capitalist economic system, based on profit as the motive of production and on the exploitation of the Soviet working class by the new class of state capitalists, have been brought into being. The Soviet Union has become a neo–imperialist state, pursuing essentially similar aims to those of the older imperialist states, and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has been transformed by its revisionist leaders from the vanguard party of the Soviet working class to a fascist-type political instrument of the Soviet neo- imperialists. An analysis of the way in which the revisionists succeeded in dominating, and bringing about the degeneration of, the international communist movement is essential to the task of building a Marxist-Leninist International free of all revisionist trends. The series of reports on “The Origins of Revisionism”, of which the preceding report forms one, is an attempt to make such an analysis. Posted in Alliance (Marxist-Leninist), Armed Struggle, Capitalist Restoration and Counterrevolution, Class Struggle, History, How Will Communism Work, Hypocrisy, Joseph Stalin, Lies & Propaganda, Life in Socialist Countries, Marxism-Leninism, Myth-Busting, Polemics & Refutations, Revisionism, Russia, Socialist Revolution, The Classics, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.), Theory, Trotskyism, Vladimir Lenin 100th Anniversary of the February Bourgeois-democratic Revolution in Russia Draft Theses, March 4 (17), 1917 Information reaching Zurich from Russia at this moment, March 17, 1917 [1], is so scanty, and events in our country are developing so rapidly, that any judgement of the situation must of needs be very cautious. Yesterday’s dispatches indicated that the tsar had already abdicated and that the new, Octobrist-Cadet government [2] had already made an agreement with other representatives of the Romanov dynasty. Today there are reports from England that the tsar has not yet abdicated, and that his whereabouts are unknown. This suggests that he is trying to put up resistance, organise a party, perhaps even an armed force, in an attempt to restore the monarchy. If he succeeds in fleeing from Russia or winning over part of the armed forces, the tsar might, to mislead the people, issue a manifesto announcing immediate conclusion of a separate peace with Germany! That being the position, the proletariat’s task is a pretty complex one. There can be no doubt that it must organise itself in the most efficient way, rally all its forces, arm, strengthen and extend its alliance with all sections of the working masses of town and country in order to put up a stubborn resistance to tsarist reaction and crush the tsarist monarchy once and for all. Another factor to bear in mind is that the new government that has seized power in St. Petersburg, or, more correctly, wrested it from the proletariat, which has waged a victorious, heroic and fierce struggle, consists of liberal bourgeois and landlords whose lead is being followed by Kerensky, the spokesman of the democratic peasants and, possibly, of that part of the workers who have forgotten their internationalism and have been led on to the bourgeois path. The new government is composed of avowed advocates and sup porters of the imperialist war with Germany, i.e., a war in alliance with the English and French imperialist governments, a war for the plunder and conquest of foreign lands—Armenia, Galicia, Constantinople, etc. The new government cannot give the peoples of Russia (and the nations tied to us by the war) either peace, bread, or full freedom. The working class must therefore continue its fight for socialism and peace, utilising for this purpose the new situation and explaining it as widely as possible among the masses. The new government cannot give the people peace, because it represents the capitalists and landlords and because it is tied to the English and French capitalists by treaties and financial commitments. Russian Social-Democracy must therefore, while remaining true to internationalism, first and foremost explain to the people who long for peace that it cannot be won under the present government. Its first appeal to the people (March 17) does not as much as mention the chief and basic issue of the time, peace. It is keeping secret the predatory treaties tsarism concluded with England, France, Italy, Japan, etc. It wants to conceal from the people the truth about its war programme, the fact that it stands for continuation of the war, for victory over Germany. It is not in a position to do what the people so vitally need: directly and frankly propose to all belligerent countries an immediate ceasefire, to be followed by peace based on complete liberation of all the colonies and dependent and unequal nations. That requires a workers’ government acting in alliance with, first, the poorest section of the rural population, and, second, the revolutionary workers of all countries in the war. The new government cannot give the people bread. And no freedom can satisfy the masses suffering from hunger due to shortages and inefficient distribution of available stocks, and, most important, to the seizure of these stocks by the landlords and capitalists. It requires revolutionary measures against the landlords and capitalists to give the people bread, and such measures can be carried out only by a workers’ government. Lastly, the new government is not, in a position to give the people full freedom, though in its March 17 manifesto it speaks of nothing but political freedom and is silent on other, no less important, issues. The new government has already endeavoured to reach agreement with the Romanov dynasty, for it has suggested recognising the Romanovs, in defiance of the people’s will, on the understanding that Nicholas II would abdicate in favour of his son, with a member of the Romanov family appointed regent. In its manifesto, the new government promises every kind of freedom, but has failed in its direct and unconditional duty immediately to implement such freedoms as election of officers, etc., by the soldiers, elections to the St. Petersburg, Moscow and other City Councils on a basis of genuinely universal, and not merely male, suffrage, make all government and public buildings available for public meetings, appoint elections to all local institutions and Zemstvos, likewise on the basis of genuinely universal suffrage, repeal all restrictions on the rights of local government bodies, dismiss all officials appointed to supervise local government bodies, introduce not only freedom of religion, but also freedom from religion, immediately separate the school from the church and free it of control by government officials, etc. The new government’s March 17 manifesto arouses the deepest distrust, for it consists entirely of promises and does not provide for the immediate carrying out of a single one of the vital measures that can and should be carried out right now. The new government’s programme does not contain a single word on the eight-hour day or on any other economic measure to improve the worker’s position. It contains not a single word about land for the peasants, about the uncompensated transfer to the peasants of all the estates. By its silence on these vital issues the new government reveals its capitalist and landlord nature. Only a workers’ government that relies, first, on the overwhelming majority of the peasant population, the farm labourers and poor peasants, and, second, on an alliance with the revolutionary workers of all countries in the war, can give the people peace, bread and full freedom. The revolutionary proletariat can therefore only regard the revolution of March 1 (14) as its initial, and by no means complete, victory on its momentous path. It cannot but set itself the task of continuing the fight for a democratic republic and socialism. To do that, the proletariat and the R.S.D.L.P. must above all utilise the relative and partial freedom the new government is introducing, and which can be guaranteed and extended only by continued, persistent and persevering revolutionary struggle. The truth about the present government and its real attitude on pressing issues must be made known to all working people in town and country, and also to the army. Soviets of Workers’ Deputies must be organised, the workers must be armed. Proletarian organisations must be extended to the army (which the new government has likewise promised political rights) and to the rural areas. In particular there must be a separate class organisation for farm labourers. Only by making the truth known to the widest masses of the population, only by organising them, can we guarantee full victory in the next stage of the revolution and the winning of power by a workers’ government. Fulfilment of this task, which in revolutionary times and under the impact of the severe lessons of the war can be brought home to the people in an immeasurably shorter time than under ordinary conditions, requires the revolutionary proletarian party to be ideologically and organisation ally independent. It must remain true to internationalism and not succumb to the false bourgeois phraseology meant to dupe the people by talk of “defending the fatherland” in the present imperialist and predatory war. Not only this government, but even a democratic bourgeois republican government, were it to consist exclusively of Kerensky and other Narodnik and “Marxist” social-patriots, cannot lead the people out of the imperialist war and guarantee peace. For that reason we cannot consent to any blocs, or alliances, or even agreements with the defencists among the workers, nor with the Gvozdyov-Potresov-Chkhenkeli Kerensky, etc., trend, nor with men who, like Chkheidze and others, have taken a vacillating and indefinite stand on this crucial issue. Those agreements would not only inject an element of falseness in the minds of the masses, making them dependent on the Russian imperialist bourgeoisie, but would also weaken and undermine the leading role of the proletariat in ridding the people of imperialist war and guaranteeing a genuinely durable peace between the workers’ governments of all countries. [1] The first news of the February bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia reached Lenin on March 2 (15), 1917. Reports of the victory of the revolution and the advent to power of an Octobrist-Cadet government of capitalists and landlords appeared in the Zürcher Post and Neue Zürcher Zeitung by the evening of March 4 (17). Lenin had drawn up a rough draft of theses, not meant for publication, on the tasks of the protetariat in the revolution. The theses were immediately sent via Stockholm to Oslo for the Bolsheviks leaving for Russia. [2] Lenin uses the appellation Octobrist-Cadet to describe the bourgeois Provisional Government formed at 3 p.m. on March 2 (15), 1917 by agreement between the Provisional Committee of the State Duma and the Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik leaders of the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies. The government was made up of Prince G. Y. Lvov (Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior), the Cadet leader P. N. Milyukov (Minister of Foreign Affairs), the Octobrist leader A. I. Guchkov (Minister of War and Acting Minister of the Navy) and other representatives of the big bourgeoisie and landlords. It also included A. F. Kerensky, of the Trudovik group, who was appointed Minister of Justice. The manifesto of March 4 (17) mentioned by Lenin later on was originally drawn up by Menshevik members of the Petrograd Soviet Executive Committee. It set out the terms on which the Executive was prepared to support the Provisional Government. In the course of negotiations with the Duma Committee, it was revised by P. N. Milyukov and became the basis of the Provisional Government’s first appeal to the people. Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Armed Struggle, Bourgeois Revolutionaries, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Exploitation, Class Struggle, History, Imperialism & Colonialism, Marxism-Leninism, Revolutionary Quotations, Russia, Russian Imperialism, Socialist Revolution, The Classics, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.), Vladimir Lenin ICMLPO: Stop the warmongers! – The beating of war drum is getting louder and louder The beating of war drum is getting louder and louder. NATO and US allies on the one hand, and Russia and China on the other, are steadfastly heading toward war. The threats of war are being expressed quite blatantly. What used to be “buffer zones”, have become militarized. The armies and navies of the imperialist are confronting each other in many region of the world: in Syria, around the Arab peninsula; in the South China Sea; in the Baltic region and in the Ukraine; and last, but not least, in the vast Arctic. For imperialism, war is the “final solution” to the crisis and stagnation in which its system find itself. Plundering of raw material and grabbing of new market is insufficient. New and huge profit can be obtained through destruction, and subsequently by reconstruction in the regions devastated by war. There is an increasing risk that many regional wars instigated by the imperialist powers, in particularly by the USA, may escalate to world war. In Europe, the level of confrontation and military build-up has escalated to a very dangerous level, especially with the reinforcement of the links between NATO and EU. The peoples of Europe are held in a grip between the imperialist bloc of NATO and imperialist Russia. Missile and troops from NATO are now deployed on the Russian borders in Poland and the Baltic countries, highly increasing the tension and risk of war. NATO generals have stated that even a nuclear attack on Russia is “an option”. The ICMLPO appeals to the people to oppose the warmongering policy, to put forward the slogan “Out of NATO”, with the perspective of the dissolution of NATO, to oppose the activity and expansion of this aggressive alliance. It is the high time to unmask the illusion that NATO has something to do with the defence of sovereign States. It is not a pact for peace, but a pact with the devil. NATO is in fact the greatest threat to the sovereignty of the peoples in Europe. The workers, the youth and the peoples of Europe must raise their voice against the militarization of States and economies. We denounce the dictate of the aggressors and of the military-industrial monopolies. We reject to fight our brother and sisters on the other side of the borders. We warn our governments that if they choose the path of war, we will consider them, and not our brother and sister across the borders, as our enemy. The upcoming NATO summit in Bruxelles will inaugurate their new headquarter. This is in itself a provocation towards the peoples of Europe, and will be met with anti-war manifestation. No to NATO and all imperialist aggressors! End to arms race, cut military spending, use the money for the needs of the people! Withdrawal of all the troops sent abroad! No to militarisation of the States! The youth doesn’t want to be cannon fodder! International solidarity – our enemies are not other workers and peoples but the warmongering governments in our own countries! International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations Posted in Armed Struggle, Asia, British Imperialism, China, Chinese Social-Imperialism, Class Struggle, Europe, European Union Imperialism, French Imperialism, German Imperialism, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Imperialist War, Internationalism, Marxism-Leninism, Middle East, NATO imperialism, Russia, Russian Imperialism, Syria, Theory, U.S. Imperialism, Ukraine, United States Party of Labor of Iran (Toufan): Solidarity with Syria The English Facebook page of the Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) has interviewed the comrade in charge of the Office of Foreign Relations of the Party, Comrade Jaafar Paknia, on the situation in Syria. The following is the text of the interview. Comrade Jaafar, thank you for the time you are spending with us for this interview. As you know, due to the Russian aerial bombardment and the destruction of the bases of Daesh (ISIS) and other terrorist groups, the balance of power has changed in Syria. The regime of Basher Assad has gone on the offensive, and its forces have advanced significantly. The Turkish government of Erdogan has violated international norms and regulations and has frantically bombarded the bases of the Kobane Kurds and has declared its opposition to any autonomy for the Syrian Kurds. How do you evaluate these new developments in Syria? The adventurist policy of Erdogan’s government, a government that is sunk in the dream of the revival of “Great Ottoman Empire” and that shamelessly interferes in the internal affairs of the countries of the region has faced disgraceful defeat. This is clearly a sign of political shortsightedness of the present leadership of Turkey. By sending the Syrian refugees to Europe, Erdogan wanted to pressure the European governments to agree with his policy of toppling the legal and legitimate government of Assad and to pretend that only through NATO involvement in Syria and its support for terrorist organizations and eventually through the overthrow of the Syrian government, it is possible to stop the influx of refugees to Europe. Erdogan’s inhumane conspiracy has become a policy of instigation, war, and destruction in the region. This policy was rejected by the European governments, and consequently Turkey’s shortsighted policy faced a dead end. Erdogan asked for three billion Euros from the European countries as blackmail to stop the influx of refugees to Europe. The gains of the Syrian army against Daesh through Russian bombardment are increasing daily. These gains have encouraged the people in the Daesh-controlled regions to resist and to participate in the war against the terrorist organizations. ISIS has chosen the “flight” over “Heaven”. These terrorists are returning to their homelands by the scores. The imperialist-trained Daesh and Jihadists have spread their terror campaigns to their motherlands. Though France has fallen victim to terrorist operations, it has not stopped interfering in the affairs of the Middle Eastern countries. The Western imperialist countries that supported Daesh and other terror groups in killing 300 thousand Syrians will not escape these terror campaigns. Turkey itself will fall victim to Daesh’s terror campaign soon. The government of Erdogan that continues the criminal fascist suppression and bombardment of PKK and the Kurdish people is extremely frightened by the recent victories of the Syrian government over the terrorist groups, and it is asking Saudi Arabia and Qatar to jointly dispatch their armies to Syria to “fight” Daesh. What a joke! What a lie! These countries have been supporting, training, arming, and financing ISIS for the past five years. Even Barak Obama and NATO and EU officials are hesitant about the effectiveness of Erdogan’s adventurist policies. The armed forces of Turkey enter Syria only for the purpose of destroying the democratic achievements of the Kobane Kurds and to fight against the Syrian army. This is obviously in violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria. Some hold the opinion that Russian bombardment of Daesh has made the situation worse and has killed many civilians, that Russia’s objective in its rivalry with the U.S. imperialists is to preserve and strengthen its interest in Syria and the Region, and that Russian interference in the Middle East is an imperialist act that should not be supported. What is your opinion on these issues? Before we talk about the class nature of the Russian establishment, we must clarify the nature of the war that is being waged in Syria and the Middle East. We must analyze the reasons why the Western imperialists headed by the U.S. and their lackeys and allies in the region such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, etc. want to overthrow the legal government of Syria. Isn’t this policy of aggression against Syria consistent with the doctrine of establishing the “Greater Middle East”? Isn’t this the continuation of the policy of military aggression against Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc.? Isn’t this policy in the interest of Zionism and world reaction? Do China and Russia desire to disintegrate Syria and split it into pieces? It must be emphasized that Syria has political independence and therefore has the right to freely seek help from any force or country in order to preserve its national independence and territorial integrity. This policy of seeking assistance is not new in the struggle of the people of the world. In the war that is imposed upon Syria, the condemnation of the Western aggressors and their regional allies must occupy the first place. These aggressors are seeking the total destruction and disintegration of Syria. Furthermore, their objective is not limited to the overthrow of Assad’s regime. The suppression of Lebanon’s resistance movement, aggression against Iran, and the dispatch of terrorist forces to the borders of Russia all will come next. The U.S. strategy of “New World Order” is to weaken and remove the allies of China and Russia, to subdue these two imperialist rivals, and to impose its hegemony on the globe. The fact is that Eastern imperialists presently do not have the necessary military power or preparation to wage war on the Western united military forces of NATO led by the U.S. In the present condition, it is NATO that has military superiority and violates and threatens the independence, territorial integrity, and the rights of nations to self determination. Western imperialism, headed by the U.S., is the source of all present wars and is responsible for the flight of millions of people from their homelands in the Middle East, Horn of Africa, Yugoslavia, and Ukraine. Russia and China vetoed the U.S. proposal in the UN Security Council and have expressed many times their opposition to the bombardment of Syria. This is a positive stand, as were the stands of Germany and France in opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It is clear that behind these stands and oppositions lie economic and political interests and motives. A political party, while clarifying the nature of the war and of the forces involved, must adopt its tactic. The independent state of Syria, as any independent state, can make use of the present world contradictions to preserve its independence; otherwise, it will not overcome the aggression imposed on it. One may simplify a complicated political question and raise a general political slogan and put his mind at ease by declaring war on all forces involved and then watch the development of the events. This is not responsible conduct and it is inconsistent with Marxism and Leninist tactics. Our Party emphasizes that we must defend the independence and territorial integrity of the countries that face imperialist military aggression. This defense is a defense for rights of nations to self-determination by their own people. We must add that Saudi, Qatar, and Turkey’s opposition to Syria is over the export of natural gas from the region to Europe. Iran, Iraq, and Syria planned for a ten-billion-dollar project for the construction of a pipeline to export Iran’s natural gas to Europe starting in 2010. In 2012, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed by these three countries. Two weeks later, armed clashes started in Syria. Armed terrorist groups were sent to Syria through northern and southern borders. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey utilized their means to overthrow the regime of Assad. Qatar now fights for a bigger share of the market for its natural gas, and Saudi Arabia and Turkey want the gas pipelines to pass through their countries in order to become a broker for the export of Qatar’s natural gas to Europe and to collect transit fees. Western media claim that Russian bombardments of Syria have killed many thousands of innocent people and that Russia is responsible for the continuation of the war and the migration of hundreds of thousands of residents. What are your views on these claims? Western media lie about the events in Syria and also fabricate stories consistent with the official line of their governments. The Russian fighter jets bomb the bases and positions of Daesh and some other terrorist groups and have significantly weakened Daesh’s grip on the regions under their control. Russia displayed satellite pictures of stolen oil tankers going from Syria to Turkey. Daesh sells the stolen oil to Turkey at a low price, and Turkey offers it to the world at the market price. Russian jet fighters bombed many hundreds of these oil tankers. Assad’s victories over Daesh and over the conspiracies and plots of the Western imperialists are very bitter for Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the U.S., and the Western media. These conspirators try to disrupt and hinder the fight against the terrorists who have destroyed Syria. European countries that are vulnerable and are threatened by the terrorist actions want to stop their losses. They see that their policy of toppling the legal government of Assad has faced defeat and that their hopes are dashed, though they – with the help from reactionary regimes of the region such as Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Jordon – made use of everything they could, including the violation of the UN Charter and of the rights of nations to defeat Assad. Now they are interested in reduction of tension in the region. They see the reduction of tension in the region as useful to their interests and to the normalization of relations with Russia. The government of Erdogan that used Daesh of Arab, Turk, Turkmen, Chechen, Dagestan, and European nationalities to attack Syria now sees that the terrorist forces are on the run and are facing defeat followed by another defeat. Erdogan, with the hope of occupying and annexing northern Syria to Turkey, has invented a Turkmen national minority in Syria that wants to join Turkey. Turkmen who are allies of Daesh and who behead Arabs and Kurds are Erdogan’s brothers and friends and are defended as “non-terrorist” opposition. The Russian jets are making these terrorists martyrs for Erdogan. And of course, the jets that make these Turkmen martyrs have to be shut down by the non-terrorists provided that the U.S. has expressed its consent. With the defeat of Daesh, the Syrian Kurdish forces are gaining strength, and Erdogan is losing the hope to split Syria. Obama and Erdogan play a sly and hypocritical role in the fight against Daesh. In the present situation, Russians and Assad’s army have no interest in bombarding the civilian regions. We should mention that long before the Russian military involvement in Syria, more than 150 thousand terrorists from 80 countries, financed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar and the U.S. and Europe, were mobilized to destroy and attack Syria. Now they are defeated and are on the run. The Western news media tries to instigate public opinion against the regime of Bashar Assad by engineering lies and distributing photo shopped pictures. What is the future of the regime of President Assad? What stand are the people taking in this situation? As I have mentioned several times, the U.S. objective is to overthrow the regime of Assad in the framework of “humanitarian involvement”. The U.S. imperialists and their allies want to divide Syria into four regions: a Sunni region in Damascus and its suburbs, the Druze region in the Golan Heights, the Alavi region in Antakya region, and a Kurdish region in northeastern Syria. This would make Syria a weak, dependent, and fragmented country that serves the strategic interest of the U.S. and Israel and their allies. The silence of the so called human rights organizations on the violation of the rights of nations by the U.S. imperialists shows the hypocrisy of the fake human rights organizations. It must be said that the overthrow of the regime of Bashar Assad by the hands of the Syrian people led by the working class and for the purpose of establishing freedom, social justice, and the preservation and deepening of independence of Syria would be a revolutionary act that serves the people of Syria and of the entire region. The toppling of the Syrian regime by the imperialist powers is neither in the interest of the Syrian people nor in the interest of the people of the region. Parties and organizations that have not learned from the experience of the occupations of Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan and that are still repeating the theories of “fight against all reactionary forces” and resolving “all social contradictions” at the same time understand neither tactics nor revolutionary politics. They are sunk in the Trotskyite quagmire of a “fight against two reactionary poles”. These forces do not serve the people. On the contrary, they sabotage the national and liberation struggles of the people against imperialist aggression and invasion. It is the responsibility of the revolutionary and progressive forces to resolutely expose these deviated and decaying political currents that damage the movement under the name of “communist” and “left”. Today, the Western imperialists see that a significant section of Syrians, due to the destructive actions of the dark force of Daesh, have lined up behind Assad’s regime and that not by any means will the Syrian people “rise up” against the “dictator”. The U.S. imperialists and their allies are forced to talk about peace (!), but in practice, they beat the war drums on all fronts. Posted in Armed Struggle, Europe, European Union Imperialism, Fascist Massacres, Hypocrisy, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Imperialist Massacres, Imperialist War, Internationalism, Islamic State (ISIS), Middle East, National Liberation, NATO imperialism, Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan), Russia, Russian Imperialism, Syria, Turkey, U.S. Imperialism Revisionism in Russia: Trotsky Against the Bolsheviks – Part One: To 1914 Read part two here. Trotsky speaks: “Among the Russian comrades, there was not one from whom I could learn anything…The errors which I have committed . . always referred to questions that were not fundamental or strategic. . . In all conscientiousness I cannot, in the appreciation of the political situation and of its revolutionary perspectives, accuse myself of any serious errors of judgement. Looking back, two years after the revolution, Lenin said: ‘At the moment when it seized the power and created the Soviet republic, Bolshevism drew to itself all the best elements in the currents of Socialist thought that were nearest to it’. Can there be even a shadow of doubt that when he spoke so deliberately of the best representatives of the currents closest to Bolshevism, Lenin had foremost in mind what is now called ‘historical Trotskyism’? . . Whom else could he have had in mind?” (L. Trotsky: “My Life”; New York; 1970; p. 184, 185, 353). Lenin: “Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events . . in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to Trotsky.” (V.I. Lenin: “Violation Of Unity under Cover Of Cries for Unity”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 194). “What a swine this Trotsky is — Left phrases and a bloc with the Right . . ! He ought to be exposed.” (V.I. Lenin: Letter to Alexandra Kollontai, February 17th., 1917, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p. 285). Originally Printed and published by: B.C., (Secretary) 26, Cambridge Road, Ilford Esssex. for the COMMUNIST LEAGUE (CL). Revisionism is the perversion of Marxism-Leninism to suit the needs of the exploiting classes, to the elimination of which Marxism-Leninism is directed. A study of revisionism in Russia is of particular importance to Marxist-Leninists, since it was through revisionism that the socialist society constructed there came to be replaced by an essentially capitalist society. One of the myths of Trotskyism is that in the years before 1917 Trotsky fought side by side with Lenin from revolutionary positions, and that only after Stalin became General Secretary of the Russian Communist Party in 1922 did a political rift develop between Trotsky and his supporters on the one hand and the leadership of the Party on the other. The facts documented in this report demonstrate that this theory could hardly be further from the truth. From 1903 to 1917, year after year, Trotsky fought Lenin on almost every political issue that arose, along with other figures whom we shall meet again in connection with the revisionist struggle to prevent the construction of socialism after the revolution and to destroy it when it had been built — such figures -as Lev Kamenev (Trotsky’s brother-in-law), Grigori Zinoviev, Yuri Piatakov, Grigori Sokolnikov, Nikolai Bukharin, Aleksei Rykov, Khristian Rakovsky, Adolf Warski, David Ryazanov, Evgenii Preobrazhensky, Solomon Lozovsky and Dmitri Manuilsky. The first part of this report covers the period up to the outbreak of the first imperialist war in 1914; the second covers the period from 1914 to the “October Revolution” of 1917. Later reports will cover the period from 1917 onwards. 1879 – 1895: Childhood Lev Davidovich Bronstein, who later became Leon Trotsky was born on November 7th, 1879. His father, David Leontievich Bronstein, was a well-to-do farmer, of Jewish origin but. Indifferent to religion, who worked with the help of wage-labour a large farm called Yanovka, near the small town of Bobrinetz in the province of Kherson in the southern Ukraine. His mother, Anna Bronstein, was an educated, petty bourgeois, city-bred woman, of Jewish descent and orthodox in religion. Lev was the Bronsteins’ fifth child, and by the time of his birth they were affluent enough to afford a nursemaid for him. At the age of seven his parents sent him to a “kheder” a private Jewish religious school, at Gromokla, a German-Jewish colony about two miles away. There he stayed with relatives. But the tuition was in Yiddish, and the boy learned little there except to read and write a little Russian. After a few months his parents withdrew him from the school and he returned home. In the autumn of 1888, when Lev was nearly nine, he was sent to stay with other relatives in Odessa in order to attend school there. These relatives –Moissei Filipovich Spentzer, a liberal publisher, and his wife, the headmistress of a secular school for Jewish girls – gave the boy his first introduction to the great literature of the world. They arranged for him to attend St. Paul’s “Realschule” a progressive, cosmopolitan school which taught in Russian. In the course of his seven years at the “Realschule” he excelled in his studies, became fastidious about his appearance and dress, and acquired, as he says, a feeling of superiority towards his fellow students. 1896-1899: Youth In 1896, at the age of seventeen, he completed his course in Odossa and moved to Nicolayev to attend a similar school for the purpose of matriculating. Here he lodged with a family whose sons had already been touched by socialist ideas and who argued against Trotsky’s conservative outlook. Six months later he had embraced socialism and had been introduced into radical discussion circle held in a gardener’s hut on the outskirts of the town. Most of the members of this group were Narodniks, adherents of an intellectual, individualistic, vaguely socialist trend, which based itself, not on the working class, but on the peasantry, and which at first appealed strongly to Trotsky… One member of the group, however –Aleksandra Sokolovskaya, a girl some few years older than Trotsky who later became his first wife was a Marxist and strongly influenced the development of his views. When his father objected to his association with this radical circle, Trotsky gave up the allowance he had been receiving from home, took up private tutoring and moved from his lodgings to live in the gardener’s hut, as a member of the Narodnik “commune.” In the spring of 1897 he took a leading part in the formation of an underground trade union, the South Russian Workers’ Union, which had grown to about 200 members before the end of the year and published its own duplicated paper “Nashe Delo” (Our Cause). In the summer of 1897 Trotsky graduated with first-class honours, and at the end of that year was arrested, together with some other leading members of the union. He was kept in a small cell in the prison at Kerson for several months, being transferred to the prison at Odessa in the middle of 1898. He occupied himself here in writing a treatise on freemasonry, and in reading Marxist books smuggled in from outside. Towards the end of 1899, Trosky received his sentence (without trial) of deportation to Siberia for four years. He was first moved to a transfer prison in Moscow, where he met older and more experienced revolutionaries from all over Russia and made his first acquaintance with the writings of Lenin. In the spring or summer of 1900 he married in the Moscow prison Aleksandra Sokolovskaya, and shortly afterwards he and his wife began their journey into exile. 1900 – 1902: Exile They reached their place of exile — the settlement of Verkholensk in the mountains overlooking Lake Baikal — in the late autumn of 1900. Having come to accept Marxism in the preceding years, Trotsky now identified himself with the labour movement, becoming a leading member of the Siberian Social Democratic Workers’ Union. In December 1900 he began to write for the “Vostochnoye Obozrenie” (Eastern Review), a progressive newspaper published in Irkutsk, under the pseudonym of “Antid Oto.” His contributions consisted, mainly of reportage on the conditions of the Siberian peasants, together with literary criticism. In the summer of 1902 Trotsky made his escape from Siberia, abandoning his wife, and two children. In Samara he received a message from Lenin asking him to report to the headquarters of ‘Iskra’- (The Spark) in London as soon as possible. 1902 – 1903: Trotsky Becomes an Iskra-ist Trotsky arrived in London in October 1902 and Lenin found him lodgings. He began to contribute to “Iskra” in November 1902 and soon became known as a brilliant writer and orator. From time to time he visited Prance, Switzerland and Belgium, and it was on a visit to Paris that he met his second “wife” (he was never formally divorced from Aleksandra Sokolovskaya), a Russian revolutionary of noble birth, Natalya Sedova, who was studying the history of art at the Sorbonne. 1903: The Struggle at the Second Congress The Second congress Of the Russian Social-Democratic Party attended by 43 delegates, was held in July/August 1903, first in Brussels, and then in London. The main business on its’ agenda was to adopt a programme and rules. Trotsky attended as a delegate from the Siberian Social-Democratic Workers’ Union. The sharpest controversy at the congress arose around the first clause of the rules, defining what was meant by the term “member of the party.” In accordance with the principles he had been putting forward for some time in “Iskra,” Lenin proposed the following wording for Clause 1: “A member of the R.S.D.L.P. is one who recognises its programme and supports the Party materially as well as by personal participation in one of the organisations of the Party.” Yuli Martov moved to substitute for the words underlined: “Working under the control and guidance of one of the organisations of the Party.” Lenin’s case against Martov’s formulation was that: 1) It would in practice be impossible to maintain effective “control and guidance” over Party members who did not personally participate in one of the organisations of the Party; 2) It reflected the outlook, not of the working class, which is not shy of organisation and discipline, but of the petty bourgeois intelligentsia, who tend to be individualistic and shy of organisation and discipline; 3) It would widen Party membership to include supporters of the Party, and so would abolish the essential dividing line between the working class and its organised, disciplined vanguard; it would, therefore, have the effect of dissolving the vanguard in the working class as a whole and so would serve the interests of the class enemies of the working class. Trotsky sided with Martov, whose formulation was adopted by 28 votes to 22 with 1 abstention. Later, the withdrawal of seven opponents of Lenin from the congress altered the balance of forces in favour of Lenin and his supporters, Lenin then proposed that the editorial board of “Iskra” (which consisted of six members) should be replaced by one of three members. Trotsky countered this manoeuvre with a motion confirming the old editorial board in office, but this was defeated by a majority of 2 votes; thereupon the anti-Leninists abstained from further voting. In the elections which followed three anti-Leninists (Axelrod, Potresov and Vera Zasulich) were dropped from the board, leaving Lenin, Plekhanov and Martov. Furthermore, three supporters of Lenin were elected to form the Central Committee. Thus, at its Second Congress the Party showed itself to be divided into two factions. From that time those Party members who supported Lenin’s political line were known as Bolsheviks (from ‘bolshinstvo”, majority) while those who opposed Lenin’s political line were known as Mensheviks (from “menshinstvo” minority). The Bolshevik trend was a Marxist trend, representing the interests of the working class within the labour movement; TheMenshevik trend was a revisionist trend representing the interests of the capitalist class within the labour movement. The “Report of the Siberian Delegation” Later Trotsky admitted his error in having opposed Lenin at the 2nd. Congress on the question of Party organisation. Speaking of Lenin’s attitude at the Congress, Trotsky says in his autobiography: “His behaviour seemed unpardonable to me, both horrible and outrageous. And yet, politically, it was right and necessary, from the point of view of organisation. My break with Lenin occurred on what might be considered “moral” or even personal grounds. But this was merely on the surface. At bottom, the separation was of a political nature and merely expressed itself in the realm of organisational methods. I thought of myself as a centralist. But there is no doubt that at that at that time I did not fully realise what an intense and imperious centralism the revolutionary party would need to lead millions of people in a war against the old order . . At the time of the London Congress in 1903, revolution was still largely a theoretical abstraction to me. Independently I still could not see Lenin’s centralism as the logical conclusion of a clear revolutionary concept.” (L.Trotsky: “My Life”; New York; 1971; p. 162) His immediate reaction to the congress, however, was to write “Second Congress of the R.S.D.L.P. (Report of the Siberian Delegation” which was published in Geneva in 1903. In this he defended his, and his delegation’s opposition to Lenin and his supporters at the congress: “Behind Lenin stood the new compact majority of the ‘hard’ ‘Iskra’ men, opposed to the ‘soft’ ‘Iskra’ men. We, the delegates of the Siberian Union, joined the ‘soft’ ones, and . . we do not think that we have thereby blotted our revolutionary record.” (L.Trotsky: “Vtoroi Syezd R.S.D.R.P. (Otchet Sibirskoi Delegatskii)” (Second Congress of the R.S.D.L.P. (Report of the Siberian Delegation); Geneva: 1903; p.21.) At the Congress, declared Trotsky, Lenin had: “…With the energy and talent peculiar to him, assumed the role of the party’s disorganiser.” (L.Trotsky: ibid.;. p.11). and, like a new Robespierre, was trying to: “…transform the modest Council of the Party into an omnipotent Committee of Public Safety.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p.21). so preparing the ground for the: “Thermidorians of Socialist opportunism.” (L. Trotsky: ibid; p.30). He added in a postscript that Lenin resembled Robespierre, however, only as “a vulgar farce resembles historic tragedy…” (L.Trotsky: ibid.; p.33). The 1903 Menshevik Conference After the Congress, the Mensheviks — including Trotsky boycotted “Iskra” and refused to contribute to it. In September 1903 they held a factional conference in Geneva to decide on future action. A shadow “central committee” was set up, consisting of Pavel Axelrod, Pedor Dan, Yuli Martov, Aleksandr Potresov and Trotsky, to direct the struggle against the Bolsheviks. In Trotsky’s view the immediate aim of the campaign should be to force the Bolsheviks to restore the ousted Mensheviks to their former positions of influence, both in the Central Committee and the editorial board. A resolution, drafted by Martov and Trotsky, was adopted by the conference: “We consider it our moral and political duty to conduct . . the struggle by all means, without placing ourselves outside the Party and without bringing discredit upon the party and the idea of its central institutions, to bring about a change in the composition of the leading bodies, which will secure to the Party the possibility of working freely towards its own enlightenment.” (P.B. Axelrod &. Y. 0. Martov: “Pisma P.B. Axelroda i.Yu Martova” (Letters of P.B. Axelrod and Y.0.Martv); Berlin; l924; p.94). The “New” Iskra Soon after the Second Congress of the Party, Plekhanov gave way to the attacks of the Mensheviks. In violation of the decisions taken at the Party congress, he claimed and exercised the right as joint editor to coopt to the editorial board of “Iskra” the Menshevik former editors. Lenin strongly objected to this step, and resigned from the board. The new editorial board transformed “Iskra” into a Menshevik organ, which waged unremitting struggle against Lenin and his supporters and against the Bolshevik Central Committee of the Party. Thus, from its 52nd. issue “Iskra” became known in the Party as the “new” “Iskra,” in contrast to the “old” Leninist “Iskra.” It continued publication until October 1905. Trotsky became a prominent contributor to the “new Iskra” and issued a pamphlet setting forth the Menshevik political line. Lenin commented: “A new pamphlet by Trotsky came out recently, under the editorship of ‘Iskra’, as was announced. This makes it the ‘Credo’, as it were, of the new ‘Iskra’. The pamphlet is a pack of brazen lies, a distortion of the facts. . . The Second Congress was, in his words, a reactionary attenpt to consolidate sectarian methods of organisation, etc.” (V.I. Lenin: Letter to Yelena Stasova, F.V. Lengnik, and 0thers, October 1904, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 43; Moscow; 1969; p. 129). 1904: The Russo – Japanese War In February 1904 the Russo-Japanese War began with a Japanese attack on the Russian fortress of Port Arthur. The Russian Army suffered defeat and almost the entire Russian Navy was destroyed in the Straits of Tsushima, forcing the Tsarist government to conclude an ignominious peace treaty in September 1905. 1904: “Our Political Tasks” Between February and May 1904, Lenin was engaged on writing the book “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back.” In this he expounded at length the principles of party organisation he had put forward at the Second Congress and analysed the character of the Menshevik opposition. In August 1904 Trotsky’s reply to Lenin’s book was published in Geneva under the title “Our Political Tasks.” It was dedicated to “My dear teacher Pavel B.Axelrod.” In “Our Political Tasks” – Trotsky developed his attack upon “Maximillien Lenin”; whom he described as: “…an adroit statistician and a slovenly attorney” (L. Trotsky: ‘ashi Politicheskie Zadachi’(Our Political Tasks) Geneva; 1904; p. 95) “…hideous, dissolute and demagogical” (L.Trotsky : ibid. ; p. 75) style, whose “Evil-minded and morally repulsive suspiciousness, a shallow caricature of tragic Jacobinist intolerance, must be liquidated now at all costs, otherwise the Party is threatened with moral and theoretical decay”; (L. Trotsky: ibid. ; p. 95). He developed his attack upon Lenin’s principles of Party organisation, claiming that they would lead to the establishment, not of the dictatorship of the working class but of a dictatorship over the working class (a dictatorship that would eventually be one of a single individual), which the working class would find intolerable: “Lenin’s methods lead to this: the Party organisation at first substitutes itself for the Party as a whole; then the Central Committee substitutes itself for the organisation; and finally a single ‘dictator’ substitutes himself for the Central Committee…. A proletariat capable of exercising its dictatorship over society will not tolerate any dictatorship over itself.” (L. Trotsky. Ibid.; p. 54, 105) and declaring that Lenin’s organisational principles would, in any case, be unworkable since any serious faction would defy Party discipline: “Is it so difficult to see that any group of serious size and importance, if faced with the alternative of silently destroying itself or of fighting for its survival regardless of all discipline, would undoubtedly choose the latter course?” (L. Trotsky: ibid; p. 72). Meanwhile, readers of the “new” “Iskra” in Russia had been complaining strongly about Trotsky’s virulent attacks on Lenin in the columns of the paper, and in April 1904, on the demand of Plekhanov, he was forced to resign from it. The Campaign for The Holding Of a Party Congress In July 1904, two members of the Central Committee of the Party, Krassin and Noskov, broke with the Bolsheviks, giving the Mensheviks a majority on the committee. The Bolsheviks then began a campaign within the Party for the holding of a new congress. In August l904 Lenin guided the conference of twenty-two prominent Bolsheviks which took place in Switzerland and which issued an appeal to the Party calling for the convocation of the Third Congress. At the same time a number of conference of Bolsheviks took place in Russia, out of which in December l904 came the Bureau of the Majority Committees which became the organising centre for the campaign for a new congress. During the autumn of 1904, the Bolsheviks organised their own publishing house and at the end of the year established their own newspaper “Vperyod” (Forward), the first issue of which appeared on January 1904. 1904-1905: Parvus Lays the Basis for Trotsky’s “Theory of Permanent Revolution” In November and December 1904 Trotsky wrote a brochure on the necessity for the working class to play the leading role in the capitalist revolution in Russia which, the following year, he entitled “Before the 9th January” (this being the date, under the old Russian calendar, in 1905 when the first Russian revolution began with the shooting down by the tsar’s troops of an unarmed workers’ demonstration). When in Munich, Trotsky was accustomed to stay at the home of Aleksandr Helfand, a Russian Jew who then claimed to be a Marxist. Helfand published his own political review “Aus der Weltpolitik” (‘World Politics’) and wrote articles for other magazines especially Kautsky’s “Neue Zeit” (New Life) and the new “Iskra” — under the pen-name “Parvus.” When Trotsky visited Munich in January 1905, he had the proofs of the brochure with him. Parvus was impressed with its contents and decided to put the weight of his authority behind Trotsky by writing a preface to it. In this preface he stated a conclusion which Trotsky still hesitated to draw: “In Russia only the workers can accomplish a revolutionary insurrection. . . The revolutionary provisional government will be a government of workers’ democracy.” (Parvus: Preface to: L.Trotsky: “Do 9 Yanvara”; Geneva; 1905) In April 1905 Lenin commented on Parvus’s theory that the capitalist revolution in Russia could result in a government of the working class, as it had been put forward in the brochure written by “the windbag Trotsky.” (V. I. Lenin: “Social-Democracy and the Provisional Revolutionary Government”; in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1946; p. 35) Lenin declared: “This cannot be . . This cannot be, because only a revolutionary dictatorship relying on the overwhelming majority of the people can be at all durable.. . The Russian proletariat, however, at present constitutes a minority of the population in Russia. It can become the great overwhelming majority only if it combines with the mass of semi-proletarians, semi-small proprietors, i.e. with the mass of the petty-bourgeois urban and rural poor. And such a composition of the social basis of the possible and desirable revolutionary-democratic dictatorship will of course, find its reflection in the composition of the revolutionary government. With such a composition the participation or even the predominance of the most diversified representatives of revolutionary democracy in such a government will be inevitable.” 1905: The Beginning of the 1905 Revolution On January 22nd, 1905 a peaceful demonstration of unarmed workers, led by a police agent, a priest by the name of Georgi Gapon, was fired on by troops while on its way to present a petition to the tsar at his Winter Palace in St. Petersburg. Over a thousand workers were killed, more than two thousand injured. The massacre taught tens of thousands of workers that they could win their rights only by struggle. During the weeks and months that followed, economic strikes began to pass into political strikes, into demonstrations and in places into clashes with tsarist troops. In a letter written in Geneva three days after “Bloody Sunday,” Lenin wrote: “The Russian proletariat will not forget this lesson. Even the most uneducated, the most backward strata of the working class, who naively trusted the tsar and sincerely wished to put peacefully before ‘the tsar himself’ the requests of a tormented nation, were all taught a lesson by the troops led by the tsar and the tsar’s uncle, the Grand Duke Vladimir… The arming of the people is becoming one of the immediate tasks of the revolutionary movement… The immediate arming of the workers and of all citizens in general, the preparation and organising of the revolutionary forces for overthrowing the government authorities and institutions — this is the practical basis on which all revolutionaries can and must unite to strike a common blow… Long live the Revolution! Long live the proletariat in revolt.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Beginning of the Revolution in Russia””, In: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; -London; l946;p. 289, 291, 292). “No Tsar, but a Workers’ Government” In February 1905 Trotsky returned to Russia, settling first in Kiev. Here he made contact with a member of the Party’s Central Committee who had the previous July played a treacherous role in assisting the Mensheviks to capture the Central Committee — Leonid Krassin. Krassin was in charge of a clandestine printing plant, which he now placed at Trotsky’s disposal. A few weeks later Trotsky moved to St. Petersburg, where he became leader of the city’s Menshevik group. He now adopted the view put forward in Parvus’s preface to his brochure “Before the 9th. January,” namely that the capitalist revolution in Russia should result in a workers’ government: “The composition of the Provisional Government will in the main depend on the proletariat. If the insurrection ends in a decisive victory, those who have led the working class in the rising will gain power.” (L. Trotsky: “Article in Iskra” (The Spark), No. 93; March 17th., 1905). “Trotskyism: ‘No Tsar, but a workers’ government’. This surely, is wrong. There is a petty bourgeoisie, it cannot be ignored”. (V. I. Lenin: Report on the Political Situation, Petrograd City Conference RSDLP, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 207). Trotsky however, declared that this formulation of his political line was sloganised by Parvus and not by himself: “At no time and in no place did I ever write or utter or propose such a slogan as “No Tsar — but a workers’ government.” The fact of the matter is that a proclamation entitled: ‘No Tsar — but a workers’ government’ was written and published abroad in the summer of 1905 by Parvus.” (L. Trotsky. “The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p.222) The Third Party Congress Early in 1905, the Central Committee acceded to the pressure within the Party and agreed to collaborate with the Bureau of Majority Committees in convening the Third Congress of the Party. The congress took place in London in April/May 1905, that is, during the rising tide of the 1905 Revolution. It was boycotted by the Mensheviks, and attended by 24 delegates. The congress adopted a resolution calling on the Party urgently to make all political and technical preparations for an armed uprising, and to organise armed resistance to the violence of the government-sponsored reactionary organisations. It also amended the formulation of point 1 of the Party rules adopted at the 2nd. Congress in order to bring this into line with Lenin’s principles of Party organisation and, abolishing the dual leading bodies (Central Committee and editorial board) established.at the 2nd. Congress, to make the Central Committee the leading body of the Party. The congress set up a new central organ of the Party “Proletary” (The Proletarian). Lenin, who chaired the congress, was elected to the Central Committee, which at its first meeting, appointed him editor of the paper. This appeared in May 1905 and was published regularly in Geneva until Lenin returned to Russia in November 1905. The 1905-Menshevik Conference The Mensheviks, who boycotted the Third Congress of the Party, held their own conference simultaneously in Geneva. The conference endorsed the Menshevik line on the capitalist revolution (see next section) and refrained from discussing resolutions that had been submitted on the arming of the masses and work among the troops. Lenin’s “The Two Tactics of Social-Democracy” In July 1905 Lenin published a long work, “The Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution” in which he analysed the resolution of the Third Party Congress on the question of the capitalist revolution alongside that adopted at the Menshevik conference. Lenin’s conception of the capitalist revolution was as follows: 1. The capitalist revolution is advantageous to the working class: “The bourgeois revolution is in the highest degree advantageous to the proletariat. The bourgeois revolution is absolutely necessary in the interests of the proletariat. The more complete, determined and consistent the bourgeois revolution, the more secure will the proletarian struggle against the bourgeoisie and for socialism become.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution”, in: “Selected Works ” Volume 3; London; 1946; p.75). 2. The working class is in fact,- objectively more interested in a full capitalist revolution than is the capitalist class: “In a certain sense the bourgeois revolution is more advantageous to the proletariat than it is to the bourgeoisie. This postulate is undoubtedly correct in the following sense: it is to the advantage of the bourgeoisie to rely on certain remnants of the past as against the proletariat, for instance, on a monarchy, a standing army, etc. It is to the advantage of the bourgeoisie if the bourgeois revolution does not too resolutely sweep away the remnants of the past, but leaves some. . . It is to the advantage of the bourgeoisie if the necessary bourgeois-democratic changes take place more slowly, more gradually, more cautiously, with less determination, by means of reforms and not by means of revolution; if these changes spare the ‘venerable’ institutions of feudalism (such as the monarchy); if these reforms develop as little as possible the revolutionary initiative of the common people, i.e., the peasantry, and especially the workers, for otherwise it will be easier for the workers, as the French say, ‘to pass the rifle from one shoulder to the other’, i.e., to turn the guns which the bourgeois revolution will place in their hands; the democratic institutions which will spring up on the ground that will be cleared of feudalism, against the bourgeoisie. On the other hand, it is more advantageous for the working class if the necessary bourgeois democratic changes take place in the form of revolution and not reform. The very position the proletariat as a class occupies, compels it to be consistently democratic. The bourgeoisie looks behind, is afraid of democratic progress which threatens to strengthen the proletariat. The proletariat has nothing to lose but its chains, but by means of democracy it has the whole world to win”. (V.1. Lenin: ibid.; p. 75-77). 3. Therefore, ‘the working class must strive to make itself the leading force in the capitalist revolution, with the peasantry as its allies: “Only the proletariat can be a consistent fighter for democracy. It may become a victorious fighter for democracy only if the peasant masses join it in its revolutionary struggle. If the proletariat is not strong enough for this, the bourgeoisie will put itself at the head of the democratic revolution and will impart to it the character of inconsistency and selfishness. The proletariat must carry out to the end the democratic revolution, and in this unite to itself the mass of the peasantry in order to crush by force resistance of the autocracy and to paralyse the instability of the bourgeoisie. At the head of the whole of the people, and particularly of the peasantry — for complete freedom for a consistent democratic revolution, for a republic!” (V.I. Lenin: ibid; p. 86, 110-11, 14). 4. The provisional government which will be set up as a result of a democratic revolution carried out under the leadership of the working class will be the “democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry”: “’A decisive victory of the revolution over tsarism’ is the revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry…. It will be a democratic, not a socialist dictatorship.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p,. 82)., 5. The working class must endeavour to continue the capitalist revolution so as to transform it uninterruptedly into a working class revolution, a socialist revolution, which will make the working class the ruling class: “From the democratic revolution we shall at once, according to the degree of our strength, the strength of the class conscious and organised proletariat, begin to pass over to the socialist revolution. We stand for continuous revolution. We shall not stop half way.” (V. I. Lenin; “The Attitude of Social-Democracy toward the Peasant Movement”, in: ibid; p 145) . 6. The working class will be the leading force in the socialist revolution, with the poorer strata of the peasantry and urban petty-bourgeoisie as its allies: “The proletariat must accomplish the socialist revolution and in this unite to itself the mass of the semi-proletarian elements of the population in order to crush by force the resistance of the bourgeoisie and to paralyse the instability of the peasantry and petty bourgeoisie. . At the head of all the toilers and the exploited – for socialism!” (V. I. Lenin: “The Two Tactics Of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 111, 124). The Menshevik conception of the capitalist revolution, on the other hand, was, on the other hand as follows: 1. As in previous capitalist revolutions in history, the capitalist revolution in Russia will make the capitalists the ruling class: “It is evident that the forthcoming revolution cannot assume any political forms against the will of the whole – of the bourgeoisie, for the latter will be the master of tomorrow.” (M. Martynov: “Two Dictatorships”, Cited by: V. I. Lenin: “Social-Democracy, and the Provisional Revolutionary Government”, in: ibid.; p. 26). 2. Therefore the role of the working class in the capitalist revolution must be to exert pressure upon the capitalist class to bring the revolution to a successful conclusion: “The hegemony of the proletariat is a harmful utopia. The proletariat must follow the extreme bourgeois opposition.” (M. Martynov: “Two Dictatorships”, cited in: J. V. Stalin: Preface to The Georgian Edition of K. Kautsky: “The Driving Forces and Prospects, of the Russian Revolution”, in: “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 2-3). “The struggle to influence the course and outcome of the bourgeois revolution can express itself only in the fact that the proletariat will exert revolutionary pressure on the will of the liberal and radical bourgeoisie, and that the more democratic ‘lower stratum’ of society will force its’ ‘upper stratum’ to agree to lead the bourgeois revolution to its logical conclusion.” (M. Martynov: ibid., cited in: V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 28). 3. There will be a relatively long interval of time between the capitalist revolution and the subsequent socialist revolution: “The triumph of socialism cannot coincide with the fall of absolutism. These two movements necessarily will be separated from one another by a significant interval of time.” (G. Plekhanov: “Chto zhe dal “she?”in: “Zarya”; No. 2-3; December 1901). 4. The capitalist revolution may be decisively victorious over the tsarist autocracy without the revolutionary overthrow of this autocracy: “A decisive victory of the revolution over tsarism may be marked either by the setting up of a provisional government, which emerges from a victorious people’s uprising, ‘or by the revolutionary initiative of this or that representative institution’ which, under the immediate pressure of the revolutionary people, decides to set up a “national constituent assembly.” (Resolution of 1905 Menshevik Conference, cited by: V. I. Lenin: “The Two Tactics of social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution”, in: ibid.; p. 57). 5. Social-Democrats must not participate in the provisional government, if one is set up in place of the autocracy since: a) this will be a capitalist government, and participation by Social-Democrats in a capitalist government is contrary to socialist principles; b) an attempt to do so would frighten the capitalist class and lead to the restoration of autocracy: “Social-Democrats must, during the whole course of the revolution, strive to maintain a position which would best of all …preserve it from being merged with bourgeois democracy…. Therefore, Social-Democracy must not strive to seize or share power in the provisional government, but must remain the party of the extreme revolutionary opposition.” (Ibid., p. 69). “The Conference believes that the formation of a Social Democratic provisional government, or entry into the government would lead, on the one hand, to the masses of the proletariat becoming disappointed in the Social-Democratic Party and abandoning it …. because the Social-Democrats, in spite of the fact that they had seized power, would not-be able to satisfy the pressing needs of the working class, including the establishment of socialism, and, on the other hand, would induce the bourgeois classes to desert the cause of the revolution and in that way diminish its sweep.” (Ibid.; p. l04). “By simply frightening the majority of the bourgeois elements, the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat can lead to but one result — the restoration of absolutism in its original form.” (M. Martynov: “Two Dictatorships”, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Social-Democracy and the Provisional Revolutionary Government'”; in: ibid.; p. 27). 6. Only in the event of working class revolution in Western Europe should the Social-Democratic Party depart from this principle and participate in the provisional government, for only then would it be possible to go forward in Russia to the working class, socialist revolution: “Only in one event should social-Democracy, on its own initiative, direct its efforts towards seizing power and retaining it as long as possible, namely, in the event of the revolution spreading to the advanced countries of Western Europe where conditions for the achievement of socialism have already reached a certain state of maturity. In that event, the restricted historical scope of the Russian revolution can be considerably extended and the possibility of striking the path of socialist reforms will arise.” (Resolution of 1905 Menshevik Conference, cited in: -V.I. Lenin:”The Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution, in: ibid.; p. 96). The St. Petersburg Soviet in the 1905 Revolution In May 1905 Trotsky went to Finland. When he returned to St. Petersburg in October, a general strike had broken out in the city. The striking workers elected delegates to a strike committee, which quickly developed into the first important “Soviet of Workers’ Deputies” and began to publish its own organ: “Izvestia” (News). The Mensheviks supported the Soviet from its inception, regarding it as an organ of democratic local government. The St. Petersburg Bolsheviks, led by Bogdan Knunyantz, were, however, at first hesitant in their approach to it, regarding it as a rival to the Party and demanding that it affiliate to the Party before they could support it. Meanwhile Lenin, after making arrangements for the publication in St. Petersburg of a legal Bolshevik newspaper “Novaya Zizn” (New Life), had left-Geneva in October for Russia. Held up in Stockholm, he wrote from there: “Comrade Radin (i.e., Knunyantz — -Ed.) is wrong in raising the question in No. 5 of the ‘Novaya Zhizn’, …the Soviet of Workers? Deputies or the Party? I think that it is wrong to put the question in this way, and that the decision must certainly be: both the Soviet of Deputies and the Party . . . The Soviet of Deputies, as an organ representing all occupations, should strive to include deputies from all industrial, professional and office workers, domestic servants, farm labourers, etc., from all who want and are able to fight in common for a better life for the whole working people. I think it inadvisable to demand that the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies should accept the Social-Democratic Programme and join the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party…. I believe (On the strength of the incomplete and only ‘paper’ information at my disposal) that politically the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies should be regarded as the embryo of a provisional revolutionary Government.” (V.I. Lenin “Our Tasks and the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies”; in “Collected Works”; Volume 10; Moscow; 1962; p. 19, 20, 21). Later, after his arrival in St. Petersburg, Lenin made a clear analysis of the Soviet. It could not be an organ of government until the power of the central tsarist state had been smashed, at least locally; in the existing circumstances its role must be to conduct this revolutionary struggle to smash the central state machine. “The Soviet of Workers’ Deputies is not a parliament of labour and not an organ of proletarian self-government. It is not an organ of government at all, but a fighting organisation for the achievement of definite aims. . . The Soviet of Workers Deputies represents an undefined, broad fighting alliance of socialists and revolutionary democrats.” (V. I.Lenin: “Socialism and Anarchism”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; l943; p. 343) . “The Soviets of Workers’ Deputies, etc., were in fact the embryo of a provisional government; power would inevitably have passed to them had the uprising been victorious.” (V.I. Lenin; “The Dissolution of the Duma and the Tasks of the Proletariat”, in: Ibid.; p. 383). Although the St. Petersburg Bolsheviks corrected their attitude to the Soviet within a few days, their hesitancy in supporting it contributed in considerable measure to the fact that the majority of the deputies were from the outset Mensheviks or supporters of the Mensheviks. On October 30th, the Soviet elected its Executive; this consisted of three Mensheviks, three Bolsheviks, and three Socialist-Revolutionaries. After a few days under the chairmanship of the Menshevik S. Zborovski, the Soviet elected as its chairman the lawyer Georgi Nosar (better known under his pseudonym “Khrustalev”); who was then independent of any party but later joined the Mensheviks. Trotsky, who had allied himself with the St. Petersburg Mensheviks on his arrival in the city, was elected to the Soviet and soon came to play a leading role in its activities – which following the Menshevik political line of damping down the revolutionary enthusiasm and activity of the workers. On November 2nd, “Trotsky urged the Soviet to call off the general strike.” and it duly came to an end on November 3rd. On November 13th, the workers themselves began to introduce an eight-hour working day in the factories, and on the 15th, widespread public indignation at the state of siege which the tsarist government had just imposed on Poland, forced the Soviet to call a second general strike in St. Petersburg. On November 18th, three days later, “Trotsky.. . proposed to call an end to the second general strike.” (I. Deutscher; ibid ; p. 134), on the pretext that : “The government had just announced that the sailors of Kronstadt (who had participated in the first general strike — Ed.) would be tried by ordinary military courts, not courts martial. The Soviet could withdraw not with victory indeed, but with honour.” (I. Deutscher; Ibid.; p. 134). In his speech to the Soviet urging the calling-off of the second general strike, Trotsky’s biographer declares that: “While he tried to dam up the raging element of revolt, he stood before the Soviet like defiance itself, passionate and sombre.” (I. Deutscher: ibid; p. 134), “Events work for us and we have no need to force the pace. We must drag out the period of preparation for decisive action as much as we can, perhaps for a month or two, until we can come out as an army as cohesive and organised as possible. . . When the liberal bourgeoisie, as if boasting of its treachery, tells us: ‘You are alone. Do you think you can go on fighting without us? Have you signed a pact with victory?’, we throw our answer in their face: ‘No, we have signed a pact with death.'” (L.Trotsky; Speech to St. Petersburg Soviet, November 16th., l905, in: No. 7, November 20th., 1905). Having succeeded in inducing the Soviet to call off the second general strike, “A few days later he had again to impress upon the Soviet its own weakness and urge it to stop enforcing the eight-hour day. . . The Soviet was divided, a minority demanding a general strike; but Trotsky prevailed.” (I. Deutscher: ibid; p. 135). “We have not won the eight-hour day for the working class, but we have succeeded in winning the working class for the eight-hour day.” (L.Trotsky: Speech to St. Petersburg Soviet, cited in: I. Deutscher: ibid.; p. 140). In addition to his activities in the Soviet, Trotsky had contrived to gain control, jointly with Parvus (who had followed him to St. Pctersburg and had become a deputy in the Soviet) of a daily newspaper, “Russkaya Gazeta” (The Russian Newspaper), and later in the year, alongside it, he founded with Parvus and Yuli Martov a second daily “Nachalo” (The Beginning),which became the organ of Menshevisim from October to December 1905. By the beginning of December, the government felt strong enough to take the offensive again. Press censorship was reimposed, and on December 5th. Khrustalev, the Chairman of the Soviet, was arrested together with a few other leading members. Trotsky replied to this by proposing that: “The Soviet of Workers’ Deputies temporarily elect a new chairman and continue to prepare for an armed uprising.” (L. Trotsky: Resolution to St. Petersburg Soviet, cited in: I. Deutscher: Ibid.; p. 140) The Soviet accepted the proposal and elected a three-man Presidium, headed by Trotsky. But the preparations for the “armed uprising” of Trotsky’s were virtually non-existent. “The preparations for the rising which Trotsky had mentioned had so far been less than rudimentary: two delegates had been sent to establish contact with the provincial Soviets. The sinews of insurrection were lacking.” Trotsky’s last gesture in the 1905 Revolution was then to put forward a “Financial Manifesto” written by Parvus. This called upon the people to withhold payment of taxes, declaring: “There is only one way to overthrow the government –to deny it . . its revenue.” (Financial Manifesto of St. Petersburg Soviet, cited in: I.Deutscher: ibid.; p.141). On December 16th., Trotsky presided over a meeting of the Executive of the St. Petersburg Soviet, when a detachment of soldiers and police burst in to the meeting room and the members of the executive were arrested. A number of charges were brought against them, the principle charge being that of plotting insurrection. The role of the Mensheviks in the St. Petersburg Soviet was summed up later by J.V. Stalin: “The St. Petersburg Soviet of Workers’ Deputies, being the Soviet of the most important industrial and revolutionary centre of Russia, the capital of the tsarist empire, ought to have played a decisive role in the Revolution of 1905. However, it did not perform this task, owing to its bad, Menshevik leadership. As we know Lenin had not yet arrived in St. Petersburg; he was still abroad. The Mensheviks took advantage of Lenin’s absence to make their way into the St.Petersburg Soviet and to seize hold of its leadership. It was not surprising under such circumstances that the Mensheviks Khrustalev, Trotsky, Parvus and others managed to turn the St. Petersburg Soviet against the policy of an uprising. Instead of bringing the soldiers into close contact with the Soviet and linking them up with the common struggle, they demanded that the soldiers be withdrawn from St. Petersburg. The Soviet, instead of arming the workers and preparing them for an uprising, just marked time and was against preparations for an uprising.” (J.V. Stalin: “History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union”(Bolsheviks; Moscow; 1941; p.79-80). The Moscow Uprising On December 19th., 1905 the Moscow Soviet of Workers’ Deputies, which was led by the Bolsheviks, resolved to: “Strive to transform the strike into an armed uprising.” (V.I. Lenin: “The Lessons of the Moscow Uprising; in: “Selected Works, Volume 3; London; 1946; p. 346) and by December 22nd, the first barricades were being set up in the streets. “The 23rd: artillery fire is opened on the barricades and on the crowds in the streets. Barricades are set up more deliberately, and no longer singly but on a really mass scale. The whole population is in the streets; all the principal centres of the city are covered by a network of. barricades. For several days stubborn guerrilla fighting proceeds between the insurgent detachments and the troops. The troops become exhausted and Dubasov is obliged to beg for reinforcements. Only on December 28 did the government forces acquire complete superiority and on December 30 the Semenov regiment stormed the Prosnya distrect, the last stronghold of the uprising.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Lessons of the Moscow Uprising”, in: ibid; p. 347). In fact, the attitude of the Menshevik leadership of the St. Petersburg Soviet, led by Trotsky enabled the tsar to transfer troops from the capital to Moscow and this was a significant factor in the crushing of the uprising in the latter city. “The climax of the Revolution of 1905 was reached in the December uprising in Moscow. A small crowd of rebels, namely, of organised and armed workers — they numbered not more than eight thousand –resisted the tsar’s government for nine days. The government dared not trust the Moscow garrison; on the contrary, it had to keep it behind locked doors, and only on the arrival of the Semenovsky Regiment from St. Petersburg was it able to quell the rebellion.” (V.I. Lenin: Lecture on the 1905 Revolution, in: ibid.; p. 16). Soviets of Workers’ Deputies were organised in other towns as well as in St. Petersburg and Moscow. In addition, Soviets of Workers’ and Peasants’ Deputies and Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies were established in some places. Isolated strikes, riots and mutinies continued into 1906, leading to a lack of clarity for some months as to whether the revolutionary tide was ebbing or merely temporarily at rest before a subsequent rise. In fact December 1905 proved to be the peak of the revolutionary tide. 1906 -1907: The Trial of the Leaders of the St. Petersburg Soviet The trial of the leaders of the St. Petersburg Soviet, the main charge against whom was that of plotting insurrection, began almost a year after the Revolution had been crushed, on October 2nd, 1906. The defendants denied having engaged in technical preparation for a rising. On October 4th, Trotsky told the court: “A rising of the masses is not made, gentlemen the judges. It makes itself of its own accord. It is the result of social relations and conditions, and not of a schema drawn up on paper. A popular insurrection cannot be staged. It can only be foreseen. For reasons that were as little dependent on us as on Tsardom, an open conflict had become inevitable. It came nearer with every day. To prepare for it meant for us to do everything possible to reduce to a minimum the number of victims of this unavoidable conflict.” (L. Trotsky: Speech at Trial of Leaders of St. Petersburg Soviet, cited in: I. Deutscher: “The Prophet Armed- Trotsky: 1879-1921”-; London; 1970; p. 166). On November 15th, the verdict was delivered. The defendants were found guilty on the main charge of plotting insurrection, but Trotsky and fourteen others were found guilty on minor charges and sentenced to deportation to Siberia for life and loss of all civil rights. In February 1907 Trotsky escaped into Finland. Trotsky’s “Results and Prospects”: The Theory of “Permanent Revolution” While in prison, Trotsky wrote “Results and Prospects,” which was published in St. Petersburg in 1906 as the final chapter of his book “Our Revolution,” a collection of essays on the Russian Revolution of December 1905. In this essay Trotsky gave a fundamental statement of his views on capitalist revolution, the “theory of permanent revolution” The term “permanent revolution” was derived from an address by Marx and Engels written in 1850: “While the democratic petty bourgeois wish to bring the revolution to a conclusion as quickly as possible and with the achievement at most of the above demand, it is our interest and our task to make the revolution permanent, until all more or less possessing classes have been displaced from domination, until the proletariat has conquered state power…Their (i.e. the German workers’ –Ed.) battle-cry must be: the permanent revolution.” (K. Marx and F. Engels: Address of the “Central Council to the Communist League”, in: K. Marx: ‘Selected Works’, Volume 2; London 1943; p. 161, 168) Lenin accepted this conception of the permanent revolution, although after the publication of Trotsky’s work Marxists preferred to use the term “uninterrupted revolution” or “continuous revolution” in order to avoid confusion with Trotsky’s perversion of the term in connection with his anti-Leninist theory of the capitalist revolution. In September 1905, Lenin wrote: “From the democratic revolution we shall at once, according to the degree of our strength, the strength of the class conscious and organised proletariat, begin to pass over to the socialist revolution. We stand for continuous revolution.” (V.I. Lenin: “The Attitude of Social-Democracy towards the Peasant Movement”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1946; p. 145). Trotsky’s theory of the capitalist revolution, as put forward in “Results and Prospects” was as follows: 1. The working class will be the active force in the capitalist revolution, with the peasantry as supporters: “The struggle for the emancipation of Russia from the incubus of absolutism which is stifling it has become converted into a single combat between absolutism and the industrial proletariat, a single combat in which the peasants may render considerable support but cannot play a leading role. Many sections of the working masses, particularly in the countryside, will be drawn into the revolution and become politically organised only after the advance guard of the revolution, the urban proletariat, stands at the helm of the state. The proletariat in power will stand before the peasants as the class which has emancipated it. The Russian peasantry in the first and most difficult period of the revolution will be interested in the maintenance of a proletarian regime (workers’ democracy).” (L. Trotsky: “Results and Prospects”, in: “The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p. 66, 70, 71-72). 2. Because the peasantry in the capitalist revolution is destined to play only an auxiliary role of supporters rather than allies of the working class, the democratic-revolution will place in power — not- an alliance of the working class and peasantry, democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry” — but the working class, establishing the dictatorship of the working class, a revolutionary workers’ government: “The idea of a ‘proletarian and peasant dictatorship’ is unrealisable . . There can be no talk of any special form of proletarian dictatorship in the bourgeois revolution, of democratic proletarian dictatorship (or dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry). Victory in this struggle must transfer power to the class that has led the strife, i.e., the Social-democratic proletariat. The question, therefore, is not one of a “revolutionary provisional government” — an empty phrase . . . but of a revolutionary worker government, the conquest of power by the Russian proletariat.” (Trotsky: ibid.; p. 73, 80, 121-22). 3. Once in power the working class will be compelled to proceed with the construction of a socialist society: “The proletariat, once having taken power, will fight for it to the very end. . . Collectivism will become not only the inevitable way forward from the position in which the party in power will find itself, but will also be a means of preserving this position with the support of the proletariat. . . The political domination of the proletariat is incompatible with its economic enslavement. No matter under what political flag the proletariat has come to power, it. is obliged to take the path of socialist policy.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 80, 101). 4. But the construction of socialism will inevitably bring the working class into hostile collision with the peasantry and urban petit bourgeoisie: “Every passing day will deepen the policy of the proletariat in power, and more and more define its class character. Side by side with that, the revolutionary ties between the proletariat and the nation will be broken. . . The primitiveness of the peasantry turns its hostile face towards the proletariat. The cooling-off of the peasantry, its political passivity, and all the more the active opposition of its upper sections, cannot but have an influence on a section of the intellectual and the petty-bourgeoisie of the towns. Thus, the more definite and determined the policy the proletariat in power becomes, the narrower and more shaky does the ground beneath its feet become. The two main features of proletarian policy which will meet opposition from the allies of the proletariat are collectivism and internationalism.“ (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p.76-77). 5. Thus the working class in power — now isolated from and opposed by the masses of the peasantry and urban petty bourgeoisie – will inevitably be overthrown by the forces of reaction — unless the working classes in Western Europe establish proletarian dictatorships which render direct state aid to the working class of Russia: “Left to it’s own resources, the working class of Russia will inevitably be crushed by the counterrevolution the moment the peasantry turns its back on it. It will have no alternative but to link the fate of its political rule and, hence, the fate of the whole Russian revolution, with the fate of the socialist revolution in Europe.” “Without the direct State support of the European proletariat the working class of Russia cannot remain in power and convert its temporary domination into a lasting socialistic dictatorship. Of this there cannot for one moment be any doubt.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 105.) 6. The Russian working class government will, therefore, be forced to use its state power to actively to initiate socialist revolutions in Western Europe and beyond: “This immediately gives the events now unfolding an international character. . . The political emancipation of Russia led by the working class. .will transfer to it colossal power and resources, and will make it the initiator of the liquidation of world capitalism. . . If the Russian proletariat, having temporarily obtained power, does not on its own initiative carry the revolution on to European soil, it will be compelled to do so by the forces of European feudal-bourgeois reaction. The colossal state-political power given it by a temporary conjuncture of circumstances in the Russian bourgeois revolution it will cast into the scales of the class struggles of the entire capitalist world.” (L. Trotsky; ibid.; p. 108, 115). Trotsky continued to put forward his theory of “permanent revolution” throughout his life. In his book “The Permanent Revolution,” published in Berlin in Russian in 1930. he says: “I came out against the formula ‘democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’…. The theory of the permanent revolution, which originated in 1905. . . .pointed out that the democratic tasks of the backward bourgeois nations lead directly, in our epoch, to the dictatorship of the proletariat. . . The socialist revolution begins on national foundations – but it cannot be completed within these foundations. . . . The difference between the permanent and the Leninist standpoint expressed itself politically in the counterposing of the slogan of the dictatorship of the proletariat relying on the peasantry to the slogan of the democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry. . . . The world division of labour, the dependence of Soviet industry upon foreign technology, the dependence of the productive forces of the advanced countries of Europe upon Asiatic raw materials, etc… make the construction of an independent socialist society in any single country impossible.” (L. Trotsky: “The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p. 128,132, 133, 189, 280). As we have seen, Lenin analysed the revolutionary process in tsarist Russia as essentially one of two successive stages — firstly, the stage of democratic revolution, secondly, the stage of socialist revolution, but with the possibility of uninterrupted transition from the first stage to the second if the working class were able to win the leading role in the first stage. The Trotskyite theory of “permanent revolution” rejected Lenin’s concept of two stages in the revolutionary process in tsarist Russia, and postulated a single stage, that of the proletarian-socialist revolution leading directly to the dictatorship of the proletariat. Lenin saw the revolutionary process in colonial-type countries also as essentially one of two successive stages–firstly, the stage of national-democratic revolution, secondly, the stage of socialist revolution, but with the possibility of uninterrupted transition from the first stage to the second if the working class were able to win the leading role in the first stage. Trotsky logically extended his theory of “permanent revolution” to colonial-type countries, here also postulating a single stage in the revolutionary process, that of proletarian-socialist revolution leading directly to the dictatorship of the proletariat. “In order that the proletariat of the Eastern countries may open the road to victory, the pedantic reactionary theory of Stalin . . on ‘’stages’’ and ‘steps’’ must be eliminated at the very outset, must be cast aside, broken up and swept away with a broom. . . . With regard to . . . the colonial and semi-colonial countries, the theory of the permanent revolution signifies that the complete and genuine solution of their tasks of achieving democracy and national emancipation is conceivable only through the dictatorship of the proletariat. The Comintern’s endeavour to foist upon the Eastern countries the slogan of the democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry, finally and long ago exhausted by history, can have only a reactionary effect.” (L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 48, 276, 278). Lenin was, of course, strongly opposed to what he called Trotsky’s: “absurdly ‘Left’ theory of ‘permanent revolution.’” (V. I. Lenin: “Violation of Unity under Cover of Cries for Unity”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 207). Analysing Trotsky’s “Results and Prospects” in 1907, Lenin pointed out: “Trotsky’s major mistake is that he ignores the bourgeois character of the revolution and has no clear conception of the transition from this revolution to the socialist revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Aim of the Proletarian Struggle in Our Revolution”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 15; Moscow; 1962; p. 371). At the end of 1910, we find Lenin saying: “Trotsky distorts Bolshevim, because he has never been able to form any definite views on the role of the proletariat in the Russian bourgeois revolution.” (V.1. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia”; in: ‘Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; l946; p. 505). And in November 1915: “Trotsky . . repeats his ‘original’ theory of 1905 and refuses to stop and think why, for ten whole years, life passed by this beautiful theory. Trotsky’s original theory takes from the Bolsheviks their call for a decisive revolutionary struggle and for the conquest of political power by the proletariat, and from the Mensheviks it takes the ‘repudiation’ of the role of the peasantry. . . . Trotsky is in fact helping the liberal labour politicians in Russia who by the ‘repudiation’ of the role of the peasantry mean refusal to arouse the peasants to revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: “Two Lines of the Revolution”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 5; London; 1935; p. 162, 163). In November and December 1924 Stalin made a more comprehensive theoretical analysis of Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution”: “Trotskyism is the theory of ‘permanent’ (uninterrupted) revolution. But what is permanent revolution in its Trotskyist interpretation? It is revolution that fails to take the poor peasantry into account as a revolutionary force. Trotsky’s ‘permanent’ revolution is, as Lenin said, ‘skipping’ the peasant movement, playing at the seizure of power;. Why is it dangerous? Because such a revolution, if an attempt had been made to bring it about, would inevitably have ended in failure, for it would have divorced from the Russian proletariat its ally, the poor peasantry. This explains the struggle that Leninism has been waging against Trotskyism ever since –1905.” (J. V. Stalin: “Trotskyism or Leninism?”, in: “Works”, Volume 6; Moscow; 1953; p. 364-65). “What is the dictatorship of the proletariat according to Trotsky? The dictatorship of the proletariat is a power, which comes ‘into hostile collision’ with ‘the broad masses of the peasantry’ and seeks ‘the solution of its ‘contradictions’ only ‘’in the arena of the world proletarian revolution’. What difference is there between this ‘theory of permanent revolution’ and the well-known theory of Menshevism which repudiates the concept of dictatorship of the proletariat? Essentially, there is no difference. ‘Permanent revolution’ is not a mere underestimation of the revolutionary potentialities of the peasant movement. ‘Permanent revolution’ is an underestimation of the peasant movement, which leads to the repudiation of Lenin’s theory of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Trotsky’s ‘permanent revolution’ is a variety of Menshevism. . . . Trotsky’s ‘permanent revolution’ means that the victory of socialism in one country, in this case Russia, is impossible without direct state support from the European proletariat’, i.e., before the European proletariat has conquered power. What is there in common between this ‘theory’ and Lenin’s thesis on the possibility of the victory of socialism ‘in one capitalist-country taken separately’? Clearly, there is nothing in common. What does Trotsky’s assertion that a revolutionary Russia could not hold out in the face of a conservative Europe signify? It can signify only this: firstly, that Trotsky does not appreciate the inherent strength of our revolution; secondly, that Trotsky does not understand the inestimable importance of the moral support which is given to our revolution by the workers of the West and the peasants of the East; thirdly, that Trotsky does not perceive the internal infirmity which is consuming imperialism today. Trotsky’s ‘permanent revolution’ is the repudiation of Lenin’s theory of proletarian revolution; and conversely, Lenin’s theory of the proletarian revolution is the repudiation of the theory of ‘permanent revolution’. . . . Hitherto only one aspect of the theory of ‘permanent revolution’ has usually been noted — lack of faith in the revolutionary potentialities of the peasant movement. Now, in fairness, this must be supplemented by another aspect — lack of faith in the strength and capacity of the proletariat in Russia. What difference is there between Trotsky’s theory and the ordinary Menshevik theory that the victory of socialism in one country, and in a backward country at that, is impossible without the preliminary victory of the proletarian revolution in the principal countries of Western Europe? There can be no doubt at all. Trotsky’s theory of ‘permanent revolution’ is a variety of Menshevism . . . Honeyed speeches and rotten diplomacy cannot hide the yawning chasm which lies between the theory of ‘permanent revolution’ and Leninism.” (J. V. Stalin: “The October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists”, in: ‘Works’, ibid.; p. 385-6,389, 392, 395-96, 397). The Campaign for Party Unity In the revolutionary conditions, which prevailed in the autumn of 1905, Bolsheviks and Mensheviks of the rank and file worked closely together and by the end of the year most of the local organisations of the two “parties” had united. Accordingly the demand grew among the workers and the rank-and-file of the Party that the leaderships of the two sections should unite. While fully supporting these moves for unity, Lenin and most of the Bolsheviks felt strongly that the political differences between the leaderships of the two factions should not be glossed over, since this would only confuse the workers. In this they were opposed by conciliationists among the Bolsheviks, such as Leonid Krassin and Aleksandr Bogdanov, who minimised these differences. Lenin arrived back in Russia in November 1905, and in December attended the First Party (Bolshevik) Conference in Tammerfors (Finland), where he met J.V. Stalin for the first time. The conference adopted a resolution to apply the elective principle within the Party in view of the freer political conditions brought about by the 1905 revolution, and another favouring the earliest possible restoration of unity with the Mensheviks and the immediate creation of a joint Central Commiittee. Simultaneously with the Bolshevik conference, the Mensheviks held a conference in St. Petersburg where, under pressure from their- rank-and-file, they endorsed the Leninist formula of Party organisation in point 1 of the Party rules and adopted a resolution in favour of unity with the Bolsheviks The joint Central Committee, consisting of three Bolsheviks and three Mensheviks, began to operate at the height of the December insurrection. When at the end of December, both the Bolshevik “Novaya Zhizn” (New Life) and the Menshevik “Nachalo”(Beginning) were suppressed, both leaderships combined to issue a joint newspaper — “Severny Golos” -(Voice of the North) — under a joint editorial Board. 1907, The Fourth (Unity) Congress of the Party The Fourth Unity Congrcss of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour was held in Stockholm (Sweden) in-April/May 1906 was attended by 111 delegates from Party organisations, together with 3 each from the national parties which affiliated to the Party at the Congress (the “Bund”, the Polish Social-Democratic Party and the Social-Democratic Party 0f the Latvian Region). As a result of the fact that many Bolshevik-led Party organisations had been broken up after the 1905 uprising, a number of these were not represented at the congress, so that the Mensheviks had a majority (62-49). This manifested itself in a number of the resolutions. As Lenin pointed out: “The three most important resolutions of the Congress clearly reveal the erroneous views of the former ‘Menshevik’ faction, which numerically was predominant at the Congress. “The Congress rejected the proposal to make it one of the tasks of the Party to combat. . Constitutional-illusions. Nor in its resolutions on the armed uprising did the Congress give what was necessary, viz., direct criticism of the mistakes of the proletariat, a clear estimate of the experience of October-December 1905, or even an attempt to study the inter-relation between strikes and uprising. The Congress did not openly and clearly tell the working class that the December uprising was a mistake, but in a covert way it condemned the uprising. We think that this is more likely to confuse the political class consciousness of the proletariat than to enlighten it.. We must and shall fight ideologically against those decisions of the Congress which we regard as erroneous.” (V. I. Lenin: An Appeal to the Party by Delegates at the Unity Congress who belonged to the Late ‘Bolshevik’ Faction, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; l946; p. 469, 470-71.) Nevertheless, the congress endorsed the basic principles of Party organisation put forward by Lenin. The congress also endorsed the formal unity of the two factions and the principle of democratic centralism. The Central Committee elected at the Fourth Congress consisted of 7 Mensheviks and 3 Bolsheviks. Against Bolshevik opposition, a Menshevik resolution was carried which elected an editorial board for the central organ of the Party which was outside the control of the Central Committee and contained not a single Bolshevik; it consisted of Martov, Dan, Martynov, Potresov and Maslow. During its life this editorial board did not publish a single issue of the central organ. Thus, the “unity” created at the Fourth Congress between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks was purely formal, and the two factions continued to exist within the framework of a single party. The Stolypin Repression The First State Duma met in May 1906, but did not prove docile enough for the ruling class. In July the tsarist government dissolved it, and Petr Stolypin (who had been Minister for Internal Affairs since May) was made Prime Minister. Under Stolypin a period of active repression of the revolutionary movement began. The new government suppressed the Bolshevik newspaper, which had been coming out since April under the successive names of “Volna” (The Wave), “Vperyod” (Forward) and “Ekho” (The Echo). In August 1906, regulations were issued providing for trial by courts martial and the death sentence for “revolutionary activity”, and mass arrests and executions followed. In the same month the Bolsheviks began to issue an illegal newspaper, “Proletary” (Proletarian), edited by Lenin, which continued to appear until December 1909. In September 1906 Lenin proposed that, since the tide of revo1ution was now clearly on the ebb, the Party shou1d participate in the elections for the Second State Duma (due to be convoked in March 1907). As a result, left-wing representation in this Duma was considerably stronger than it had been in the first, namely: 157 Trudoviks (Group of Toil) and Socialist-Revolutionaries (expressing the outlook of the peasantry) (from 94 in the First State Duma); 165 Social-Democrats (from 18 in the First State Duma), while the representation of the Cadets (the Constitutional-Democratic Party, representing the interests of the bourgeoisie) fell from 179 to 98. Most of the Social Democratic deputies were, however Mensheviks. The Fifth Party Congress The Fifth Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party was held in London in May/June 1907. It was attended by 336 delegates, representing a membership of some 150,000. The congress consolidated the Russian, Polish and Latvian Parties (together with, for a time, the Bund) into a single Party based on (mainly) Leninist principles. Trotsky participated in the congress, expounding at length his “theory of permanent revolution,” to which Rosa Luxemburg gave her support: “At the London congress I renewed acquaintance with Rosa Luxemburg whom I had known since 1904. . .On the question of the so-called permanent revolution, Rosa took the same stand as I did.” In the resolutions the congress largely adopted the Bolshevik line. A Bolshevik resolution condemning the Menshevik proposal to transform the Party into a broad “Labour Party” of the British type was carried by 165 votes to 94; another Bolshevik resolution declaring that the Cadets were now a counter-revolutionary party which must be mercilessly exposed, and that it was essential to coordinate the Party’s own activity with that of the parties expressing the outlook of the peasantry (i.e., the Trudoviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries) was carried by 159 votes to 104. However, a Bolshevik motion of censure on the Menshevik Central Committee elected at the Fourth Congress in 1906 was lost. This resolution was opposed not only by the Mensheviks, but by a centrist group headed by Trotsky: “If, after all, the Bolshevik resolution, which noted the mistakes of the Central Committee was not carried, it was because the consideration “not to cause a split” strongly influenced the comrades.” (J.V. Stalin: “The London Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Notes of a Delegate)”; in: ‘Works’, Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 59) “Trotsky… spoke on behalf of the ‘Centre’, and expressed the views of the Bund. He fulminated against us for introducing our ‘unacceptable’ resolution. He threatened an outright split. . . That is a position based not on principle, but on the Centre’s lack of principle.” (V. I. Lenin: Fifth Congress of RSDLP, Speech on the Report of the Activities of the Duma Group, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 12; Moscow; 1962; p. 451-2) Trotsky endeavored to justify his concilationist position by suggesting that there were no fundamental differences between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, saying: “Here comes Martov . . and threatens to raise between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks a Marxist wall . . .’Comrade Martov, you are going to build your wall with paper only with -your polemical literature you have nothing else to build it with.” (Pyatyi Syezd RSDRP (Fifth Congress RSDLP); Moscow; n.d.; p. 54-55). In view of the decline of the revolutionary tide, the question of ‘armed insurrection’ was dropped from the agenda of the congress. However, a sharp controversy arose at the congress on the question of “expropriations,” i.e., the illegal acquisition of funds for the Party. Lenin’s views on this question had been expressed in an article published in “Proletary,” in October 1906: “Armed struggle pursues two different aims; which must be strictly distinguished; in the first place this struggle aims at assassinating individuals, chiefs and subordinates, in the army and police: in the second place, it aims at the confiscation of monetary funds both from the government and from private persons. The confiscated funds go partly into the treasury of the Party, partly for the special purpose of arming and preparing for an uprising, and partly for the maintenance of persons engaged in the struggle we are describing. . . It is not guerilla actions which disorganise the movement, but the weakness of a party which is incapable of taking such actions under its control.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘Guerilla Warfare, in: “Collected Works””, Volume 11; Moscow; 1962; p. 216, 219). The Fourth Congress of the Party in 1906 had adopted a Menshevik resolution banning Party members, from taking part in “expropriations” and at the Fifth Congress an attack was launched upon the Bolsheviks for allegedly continuing to take part in (or at least advise others on the organisation of “expropriations.” A Menshevik motion was adopted at the Fifth Congress banning the participation of Party members in all armed actions and acts of “expropriation” and- ordering the disbandment of the fighting squads connected with the, Party. Trotsky, according to his biographer, sharply supported the Menshevik attacks on this issue: “The records of the Congress say nothing about the course of this controversy, (i.e. on “expropriations” –Ed.); only fragmentary reminiscences, written many years after, are available. But there is no doubt that Trotsky was, with Martov, among those who sharply arraigned the Bolsheviks.” (I. Deutscher; ‘The Prophet Armed: Trotsky: 1879-1921″; London; 1970; p. 179). Shortly after the Congress, Lenin wrote to Maxim Gorky that : “At the London Congress, too, he (i.e., Trotsky –Ed.) acted the ‘poseur.’” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Maxim Gorky, February 13th., 1908; in: ,”Collected Works”, Volume 34; Moscow; 1966; p. 386). While Stalin, writing of Trotsky’s activities at the congress, declared “Trotsky proved to be ‘pretty but useless.’” (J.V. Stalin: “The London Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Notes of a Delegate)”, in: “Works”; Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 52). After the congress Trotsky carried his attacks on the Bolsheviks on the question of “expropriations’ into the columns of “Vorwaerts” (Forward), the organ of the German Social-Democratic Party. He describes how Lenin reacted to this news: “I told Lenin of my latest article in “Vorwaerts” about the Russian Social-Democracy. . . The most prickly question in the article was that of so-called ‘expropriations’. .. The London congress, by a majority of votes composed of Mensheviks, Poles and some Bolsheviks banned ‘expropriations’. When the delegates shouted from their seats: “What does Lenin say? We want to hear Lenin”, the latter only chuckled, with a somewhat cryptic expression. After the London congress, ‘expropriations’ continued. . . That was the point on which I had centred my attack in the “Vorwaerts.” ‘Did you really write like this?’, Lenin asked me reproachfully. Lenin tried to induce the Russian delegation at the congress to condemn my article. This was the sharpest conflict with Lenin in my whole life.” (L. Trotsky: “My Life”; Now York; 1971; p. 218). The Stolypin Coup d’Etat In June 1907 the tsarist government accused the Social-Democratic deputies in the Second-State Duma of conspiracy, and demanded that the Duma lift their parliamentary immunity. When the Duma hesitated, the government peremptorily dissolved it on June 16th, 1907 – the “Coup d’Etat of June 3rd 1907 as it was known under the old calendar. Most of the Social-Democratic deputies were then arrested. In the same manifesto the government announced new electoral laws for the Third State Duma, the purpose of which was to increase the representation of the landlords and capitalists, and to reduce still further the representation of the workers and peasants. “The government promulgated a ‘new law’ which reduces the number of peasant electors by half, doubles the number of landlord electors, . reduces the number of deputies also by nearly half. . . reserves for the government the right to distribute voters according to locality, various qualifications and nationality; destroys all possibility of conducting free election propaganda, etc., etc. And all this has been done in order to prevent revolutionary representatives of the workers and peasants from getting into the Third Duma, in order to fill the Duma with the liberal and reactionary representatives of the landlords and factory owners. This is the idea behind the dispersion of the Second State.” (J.V. Stalin: “The Dispersion of the Duma and the Tasks of the Proletariat”, in: “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; l9~3; p. 14). The Third Party Conference The Third Conference of the RSDLP was held in August 1907 in Vyborg (Finland), attended by 26 delegates of whom 15 were Bolsheviks and 11 Mensheviks. The dissolution of the Second State Duma and the issue of the new reactionary electoral law had caused the Socialist-Revolutionary Party to revert to a policy of boycotting the elections to the Third State Duma, and had revived boycotting among the Bolsheviks. The leader of the boycottists at the conference was Aleksandr Bogdanov. Lenin moved a resolution at the conference which declared that reaction prevailed in the country and would prevail for some years, although it would inevitably be followed by a new upsurge; in the meantime it was essential to take advantage of every legal opportunity and, in particular, of the tribune afforded by the Duma. The resolution was adopted by the conference. The Third State Duma Despite the decision of the Third Party Conference to participate in the elections to the Third State Duma, many Bolsheviks continued to oppose this. In the autumn of 1907 Lenin wrote a number of articles on this question, the most famous of which – “Against the Boycott” – — Was published as part of a pamphlet entitled “Boycott of the Third Duma,” the other part being written by Lev Kamenev and entitled “For the Boycott!” “The state of affairs now, in the autumn of 1907, does not call for such a slogan and does not justify it. . . . Without renouncing the application of the slogan of boycott in times of an upsurge, when the need for such a slogan may seriously arise, we must direct all our efforts towards the aim of transforming by direct influence every upsurge in the labour movement into a general, wide, revolutionary attack against reaction as a whole, against its very foundations.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Boycott: From the Notes of a Social-Democratic Publicist”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; l946; p.427). The Third State Duma was convened in November 1907. By reason of the new reactionary electoral system, left–wing representation in the Duma was considerably reduced from what it had been in the second, namely: 13 Trudoviks (Group of Toil), from l57 Trudoviks and Social-Revolutionaries in the Second State Duma); 18 Social-Democrats (from 65 in the Second State Duma) The Fourth Party Conference The Fourth Conference of the RSDLP was held in November 1907 in Helsingfors (Finland), attended by 10 Bolsheviks, 4 Mensheviks, 5 representatives of the Social-Democratic Party of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, 3 representatives of the Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region, and representatives of the “Bund.” The main business of the conference was to discuss the work of the Social-Democratic fraction in the newly elected Third State Duma. The Mensheviks to whose faction a majority of the Social-Democratic deputies belonged — were in favour of the independence of the deputies from Party control, while the Bolsheviks regarded it as essential that the fraction should be guided by the Party like any other section of Party members. The Bolshevik resolution to this effect was adopted. This resolution also demanded that the fraction should wage relentless war in the Duma on the pro-tsarist majority, that it should under no circumstances curtail its’ demands in concession to reaction, and that its efforts should be primarily devoted to using the Duma as a tribune for agitational purposes, in order to expose to the masses the reactionary policy of the pro-tsarist parties. 1907 – 1908: The Move Abroad Owing to the increased repression of the Stolypin regime, which was extended to Finland despite the Finnish constitution, the Central Committee was compelled to move from Russia to Geneva towards the end of 1907. The publication of the illegal Bolshevik paper “Proletary” was also transferred to Geneva. In December 1907 Lenin moved from Geneva to Paris. In February 1908 the first issue of the central organ of the Party – “Sotsial-Demokrat” (The Social-Democrat) appeared in Russia. Following the arrest of its editors, publication of the paper was transferred abroad, first to Paris, then to Geneva. It continued to appear until January 1917. The Menshevik leaders also moved abroad, and in February 1908 began to issue their organ “Golos Sotsial-Demokrata” (The Voice of the Social-Democrat) . The first editorial board consisted of Pavel Axelrod, Fedor Dan, Yuli Martov and Aleksandr Martynov. It continued to appear until December 1911. 1908: Liquidationism The movement among the Mensheviks to transform the Party into a broad, legal Labour Party along British lines developed by the summer of 1908 into a trend which the Leninists called “liquidationism,” since it aimed at the liquidation of the Party as the revolutionary vanguard of the working class. “Our Party organisations have all become reduced in membership. Some of them — namely, those whose membership was least proletarian — fell to pieces. The semi-legal institutions of the Party, created by the revolution, were raided time after time. Things reached such a state that some elements within the Party, which had succumbed to the influence of that disintegration, began to ask whether it was necessary to preserve the old Social-Democratic Party, whether it was necessary to continue its work, whether it was necessary to go ‘underground’ once more, and how this was to be done; and the extreme Right (the so-called liquidationist trend) answered this question in the sense that it was necessary to legalise ourselves at all costs, even at the price of an open renunciation of the Party programme, tactics and organisation. This was undoubtedly not only an organisational but also an ideological and political crisis.” (V. I. Lenin: “On to the High Road”; in ‘Works’; Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 3). “Liquidationism is ideologically connected with renegacy, . with opportunism. . . But liquidationism is not only opportunism. . . Liquidationism is opportunism that goes to the length of renouncing the Party . . . The renunciation of the ‘underground’ under the existing conditions is the renunciation of the old Party. Liquidationism is not only the ‘liquidation’ of the old party of the working class; it also means the destruction of the class independence of the proletariat, the corruption of its class-consciousness by bourgeois ideas. The liquidators are petty-bourgeois intellectuals, sent by the bourgeoisie to sow the seeds of liberal corruption among the workers. The liquidators are traitors to Marxism.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘Controversial Questions”; in: ibid.; p. 126-7, 131, 138). The August 1908 Central Committee Meeting In August 1908 a meeting of the Central Committee of the RSDLP was held and the liquidator Mensheviks opened their attack on the Party organisation by moving a resolution that the Central Committee should be abolished as the leading organ of the Party and converted into a mere information bureau. The motion was defeated, and a Bolshevik motion to convene a Party Conference was adopted. At this meeting the Central Committee set up a Russian Bureau of the Central Committee, composed of one representative each of the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks, the Polish Party, the Latvian Party and the ‘Bund’, responsible, under the Central Committee, for the direction of Party work within Russia. It also set up a Central Committee abroad, composed of members of the Central Committee residing outside Russia, responsible to the Russian Collegium. “Otzovism” and “Ultimatumism” From August 1908 the Leninist tactics of combining legal and illegal forms of struggle began to be attacked, riot only by the liquidationists on the right, but also by a group of ‘leftist’ Bolsheviks who demanded the renunciation of all legal forms of struggle. Since the main demand of this group of Bolsheviks was the immediate recall of the Social-Democratic Deputies from the Duma, they were called “Otzovists” (from “otozvat,” to recall). Another group of ostensibly “leftist” Bolsheviks did not demand the immediate recall of the Party’s deputies, but demanded that they should be presented with an ultimatum to correct their politicel errors or be recalled. Lenin described these “ultimatumists” as: “bashful otzovists.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia”, in: ibid.; p. 514) . The leading figures among the otzovists and ultimatumists were Aleksandr Bogdanov, Anatoly Lunacharsky, Leonid Krassin and Grigori Alexinsky. In arguing in favour of recall, as did both otzovism and ultimatumism, the adherents of these trends made great play with the errors committed by the Social-Democratic deputies in the Duma who were mainly Mensheviks. The Leninists replied that this was an argument for correcting the errors, not for recalling the deputies. “The illegal Party must know how to use the legal Duma fraction . . The most regrettable deviation from consistent proletarian work would be to raise the question of recalling the fraction from the Duma. …. We must at once establish team work in this field, so that every Social-Democratic deputy may really feel that the Party is backing him, that the Party is distressed over his mistakes and takes care to straighten his path –so that every Party worker may take part in the general Duma work of the Party. . . striving to subordinate the special work of the fraction to Party propaganda and agitational activity as a whole.” (V. I. Lenin: “On to the High Road”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1943; p. 8, 9). The Leninists strongly condemned both otzovism and ultimatumism as “liquidationism in reverse,” since, like liquidationism; its aim was to liquidate one side of the Party’s work: “In the course of the bourgeois-democratic revolution our Party was joined by a number of elements that were not attracted by its purely proletarian programme, but mainly by its glorious and energetic fight for democracy. In these troubled times such elements more and more display their lack of Social-Democratic consistency and, coming into ever sharper contradiction with the fundamentals of revolutionary Social-Democratic tactics, have been, during the past year, creating a tendency which is trying to give shape to the theory of otzovism and ultimatumism. Politically, ultimatumism at the present time is indistinguishable from otzovism; it only introduces greater confusion and disintegration by the disguised – character of its otzovism. By their attempt to deduce from the specific application of the boycott of representative institutions at this or that moment of the revolution that the policy of boycotting is a distinguishing feature of Bolshevik tactics in the period of counter-revolution also — ultimatumism and otzovism demonstrate that these trends are in essence the reverse side of Menshevism, which preaches indiscriminate participation in all representative institutions- irrespective of the given stage of development of’ the revolution. . . . 0tzovist-ultimatumist agitation has already begun to cause definite harm to the labour movement and to Social-Democratic work.. . Bolshevism as a definite tendency . . has nothing in common with otzovism and ultimatumism and . . the Bolshevik faction must more resolutely combat these deviations from the path of revolutionary Marxism”. (V.I. Lenin: Resolution of the Meeting of’ the Enlarged Editorial Board of ‘Proletary’: “On Otzovism and Ultimatumism”, in: ibid.; p. 19, 20-21). The Struggle on Two Fronts From August 1908, therefore, the Leninists carried on a struggle on the question of Party organisations on two fronts: Against liquidationism on the one hand, and against “leftist” otzovism and ultimatumism on the other hand. “Three and a half years ago all the Marxists. . had unanimously to recognise two deviations from the Marxian tactics. Both deviations were recognised as dangerous. Both deviations were explained as being due, not to accident, not to the evil intention of individual persons but to the ‘historical situation of the labour movement in the given period. . . The deviations from Marxism are generated by the “bourgeois influences over the proletariat.” (V. I.Lenin: “Controversial Questions” in: Ibid; p.129, 130). “The Bolsheviks have actually carried on, from August 1908 to January l910, a strugg1e on two fronts, i.e., a struggle against the liquidators and the otzovists.” (V. I. Lenin: “Notes of a Publicist”, in: ibid.; p. 45). “Empiro-Criticism” The reaction following the defeat of the 1905 Revolution led to a revival of’ idealist philosophy among the Russian intelligentsia, including some Social-Democrats. During 1908 a number of books were published which claimed to bring Marxism “up-to-date.” The most important of these was a symposium entitled “Studies in the Philosophy of Marxism,” published in St. Petersburg, the leading contributors to which were Aleksandr Bogdanov and Anatoly Lunacharsky. Following the lines of an earlier work by -Bogdanov – “Empirio-Criticism” (1904-06)– this attempted to combine Marxist philosophy with the idealist philosophy of Ernst Mach and Richard Avenarius to produce a “synthesis” which they called “empirio-criticism.” “A number of writers, would-be Marxists, have this year undertaken a veritable campaign against the philosophy of Marxism. In the course of less than half a year four books devoted mainly and almost exclusively to attacks on dialectical materialism have made their appearance. These include first and foremost ‘Studies in (? — it would have been more proper to say ‘against’) the Philosophy of Marxism.’” (V.1. Lenin: Preface to the First Edition of “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism”; in: ‘Selected Works’; Volume 11; London; 1943; p. 89). In September 1908 Lenin completed a long philosophical work, “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism,” published in May 1909, in which he attacked and exposed these works of Anti-Marxist philosophy: “Behind the mass of new terminological devices, behind the litter of erudite scholasticism, we invariably discerned two principal alignments, two fundamental trends in the solution of philosophical problems, Whether nature, matter, the physical, the external world be taken as primary, and mind, spirit, sensation (experience – as the widespread terminology of our time has it) , the psychical, etc., be regarded as secondary — that is the root question which in fact continues to divide the philosophers into two great camps. The theoretical foundations of this philosophy (i.e., empirio-criticism — Ed.) must be compared -with those of dialectical materialism. Such a comparison . . reveals, along the whole line of epistemological problems, the thoroughly reactionary character of empirio-criticism, which uses new artifices, terms and subtleties to disguise the old errors of idealism and agnosticism. Only utter ignorance of the nature of philosophical materialism generally and of the nature of Marx’s and Engels’ dialectical method can lead one to speak of a ‘union’ of empirio-criticism and Marxism. . Behind the epistemological scholasticism of empirio-criticism it is impossible not to see the struggle of parties in philosophy, a struggle which in the last analysis reflects the tendencies and. ideology of the antagonistic classes in modern society. The contending parties essentially, although concealed by a pseudo-erudite quackery of new terms or by a feeble-minded non-partisanship, are materialism and idealism. The latter is merely a subtle, refined form of fideism, which stands fully armed, commands vast organisations and steadily continues to exercise influence on the masses, turning the slightest vacillation in philosophical thought to its own advantage. The objective, class role played by empirio-criticism entirely consists in rendering faithful service to the fideists in their struggle against materialism in general and historical materialism in particular“. (V.I. Lenin: “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism”, in: ibid: p.385-6, 405, 406). “God-Building” Among some Social-Democrats the revival of idealist philosophy took the form of trying to reconcile Marxist philosophy and religion. In 1908, Anatoly Lunacharsky published “Religion and Socialism” in which he described Marxism as a “Natural, earthly, anti-metaphysical, scientific and human-religion.” Shortly afterwards Maxim Gorky wrote a novel entitled “A Confession,” in which a character prays to the people with the words: “Thou art my God, O sovereign people, and creator of all the gods, which thou hast formed from the beauties of the spirit in the travail and torture of thy quest.. And the world shall have no other gods but thee, for thou art the only god that works miracles. This . . .is my confession and belief.” (M. Gorky: “A Confession”; London 1910; p. 320). Gorky carried this idea forward in his articles and letters. “One does not seek for Gods – one creates them!” (M. Gorky: “The Karamazov Episode Again”, cited-by: V. I. Lenin: Letter to A. M. Gorky, November 14th,1913, in: ibid.; p. 675). The Leninists strongly attacked the concept of “God Building.” “I cannot -and will not have anything to do with people who have set out to propagate unity between scientific socialism and religion.” (V.I.Lenin: Letter to A.M.Gorky, April , 1908; In: “Socheniya”; Volume 34; Moscow; 1950; p.343.) “God seeking no more differs from god-building, or god-making, or god-creating or the like than a yellow devil differs from a blue devil . . Every religious idea, every idea of god, even every flirtation with the idea of god, is unutterable vileness, vileness that is greeted very tolerantly (and often even favourably) by the democratic bourgeoisie — and for that very reason it is vileness of the most dangerous kind, ‘contagion’ of the most abominable kind. Millions of sins, filthy deeds, acts of violence and physical contagions are far more easily exposed by the crowd, and are therefore far less dangerous, than the subtle, spiritual ideas of a god decked out in the smartest ‘ideological’ costumes. The Catholic priest who seduces young-girls (of whom I happened to read in a German newspaper) is far less dangerous to democracy than a priest without a frock, a priest without a coarse religion, a democratic priest with ideas who preaches the making and creating of a god. For the first priest is easily exposed, condemned and ejected, whereas the second cannot be ejected so easily.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to A. N. Gorky, November l4th. 1913; in: “Selected Works”, Volume 11; London; l943; p. 675-6). “You advocate the idea of god and god-building…This theory is obviously connected with the theory, or theories, of Bogdanov and Lunacharsky. . . . And it is obviously false and obviously reactionary. You have gilded and sugar-coated the idea of the clericals, the Purishkeviches, Nicholas II and Messieurs the Struves, for, in practice, the idea of god helps THEM to keep the people in slavery. By gilding the idea of-god, you gilded the chains with which they fetter – the ignorant workers and muzhiks. . . The idea, of god has always deadened and dulled ‘social- sentiments’, for it substitutes a dead thing for a living thing, and has always been an idea of slavery (the worst, hopeless kind of slavery). The idea of god has never ’bound the individual to society’ but has always bound the oppressed classes by belief in the divinity of the oppressors.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to A. N. Gorky, December 1913; in: ibid; p. 678-9). The “Party Mensheviks” The Leninists considered that a truly united Party could be brought about-only by a rapproachement between the Bolsheviks on the one hand and a section of the Mensheviks on the other hand, those representing the principal factions within the Party and the only ones with significant mass influence. They estimated that a section of the Mensheviks would move farther from reflecting the interests of the capitalist class and nearer to reflecting the interests of the working class, so coming to oppose liquidationism, to split off from the liquidator Mensheviks and to support genuine, practical unity with the Bolsheviks. In fact, towards the end of 1908 various groups of Mensheviks in Moscow, and later in the Vyborg district of St. Petersburg, passed resolutions sharply condemning the liquidator Mensheviks and their anti-Party policy. A leading role in the splitting of the Mensheviks was taken by Georgi Plekhanov, who publicly dissociated himself from liquidationism, retired from the editorial board of the organ of the liquidator Mensheviks, “Golos Sotsial-Demokrata” (The Voice of the Social-Democrat), and began to issue his own illegal journal “Dnevnik Sotsial-Demokrata” (The Diary of a Social-Democrat) . In this paper, Plekhanov vigorously attacked the liquidators and called upon all Mensheviks who recognised the necessity of illegal work to rally together. The Leninists called these anti-liquidationist Mensheviks “Party Mensheviks.” “Factions are generated by the relations between the classes in the Russian revolution. The Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks only formulated answers to the questions put to the proletariat by the objective realities of l905-97. Therefore, only the inner evolution of these factions, the ‘strong’ factions — strong because of their deep roots, strong because their ideas correspond to certain aspects of objective reality — only the inner evolution of precisely these factions is capable of securing a real fusion of the factions, i.e- the creation of a genuinely and completely united party of proletarian Marxian socialism in Russia. Hence the practical conclusion: the rapprochement in practical work between these two strong factions alone – and only in so far as they are purged of the non-Social-Democratic tendencies of liquidationism and otzovism – really represents a Party policy, a policy that really brings about unity, not in an easy way, not smoothly, and by no means immediately, but in a real way as distinguished from the endless quack promises of easy, smooth, immediate fusion of “all” factions. . .. In my discussions I suggested the slogan: ‘rapprochement between the two strong factions, and no whining over the dissolution of the factions’.” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 93-4). “The present split among the Mensheviks is not accidental but inevitable. The stand taken by certain Mensheviks justifies their appellation ‘Party Mensheviks’. They took their stand upon the struggle for the Party against the independent legalists… Plekhanov was never a Bolshevik. We do not and never will consider him a Bolshevik. But we do consider him a Party Menshevik, as we do any Menshevik capable of rebelling against the group of independent legalists and carrying on the struggle against them to the end. We regard it as the absolute duty of all Bolsheviks in these difficult times, when the task of the day is the struggle for Marxism in theory and for the Party in the practical work of the labour movement, to do everything possible to arrive at a rapprochement with such Social-Democrats” (V. I. Lenin: “Notes of a Publicist”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 66, 67, 69). “In my opinion, the line of the bloc (Lenin-Plekhanov) is the only correct one: 1) this line, and it alone, answers to the real interests of the work in Russia, which demand that all real Party elements should rally together; 2) this line, and it alone, will expedite the process of emancipation of the legal organisations from the yoke of the Liquidators, by digging a gulf between the Menshevik workers and the Liquidators, and dispersing and disposing of the latter. A fight for influence in the legal organisations is the burning question of the day, a necessary stage on the road towards the regeneration of the Party.; and a bloc is the only means by which these organisations can be cleansed of the garbage of Liquidationists. The plan for a bloc reveals the hand of Lenin — he is a shrewd fellow and knows a thing or two. But this does not mean that any kind of bloc is good. A Trotsky bloc (he would have said ‘synthesis’) would be rank unprincipledness. A Lenin-Plekhanov bloc is practical because it is thoroughly based on principle, on unity of views on the question of how to regenerate the Party.” (J. V. Stalin:”Letter to the Central Committee of the Party from Exile in Solvychegodsk, December 1910, in “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; l952; p. 2l5, 216). “Conciliationism” The Leninists maintained that unity was possible only with groups, which accepted the fundamental principles of Leninist strategy and tactics, and of Leninist organisation. There were some, however, who stood for unity of the groups at any price, who minimised the differences of principle between Bolsheviks and others and who demanded, that for the sake of unity, the Leninists should make compromises in their principles. Those people the Leninists called “conciliationists.” “Differences of opinion must be hushed up, their causes, their significance, their objective conditions should not be elucidated. The principal thing is to ‘reconcile’ persons and groups. If they do not agree upon the carrying out of common policy, that policy must be interpreted in such a way as to be acceptable to all. Live and let live. This is philistine ‘concilationism’, which inevitably loads to narrow-circle diplomacy. To ‘stop up’ the source of disagreement, to hush it up, to ‘adjust’ at all costs, to neutralise the conflicting trends –it is to this that the main attention of such ‘concilationism’ is directed.” (V. I. Lenin: “Notes of a Publicist,” in: ‘Selected Works’, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 41). The Leninists regarded concilationism as the product of the same objective conditions which had produced the factions between which it strove for agreement. “Concilationism is the sum total of moods, strivings and views which are indissolubly bound up with the very essence of the historical task set before the RDSLP during the period of the counter-revolution of 1908-11.” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in: ibid.; p. 93). They recognised conciliationism as a partial and concealed deviation from Marxist principles, since its aim was to secure modifications by the Leninists of their Principles for the sake of unity. “Conciliatioism . . really renders a most faithful -service to the liquidators and the otzovists, and therefore constitutes an evil all the more dangerous to the Party, the more cunningly, artfully and floridly it cloaks itself with professedly Party, professedly anti-factional declamations.” “The role of the conciliators during the period of counter-revolution may be characterised by the following picture. With immense efforts the Bolsheviks are pulling our Party wagon up a steep slope. The liquidators –‘Golos’-ites are trying with all their might to drag it downhill again. In the wagon sits a conciliator; he is a picture of tenderness. He has such a sweet face, like that of Jesus. He looks the very incarnation of virtue. And modestly dropping his eyes and raising his hands he exclaims: ‘I thank: thee, Lord, that I am not like one of these’ — a nod in the direction of the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks – ‘vicious factionalists’ who hinder all progress’. But the wagon moves slowly forward and in the wagon sits the conciliator.” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in: ibid.; p. 110-11). The Viennese “Pravda” In the summer of 1907, following the Fifth Congress of the RSDLP, Trotsky had moved to Berlin. Here he became intimate with the right wing-leaders of the Social-Democratic Party of Germany. As his biographer, Isaac Deutscher, expresses it: “Curiously enough, Trotsky’s closest ties were not with the radical wing of German socialism, led by Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Liebnicht and Franz Mehring, the future founders of the Communist Party, but with the men . . who maintained the appearances of Marxist orthodoxy, but were in fact leading the party to its surrender to the imperialist ambitions of the Hohenzollern empire.” (I. Deutscher “The Prophet Armed Trotsky: 1879-1921”; London: 1970; p.162). Trotsky contributed frequently to the SPG’s daily “Vorwarts” (Forward) and to its monthly ‘Neue Zeit’ (New Life), on which his influence was strong. In those articles Trotsky reiterated his attacks on the “sectarianism” of the Bolsheviks, alleging that the: “Boycottist tendency runs through the whole history of Bolshevism — the boycott of the trade unions, of the State Duma, of the local government bodies, etc.” (L.. Trotsky: Article in “Neue Zeit”, No.50, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia”, in: Selected Works’, Volume 3; London; 1946; p.505), as a “. . result of the sectarian fear of being swamped by the masses” “As regards the boycott of the trade unions and the local government bodies, what Trotsky says is positively untrue. It is equally untrue to say that boycottism runs through the whole history of Bolshevism; Bolshevism as a tendency took definite shape in the spring and summer of 1905, before the question of the boycott first came up. In August 1906 in the official organ of the faction, Bolshevism declared that the historical causes which called forth the necessity of the boycott had passed. Trotsky distorts Bolshevism.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 505.) Trotsky further declared that both the Bolshevik and the actions, and the Party itself were “falling to pieces.” To this Lenin replied: “Failing to understand the historical-economic significance of this split in the epoch of the counter-revolution, of this falling away of non-Social-Democratic elements from the Social-Democratic Labour Party, Trotsky tells the German readers that both factions are ‘falling to pieces,’ that the Party is ‘falling to pieces’, that the Party is becoming ‘disintegrated’. This is not true. And this untruth expresss.. first of all, Trotsky’s utter lack of theoretical understanding. Trotsky absolutely fails to understand ‘why the Plenum described both liquidationism and otzovism as the manifestation of bourgeois influence over the proletariat’. Just think: is the severance from the Party of trends which have been condemned by the Party and which express the bourgeois influence over the proletariat, the collapse of the Party, the disintegration of the Party, or is it the strengthening and purging of the Party?” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 515) The German government refused to allow Trotsky to stay in Berlin, and he moved shortly to Vienna. However he maintained his influence in the press of the Social-Democratic Party of Germany, the leaders of which continued to regard him as “the authority,” on the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party. “It is time to stop being naive about the Germans, Trotsky is now in full command there.. . It’s Trotsky and Co. who are writing, and the Germans believe them. Altogether, Trotsky is boss in ‘Vorwarts.’” (V. I. Lenin: “Letter to the Bureau of the CC of the RSDLP”, April 16th. 1912, in: “Collected Works”Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p. 34, 35). Trotsky remained in Vienna for seven years, and there he became intimate with the right-wing leaders of the Austrian Social-Democratic Party – Victor Adler, Rudolf Hilferding, Otto Bauer an& Karl Renner. He became Vienna correspondent of the daily newspaper “Kievskaya Mysl” (Kievan Thought), and contributed to a number of other papers. In October 1908, Trotsky began to edit a small run-down paper called “Pravda” (Truth), started in 1905, by the pro-Menshevik Ukrainian Social-Democratic League (“Spilika”) At the end of 1908, the group abandoned the paper, and it became Trotsky’s own journal. Published in Vienna from November 1909, it continued to appear until December 1913. The principal regular contributors to the Viennese “Pravda,” under Trotsky, were Aleksandr Skobolev (a student-who later became Minister of Labour in the Kerensky government) Adolf Yoffe (who committed suicide in 1927-in protest at Trotsky’s expulsion from the Party), David Ryazanov (later director of the Marx-Engels Institute) and Victor Kopp (later a Soviet diplomat). As Lenin commented in October 1911: “‘Pravda’ represents a tiny group, which has not given an independent and consistent answer to any important fundamental question of the revolution and counter-revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Concilators or the Virtuous” in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 106). Under Trotsky the Viennese “Pravda” became the principal organ of conciliationism, as Lenin repeatedly pointed out, describing Trotsky as a “spineless conciliator”; (V. I. Lenin: “Notes of a Publicist”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 60). “During the period of the counter-revolution of 1908-11 . . Trotsky provides us with an abundance of instances of unprincipled ‘unity’ scheming” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in: ibid.; p. 93, 105.) Trotsky himself admits: “My inner party stand was a concilationist one. . The great historical significance of Lenin’s policy was still unclear to me at that time, his policy of irreconcilable ideological demarcation and, when necessary split, for the purpose of welding and tempering the core of the truly revolutionary party. By striving for unity at all-costs, I involuntarily and unavoidably idealised centrist tendencies in Menshsvism.” (L. Trotsky: “The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p. 173). In fact, Trotsky elaborated in this period a “theory” of conciliationism, based on the erroneous concept that factions expressed, not the interests of different classes, but “the influence of the intelligentsia” upon the working class: “Trotsky expressed conciliationism more consistently than anyone else. He was probably the only one who attempted to give this tendency a theoretical foundation. This is the foundation: factions and factionalism-expressed the struggle of the intelligentsia ‘for influence over the irmiature proletariat’. . . . The opposite view (i.e. the Leninist view – Ed.) is that the factions are generated by the relations between the classes in the Russian revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 93). Trotsky attempted to give substance to his “non-factional” pose by articles in which he attacked as “anti-revolutionary” both the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. In 1909, for example, he wrote in Rosa Luxemburg’s Polish paper “Przeglad Socjal-Demokratyczny” (Social-Democratic Review): “While the Mensheviks, proceeding from the abstraction that ‘our revolution is bourgeois’, arrive at the idea of adapting the whole tactic of the proletariat to the conduct of the liberal bourgeoisie, right up to the capture of state power, the Bolsheviks, proceeding from the same bare abstraction: ‘democratic, not socialist dictatorship’, arrive at the idea of the bourgeois-democratic self-limitation of the proletariat with power in its hands. The difference between them on this question is certainly quite important: while the anti-revolutionary sides of Menshevism are already expressed in full force today, the anti-revolutionary features of Bolshevism threaten to become a great danger only in the event of the victory of the revolution.” (L. Trotsky: Article in “‘Przeglad Socjal-Demokratyczny”, cited in: L. Trotsky: “The Permanent Revolution”; New York; 1970; p. 235-36). However, Lenin pointed out that, under the guise of “non-factionalism,” Trotsky was, in fact, forming his own faction: “That Trotsky’s venture is an attempt to create a faction is obvious to all now.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia”, in: “Selected Works”; Volume 3; London; 1943; p.517). “We were right in referring to Trotsky as the representative of the ‘worst remnants of factionalism’…Although Trotsky professes to be non-factional, he is known to all who are in the slightest degree acquainted with the labour movement in Russia as the representative of “Trotsky’s faction” — there is factionalism here, for both the essential characteristics of it are present: 1) the nominal recognition of unity, and 2) group segregation in reality. This is a remnant of factionalism, for it is impossible to discover in it anything serious in the way of contacts with the mass labour movement in Russia. Finally it is the worst kind of factionalism, for there is nothing ideologically and politically definite about it.” (V.I. Lenin: “Violation of Unity under Cover of Cries for Unity”, in: “Selected Works”; Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 191, 192). Trotsky’s faction, declared Lenin, vacillated in theory from one of the major factions to the other: “Trotsky completely lacks a definite ideology and policy, for having the patent, for ‘non-factionalism’, only means . . having a patent granting complete freedom to flit from one faction to another.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 191-92). “Trotsky, on the other hand; represents only his own personal vacillations and nothing more. In l903 he was a Menshevik; he abandoned Menshevism in 1904, returned to the Mensheviks in 1905 and merely flaunted ultra-revolutionary phrases; in 1906 he left them again; at the end of 1906 he advocated elect-oral agreements with the Cadets (i.e., was virtually once more with the Mensheviks) ; and in the spring of 1907, at the London Congress, he said that he differed from Rosa Luxemburg on ‘individual shades of ideas rather than on political tendencies’. Trotsky one day plagiarises the ideological stock-in-trade of one faction; next day he plagiarises that of another, and therefore declares himself to be standing above both factions.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia in: ‘Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1946; p. 517). His “political line” asserted Lenin, is mere high flown demagogy, characterised by revolutionary phrases, designed to deceive the workers: “The Trotskys decieve the workers. Whoever supports Trotsky’s puny group supports a policy of lying and deceiving the workers. . . by ‘revolutionary’ phrase-mongering.” (V. I. Lenin: “From the Camp of the Stolypin ‘Labour’ Party”, in: “Collected Works”; Volume 17; Moscow; 1963; p. 243). “Empty exclamations, high-flown words. . and impressively important assurances — that is Trotsky’s total stock-in-trade.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Question of Unity”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; Moscow; 1963; p. 553) . “Trotsky is fond of sonorous and empty phrases. . . . Trotsky’s phrases are full of glitter and noise, but they lack content. . . . Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to Trotsky.” (V. I. Lenin: “Violation of Unity under Cover of Cries for Unity”, in: “”Selected Works”; Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 189,192, 194). This demagogy, asserted Lenin, is used to attempt to conceal the fact that in practice Trotsky’s faction supports, and has the confidence of the liquidator Mensheviks and the otzovists: “People like Trotsky, with his inflated phrases about the RSDLP and his toadying to the liquidators, ‘who have nothing in common’ with the RSDLP, today represents ‘the prevalent disease’. At this time of confusion, disintegration and wavering it is easy for Trotsky to become the ‘hero of the hour’ and gather all the shabby elements around himself. Actually they preach surrender to the liquidators who are building a Stolypin Labour Party.” (V. I. Lenin: Resolution Adopted By the Second Paris Group of the RSDLP on the State of Affairs in the party”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 17: Moscow; 1963; p. 216). “Trotsky and the ‘Trotskyites and conciliators’ like him are more pernicious than any liquidators; the convinced liquidators state their views bluntly, and it is easy for the workers to detect where they are wrong, whereas the Trotskys deceive the workers, cover up the evil. . . Whoever supports Trotsky’s puny group supports a policy. . of shielding the liquidators. Full freedom of action for Potresov and Co. in Russia, and the sheltering of their deeds by ‘revolutionary’ phrase-mongering abroad – — there you have the essence of the policy of ‘Trotskyism.’” (V. I. Lenin: “From the Camp of the Stolypin ‘Labour Party’”, in: ibid.; p. 243). “Trotsky’s particular task is to conceal liquidationism by throwing dust in the eyes of the workers. It is impossible to argue with Trotsky on the merits of the issue, because Trotsky holds no views whatever. We can and should argue with confirmed liquidators and otzovists; but it is no use arguing with a man whose game is to hide the errors of both trends; in his case the thing is to expose him as a diplomat of the smallest calibre.” (V. I. Lenin: “Trotsky’s Diplomacy and a Certain Party Platform”, in: ibid.; p. 362). “Trotsky follows in the wake of the Mensheviks and camouflages himself with particularly sonorous phrases. . . In theory Trotsky is in no respect in agreement with either the liquidators or the otzovists, but in actual practice he is in entire agreement with both the ‘Golos’-ites and the ‘Vperyod’-ists. . . Trotsky . . enjoys a certain amount of confidence exclusively among the otzovists and the liquidators.” (V. I. Lenin : “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle” in Russia, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1946; p. 499, 517). The Menshevik leader Yuli Martov endorsed Lenin’s estimate of Trotsky in a letter dated May 1912: “The logic of things compels Trotsky to follow the Menshevik road, despite all his reasoned pleas for some ‘synthesis’ between Menshevism and Bolshevism. … He has not only found himself in the camp of the ‘liquidators’, but he is compelled to take up there the most ‘pugnacious’ attitude towards Lenin.” (Y. Martov: Letter, May 1912, cited in: “Pisnia P. B. Axelroda i Y. 0. Martova”. (Letters of P. B.Axelrod and Y. 0. Martov); Berlin, 1924; p. 233). 1909: The Fifth Party Conference The Fifth Conference of the RSDLP was held in Paris in January 1909, attended by 18 delegates (6 Bolsheviks, I Mensheviks, 5 representatives of the Social-Democratic Party of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, and 3 representatives of the “Bund”). The conference adopted a Bolshevik resolution which defined liquidationism as: “…the attempts of a certain section of the Party intelligentsia to liquidate the existing organisation of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party and substitute for it an amorphous association within the limits of legality at all costs, even if this legality is to be attained at the price of an open renunciation of the programme, tactics and traditions of our Party.” (Resolution on Organisation, 5th. Conference of RSDLP, cited by V. I. Lenin. “Excerpts from the Resolutions of the Prague Conference of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party”; in: “Selected Works”; Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 151). and instructed the Party to wage a determined struggle against this deviation: “The All-Russian Conference of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party recognises that the following constitute the fundamental tasks of the Party at the present time: . . . 3) to strengthen the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party in the shape it assumed during the revolutionary period; . . to fight against deviations from revolutionary Marxism, against the curtailment of the slogans of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, and against the attempts to dissolve the illegal organisations of the RSDLP that are observed among certain Party elements, which have yielded to the influence of disintegration.” (V. I. Lenin: Draft Resolution on the Present Situation and the Tasks of the Party, in: ibid.; p. 15). The “Proletary” Conference In June 1909 the editorial board of the Bolshevik newspaper “Proletary” (The Proletarian) called a conference in Paris to which leading Bolsheviks were invited. Although called officially an “enlarged editorial conference” it was, in fact, a Bolshevik Conference. The conference adopted a-resolution to the effect that otzovism, ultimatumism, Machism and god-building were all incompatible with membership of the Bolshevik faction, and the adherents of these trends were declared to have placed themselves outside the faction: “At an official meeting of its representatives held as far back as the spring of 1909, the Bolshevik faction repudiated and expelled the otzovists.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 3; London; 1946; p. 517). The conference drew attention to the emergence of the “Party Mensheviks,” and declared: “Under such circumstances, the task of the Bolsheviks, who will remain the solid vanguard of the Party, is not only to continue the struggle against liquidationism and all the varieties of revisionism, but also to establish closer contact with the Marxian and Party elements of the other factions.” (V. I. Lenin: Resolution of the Meeting of the Enlarged Editorial Board of “Proletary” – on “The Tasks of the Bolsheviks in the Party”, in: ‘Selected Works,” Volume 4; London 1943; p. 23-24). The “Vperyod” Group From August to December 1909 a number of otzovists and god-builders who had been expelled from the Bolshevik faction at the enlarged meeting of the editorial board of in June, held a “school” on the island of Capri (Italy). The leading figures in the school were Grigori Alexinsky, Aleksandr Bogdanov and Anatoly Lunacharsky, with the participation of Maxim Gorky. In December 1909 a number of lecturers at the Capri school, together with a number of prominent Bolsheviks including Vyacheslav Menzhinsky, Dmitri Manuilsky and Mikhail Pokrovsky formed themselves into a new faction which they named “Vperyod” (Forward.) The name was selected because it was that of the paper published by the Bolshevik “Bureau of the Committees of the Majority” in 1904, in order to lend support to the group’s claim that its members were “true Bolsheviks” and that the Leninists were now “betraying Bolshevism.” As Lenin characterised the faction: “’Vperyod’ represents a non-Socialist-Democratic tendency (otzovism and Machism)” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous.””,Lenin “Selected Works”., Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 106). Analysing the programme put forward by the “Vperyod” group, Lenin criticised it for its deviations towards otzovism in the sphere of political tactics and towards reactionary idealism in the sphere of philosophy: “The platform of the “Vperyod” is permeated through and through by views which are incompatible with Party decisions. . . In actual fact otzovist tactical conclusions follow from the view adopted by the ‘vperyod’ platform. By putting forward in its platform the task of elaborating a so-called ‘proletarian philosophy’, ‘proletarian culture’, etc., the ‘Vperyod’ group in fact comes to the defence of the group of literati who are putting forward anti-Marxist views in this field. . . . By declaring otzovism a ‘legitimate shade of opinion’, the platform of the ‘Vperyod’ group shields and defends otzovism, which is doing great harm to the Party.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The ‘Vperyod’ Group”, in: “Collected Works”; Volume 16; Moscow; 1963; p.145-6). “Everyone knows that it is precisely Machism that is really implied by the term ‘’proletarian philosophy’. In fact, the most influential literary nucleus of the group is Machian, and it regards non-Machian philosophy as non-‘proletarian’….In reality, all the phrases about ‘proletarian culture’ are intended precisely to cloak the struggle against Marxism.“ (V.I. Lenin: “Notes of a Publicist”, in: ‘Selected Works’, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 35-6). In the winter of 1910-11 the ‘Vperyod’ group organised a second ‘school’ at Bologna (Italy), Here Trotsky acted as one of the lecturers, together with Yuli Martov and Aleksandra Kollontai. 1910: The January 1910 Central Committee Meeting In January 1910, against the opposition of Lenin who considered the circumstances inopportune, a meeting of the Central Commiittee of the RSDLP was held in Paris, attended by representatives of the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks, the “Party Mensheviks”, the Social-Democratic Party of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, the Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region, the “Vperyod” group, the Viennese group, and the “Bund’. Lenin’s opposition to the holding of the Central Committee at this time was due to his awareness that a number of Bolsheviks — including Alexel Rykov, Solomon Lozovsky, Lev Kamenev, and Grigori Sokolnikov, had adopted a concilationist position. Despite this, the Leninists were able to secure the unanimous adoption of a resolution which condemned both otzovism and liquidationism, although without specifically naming them. “The historical situation of the Social-Democratic movement in the period of the bourgeois counter-revolution inevitably gives rise, as a manifestation of the bourgeois influence over the proletariat, on the one hand to the renunciation of the illegal Social-Democratic Party, this debasement of its role and importance, the attempts to curtail the programme and tactical tasks and slogans of consistent Social-Democracy, etc.; on the other hand, it gives rise to the renunciation of the Duma work of Social-Democracy and of the utilisation of the legal possibilities, the failure to understand the importance of either, the inability to adapt the consistent Social-Democratic tactics to the peculiar historical conditions of the present moment, etc. An integral part of the Social-Democratic tactics under such conditions is the overcoming of both deviations by broadening and deepening the Social-Democratic work in all spheres of the class struggle of the proletariat and by explaining the danger of such deviations.” (Resolution of Plenum of Central Committee of the RSDLP, January 1910, cited by V. I. Lenin: “Controversial Questions”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 129). Lenin’s draft resolution used the phrase “fight on two fronts,” but this was altered by the meeting, on Trotsky’s motion, to the phrase “overcoming … by broadening and deepening”: “The draft of this resolution was submitted to the Central Committee by myself, and the clause in question was altered by the plenum itself . . on the motion of Trotsky, against whom I fought without success. . . . The words ‘overcoming by means of broadening and deepening’ were inserted on Trostsky’s motion. . . ‘ Nothing at the plenum aroused more furious – and often comical — indignation than the idea of a ‘struggle on two fronts’. . . . Trotsky’s motion to substituite ‘overcoming by means of broadening and deepening’ for the struggle on two fronts’ meet with the hearty support of the Mensheviks and the ‘Vperyod’-ists. . . . In reality this phrase expresses a vague desire, a pious innocent wish that there should be less internal strife among the Social-Democrats! . . it is a sigh of the so-called conciliators.” (V. I. Lenin: “Notes of a Publicist’, in: ibid.; p. 45, 47) Despite it’s dilution by the concilationists, Lenin considered this resolution as “especially important”: “This decision is especially important because it was carried unanimously: all the Bolsheviks, without exception, all the so-called ‘Vperyod’-ists, and finally (this is most important of all) all the Mensheviks and the present liquidators without exception, and also all the ‘national’ (i.e., Jewish, Polish and Lettish) Marxists endorsed this decision.” (V. I. Lenin: “Controversial Questions “, in: ibid.; p. 128-9). However, the conciliationists managed to secure the adoption of a number of other resolutions at the Central Committee meeting: 1) to dissolve all factional groups; 2) to discontinue the Bolshevik paper “Proletary” and the Menshevik paper “Golos Sotsial-Demokrata”; 3) to grant Trotsky’s Viennese “Pravda”‘ a subsidy from Party funds and to delegate a representative of the Central Committee to sit as co-editor along with Trotsky; 4) to set up an editorial board for the Party’s central organ, “Sotsial-Demokrat” (The Social-Democrat) consisting of two Bolsheviks (Lenin and Zinoviev), two Mensheviks (Martov and Dan, and one representative of the Polish Party (Waraki); 5) to initiate a “Discussion Sheet” in conjunction with the central organ, open to representatives of trends which differed from the line of the Party; 6) to establish the seat of the Central Committee in Russia; 7) to transfer all funds in the possession of factional centres to the general Party treasury. So far as the last point was concerned, the Bolsheviks transferred their funds to three trustees – the leaders of the Social-Democratic Party of Germany, Karl Kautsky, Franz Mehring and Clara Zetkin — until it could be shown that the other factions had carried out the decisions adopted at the Central Committee meeting. The Leninists characterised this series of decisions as a conciliationist error, since it secured the dissolution of the Bolshevik faction in return for a worthless verbal promise from the other factions. “Both the ideological merit of the plenum and its conciliationist error become clear. Its merit lies in its rejection of the ideas of liquidationism and otzovism; its mistake lies in indiscriminately concluding an agreement with persons and groups whose deeds do not correspond to their promises ( ‘they signed the resolution’).” (V. I. Lenin: “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in: ibid.; p. 101). “The conciliators recognised all and sundry tendencies on ‘their mere promise to purge themselves, instead of recognising only those tendencies which are purging themselves (and only in so far as they do purge themselves) of their “ulcers”. The ‘Vperyod’-ists, the ‘Golos’ ites and Trotsky all ‘signed’ the resolution against otzovism and liquidationism — that is, they promised to ‘purge themselves’ — and that was the end of it! The conciliators ‘believed’ the promise and entangled the Party with non-Party grouplets, ‘ulcerous’ as they themselves admitted.” (V. I.. Lenin: ‘The Climax of the Party Crisis’ in. ibid; p. 115). The Violation of the CC Decisions The Bolsheviks dissolved their factional organisation and wound up their factional Paper ‘Proletary’ (The Proletarian), in accordance with the decisions of the January 1910 meeting of the Central Committee. The Mensheviks, however, declined to dissolve their factional organisation, their factional paper “Golos Sotsial-Demokrata’ (The Voice of the Social-Democrat) or to break with liquidationism. In fact, they began to publish in St. Petersburg a new legal monthly magazine called “Nasha Zarya” (Our Dawn) (which continued to appear until 1914) and continued to publish in Moscow their legal journal “Vozrozhdeniye” (Regeneration). And in August 1910 the Mensheviks began to issue in Moscow the magazine “Zhizn”(Life) (which, appeared until September 1910), while in January 1911 they began to issue in St. Petersburg the legal magazine “Dyelo Zhizni” (Life’s Cause) (which appeared until October 1941). In all these publications, as well as in “Golos Sotsial-Deniokrata”; which continued to appear regularly, the Mensheviks continued to put forward openly liquidationist views: “A party in the form of a complete and organised hierarchy of institutions does not exist” (P. Potresov: Article in “Nasha Zarys”, No. 2, February 1910, p. 61, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Notes Of a Publicist”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; l943; p. 53). “There is nothing to wind up and — we on our part would add — the dream of re-establishing this hierarchy in its old underground form is simply a harmful reactionary utopia.” (Editorial in “Vozrozhdeniye”, No. 5, April 12th., 1910, p. 51, cited in V.I.Lenin: ibid.; p. 53). “The tactics which are to be observed in the activities of the so-called ‘liquidators’ are the ‘tactics’ which put the open labour movement in the centre, strive to extend it in every possible direction, and seek within this open labour movement and there only the elements for the revival of the party.” (Y.Martov: “Article in “Zhizn”, No. 1, September 12th., 1910, p. 9-l0; cited in: V. I. Lenin: ‘The Social Structure of State Power, the Prospects and Liquidationism”; in:ibid.; p. 84). “In the new historical period of Russian life that has set in, the working class must organise itself not ‘for revolution’, not ‘in expectation of a revolution’, but simply for the determined and systematic defence of its special interests in all spheres of life; for the gathering and training of its forces for this many-sided and complex activity; for the training and accumulation in this way of socialist consciousness in general; for acquiring the ability to find one’s bearings — to stand up for oneself.” (Y. Larin: “Right Turn and About Turn!”, in: “Dyelo Zhizni”, No. 2, p..18, cited in: V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 90). “Great political tasks make inevitable a relentless war against anti- liquidationism …. Anti-liquidationism is a constant brake, constant disruption.” (F. Dan: “Article in “Nasha Zarya”, No. 6, 1911, cited by: J. V. Stalin: “The Situation in the Social-Democratic Group in the Duma “, in: “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 385). In various articles from June 1910 onwards, Lenin drew attention to the fact that the liquidator Menshviks had failed to carry out the decisions of the January 1910 Central Committee meeting: “During that year (1910), the ‘Golos’-ites, the ‘Vperyod’-ists, and Trotsky, all in fact, estranged themselves from the Party and moved precisely in the direction of liquidationism and otzovism-ultimatumism.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Climax of the Party Crisis”, in: ibid; p. 116). “Since that very plenum of 1910, the above-mentioned principal publications of the liquidators. . have turned decidedly and along the whole line towards liquidationism, not only by ‘belittling’ (in spite of the decisions of the plenum) ‘the importance of the illegal Party’; but directly renouncing the Party, calling it a ‘corpse’, declaring the Party to be already dissolved, describing the restoration of an illegal Party as a ‘reactionary Utopia’, heaping calumny and abuse on the illegal Party in the pages of the legal magazines.” (V. I. Lenin: Resolution on Liquidationism and the Group of Liquidators, Sixth Conference of the RSDLP, in: Ibid.; p. 152) “All the liquidationist newspapers and magazines….. after the most definite and even-unanimous decisions have been adopted by the Party, reiterate thoughts and arguments that contain obvious liquidationism… The truth proved by the documents I have quoted, which cover a period of more than five years (1908-13), is that the liquidators, mocking all the Party decisions, continue to abuse and bait the Party, i.e., ‘illegal work.'” (V.I. Lenin: “Controversial Questions”, in:. ibid.; p. 133-4). The ‘Vperyod’-ists, on the other hand, continued to support toleration of otzovism within the Party: “‘Vperyod’, No. 3 (May 1911) . . openly states that otzovism is a ‘completely legitimate tendency within our Party’ (p. 78).” (V.I. Lenin: ‘The New Faction of Conciliators Or the Virtuous’, in; ibid.; p. 107). In September 1910, Trotsky expelled Lev Kamenev, the officica representative of the Central Committee of the Party, from the editorial board of ‘Pravda’ denouncing: “The conspiracy of the emigre clique (i.e., the Bolsheviks — Ed.) against the Russian Social-Democratic Labour party”; (L. Trotsky: “Pravda’, No. 21, 1910), and adding threateningly: “Lenin’s circle, which wants to place itself above the Party, will find itself outside it’. (L. Trotsky: ibid). Lenin declared that Trotsky’s expulsion of the CC representative from the editorial board of “Pravda” confirmed the already expressed view of the Bolsheviks that, under the guise of “non-factionalism,” Trotsky was, in fact, endeavouring to form a faction: “That Trotsky’s venture is an attempt to create a faction is obvious to all now, after obvious to all now, after Trotsky has removed the representative of the Central Committee from ‘Pravda.’” (V. I. Lenin: “The Historical Meaning of the Internal Party Struggle in Russia”: In ‘Selected Works’; Volume 3; London; 19~6; p. 517). The fact that Trotsky’s professed desire for unity of the factions concealed his support in practice for the Menshevik liquidators and otzovists is shown by his failure to condemn these factions for their repudiation of the conciliationist decisions to which all actions had agreed at the January 1910 meeting Central Committee. “This was the occasion on which Trotsky, the champion of unity, should have spared the offenders against unity no censure. Yet in ‘Pravda’ he ‘suspended judgement’ and only mildly hinted at his disapproval of the Mensheviks’ conduct.. . . Trotsky took his stand against the disciplinarians. Having done so, he involved himself in glaring inconsistencies. He, the fighter for unity, connived in the name of freedom of dissent at the new breach in the Party brought about by the Mensheviks. He, who glorified the underground with zeal worthy of a Bolshevik; joined hands with those who longed to rid themselves of the underground as a dangerous embarrassment. Finally, the sworn enemy of bourgeois liberalism allied himself with those who stood for an alliance with liberalism against those who were fanatically opposed to such an alliance. . . . So self-contradictory an attitude brought him nothing but frustration. Once again to the Bolsheviks he appeared not just an opponent, but a treacherous enemy. . . Martov made him turn a blind eye more than once on Menshevik moves which were repugnant to him. His long and bitter quarrel with Lenin made him seize captiously on every vulnerable detail of Bolshevik policy. His disapproval of Leninism he expressed publicly with the usual wounding sarcasm. His annoyance with the Mensheviks he vented mostly in private arguments or in ‘querulous’ letters.” (I. Deutscher: “The Prophet Armed: Trotsky: 1879-1921”; London; 1970; p.. 195, 196). Lenin expressed, himself more forthrightly on Trotsky’s attitude in an article entitled “Judas Trotsky’s Blush of Shame”: “At the Plenary Meeting Judas Trotsky made a big show of fighting liquidationism and otzovism. He vowed and swore that he was true to the Party. He was given a subsidy. . . Judas expelled the representative of the Central Committee from ‘Pravda’ and began to write liquidationist articles in ‘Vorwarts’. In defiance of the direct decision of the School Commission appointed by the Plenary Meeting to the effect that no Party lecturer may go to the ‘Vperyod’ factional school, Judas Trotsky did go and discussed a plan for a conference with the ‘Vperyod’ group. . . Such is Judas Trotsky’s blush of shame.” (V. I. Lenin: “Judas Trotsky’s Blush of Shame”; in: “Collected Works”; Volume 17; Moscow; 1963; p.45) . The liquidator Menshevik members of the Central Committee, now based in Russia by the decision of the January 1910 meeting of the Central Committee and so compelled to function illegally, refused to attend the CC on the grounds that all illegal organisations were “objectionable” and “harmful.” The conciliationist members of the Central Committee refused to agree to meetings of the Central Committee without the liquidator Mensheviks, on the grounds that such meetings would be “unrepresentative.” “And what about the work in Russia? Not a single meeting of the Central Committee was held during the whole year! Why? Because the members of the Central Committee in Russia (conciliators who well deserved the kisses of ‘Golos Likvidatorov’) kept on ‘inviting’ the liquidators for a year and a quarter but never got them to ‘accept the invitation.’” (V. I. Lenin: “The Climax of the Party Crisis”, in: Ibid.; p.116). The result was that for a considerable period after the January 1910 meeting of the Central Committee, all practical Party work was carried out by the Bolsheviks and the Party Mensheviks,” the latter led by Georgi Plekhanov. “All Party work .. during the whole of that year (i.e., 1910 — Ed.) was done by the Bolsheviks and the Plekhanovists. . . This Party work (in literature, which was accessible to all) was conducted by the Bolsheviks and the Plekhanovists in spite…of the ‘conciliatory’ resolutions and the collegiums formed by the plenum, and not in conjunction with the ‘Golos’-ites and the ‘Vperyod’-ists, but against them (because it was impossible to work in conjunction with the liquidators and otozovists-ultimatumists).” 1910-1911: The Bolsheviks Re-form their Faction Considering in September 1910 that the repudiation of the January 1910 Central Committee decisions had been sufficiently demonstrated; in this month the Bolsheviks funded their own factional newspaper “Rabochaya Gazeta”‘ (Worker’s Newspaper), published in Paris under the editorship of Lenin. The Sixth Party Conference in January 1912, transformed this paper into the official organ of the Party’s Central Committee, and it continued to appear until August 1912. “The first factional step the Bolsheviks took was to found “Rabochaya Gazeta” in September 1910.” (V. I. Lenin. “The New Faction of Conciliators or the Virtuous”, in “Selected Works” Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 102). In December 1910 the Bolsheviks announced formally that they considered themselves released from all the obligations imposed by the January 1910 Central Committee meeting since its decisions had been consistently flouted by the liquidator Mensheviks. “By their ‘declaration’ of December 18, 1910, the Bolsheviks openly and formally declared that they cancelled the agreement with all the other factions. The violation of the ‘peace’ made at the plenum, its violation by ‘Golos’, ‘Vperyod’ and Trotsky, had become a fully recognised fact.” (V.I. Lenin: “The Climax of the Party Crisis”, in ibid.; p.117.) In the same month, December 1910, the Bolsheviks began publication in Russia of’ the legal newspaper “Zvezda” (The Star) – published at first weekly and then two or three times a week, in St. Petersburg until its suppression by the tsarist government in April 1912. “Zvedzda”, was succeeded by “Nevskaya Zvezda” (The Neva Star) , until this too was suppressed in October 1912. They also began to issue the legal magazine “Mysl” (Thought), published monthly in Moscow until April 1911. In May 1911 the Bolsheviks broke off relations with the Central Corrinittee Bureau Abroad, which was dominated by liquidator Mensheviks. “For a year and a half, from January 1910 to June 1911, when they had a majority in the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee and faithful ‘friends’ in the persons of the conciliators in the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee, they did nothing, absolutely nothing to further the work in Russia!” (V. I. Lenin: ‘The Climax of the Party Crisis”, in: ibid.; p. 121). “The rupture between the Bolsheviks . . . and the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee is a correction of the conciliationist mistake of the plenum. The rapprochement of the factions which are actually fighting against liquidationism end otzovism will now proceed despite the forms decided on by the plenum, for these forms did not correspond to the content.” 1911: The June 1911 Meeting of CC Members Living Abroad In June 1911, on the initiative of Lenin, a meeting of Central Committee members living- abroad was held in Paris, attended by representatives of the Bolsheviks, the “Party Mensheviks” the Social-Democratic Party of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, and the Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region. The meeting set up an Organising Commission Abroad, charged with the calling of an All-Russian Conference. This, in turn, set up a Technical Comminion Abroad, to deal with technical questions such as publishing, transport, etc. From its inception the Organising Commission Abroad had a majority of conciliationist members and, to avoid bringing about a break with the liquidator Mensheviks, it did not proceed with the work of calling a conference. In November 1911 therefore, the Bolshevik members withdrew from it. The Russian Organising Commission In July 1911 the Bolshevik member of the Central Committee in Paris sent Grigori Ordzhonikidze to Russia to work there for the calling of a Party Conference. As a result of Ordzhonikidze’s activity, a meeting of representatives of local Party organisations set up in November 1911 a ‘Russian Organising Commission” charged with making all arrangements for convening of a Party Conference. This commission, composed of Bolsheviks and “Party Mensheviks,” made arrangements for the convening of the Sixth Party Conference in Prague in January 1912. “By November l4, the Russian Organisation Committee was formed. In reality, it was created by the Bolsheviks and by the Party Mensheviks in Russia. ‘The alliance of the two strong factions’ (strong in their ideological solidarity and in their work of purging ‘ulcers’) became a fact.” (V.I. Lenin: “The Climax of the Party Crisis”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943, p. 118) In December 1911 the Bolsheviks began publication in St. Petersburg of a legal monthly magazine “Prosveshceniye” (Enlightenment) to succeed “Mysl,” suppressed by the Tsarist government. This in turn was suppressed by the tsarist government in June l914, but a double number appeared in the autumn of 1917. In the same month, December 1911, a meeting of Bolshevik groups abroad took place in Paris, with the aim of unifying the Bolshevik groups abroad for the forthcoming Party conference. It was attended by 11 voting delegates, under the leadership of Lenin. 1912: The Sixth Conference of the RSDLP To remedy the intolerable situation created by Menshevik domination of the Central Committee, which refused either to be active or to convoke a congress, a conference of the Party was convened in January 1912 on the initiative of the Bolsheviks – the Sixth Conference of the RSDLP. More than twenty organisations of the Party were represented at the conference, including those of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev, Ekaterinoslav, Nicolayev, Saratov, Kazan, Vilna, Dvinsk, Tiflis and Baku. The Mensheviks refused to attend – except for a small group of “Party Mensheviks.” The conference elected a Bolshevik Central Committee, headed by Lenin, and this in turn set up a new Russian Bureau of the Central Committee, headed by Stalin, to direct the practical work of the Party within Russia. A resolution drafted by Lenin and adopted by the conference reviewed the anti-Party activities of the liquidator Mensheviks, who were grouped around the magazines “Nasha Zarya” (Cur Dawn) and “Dyelo Zhizni” (Life’s Cause), and declared them to be now “outside the Party”: “The Conference declares that the group represented by ‘Nasha Zarya’ and ‘Dyelo Zhizni’ has by its behaviour, definitely placed itself outside the Party‘. (V. I. Lenin: Resolution on Liquidationism and the Group of Liquidators, Sixth Conference RSDLP, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 152). The Bolsheviks regarded the Sixth Party Conference as of great significance since, by the expulsion of the liquidator Mensheviks, it created for the first time a truly united Party based on Leninist principles: “The conference was of the utmost importance in the history of our Party, for it drew a boundary line between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks and amalgamated the Bolshevik organisations all over the country into a united Bolshevik Party.” (J. V. Stalin: Report to the 15th. Congress of the CPSU (B.), cited in: “History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)”. Moscow; 1941; p. 142). The Bolshevik “Pravda” (Truth) The liquidator Mensheviks and the group around Trotsky’s “Pravda” (Truth) refused to recognise the Sixth Party Conference as “legitimate”: “Neither the liquidators nor the numerous groups living abroad (those of…Trotsky and others)…recognised our January 1912 conference”. (V. I. Lenin: “Socialism and War”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 255). Trotsky, in particular, denounced the Conference virulently in the pages of “Pravda” (e.g., “Pravda” No. 24, 1912) and anonymously in the pages of “Vorwarts”. His anger was intensified when, on May 5th., 1912, the Bolsheviks began publication in St. Petersburg of a daily newspaper under the name of “Pravda”, edited by Stalin; Trotsky thundered against the “theft” of “his” paper’s name by the: “The circle whose interests are in conflict with vital needs of the Party, the circle which lives and thrives only through chaos and confusion”. (“Pravda”, No. 25; 1912), and demanded that the Bolshevik paper change its name, concluding threateningly: “We wait quietly for an answer before we undertake further steps.'” (Ibid.) Lenin wrote to the editorial board of the Bolshevik “Pravda”: “I advise you to reply to Trotsky through the post: “To Trotsky (Vienna)…We shall not reply to disruptive and slanderous letters”; Trotsky’s dirty campaign against ‘Pravda’ is one mass of lies and slander..” (V. I. Lenin: “Letter to the Editor of Pravda”, July 19th., 1912, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p. 41), and Stalin commented dryly that Trotsky was merely: “. . .a vociferous champion with fake muscles.” (J. V. Stalin: “The Elections in St. Petersburg”, in: “works”; Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 288). “The Organisation Committee” From the autumn of 1910 Trotsky began preparations to try to unite all the anti-Bolshevik elements associated with the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party into a single bloc which, by calling a conference in the name of the Party, might usurp the name and machinery of the Party. As Lenin put it: “Trotsky groups all the enemies of Marxism. Trotsky unites all to whom ideological decay is dear; . . . all philistines who do not understand the reasons for the struggle and who do not wish to learn, think and discover the ideological roots of the divergence of views.” (V. I Lenin: Letter to the Russian Collegium of the Central Committee of the RSDLP, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 17; 1963; p. 21). In November 1910 Trotsky secured the passage through the Vienna Club of the Russian Social-Democratic Party of a resolution setting up a fund for the purpose of convening such a conference. Lenin commented: “On the 26th November, 1910, Trotsky carried through a resolution in the so called Vienna Party Club (a circle of Trotskyites, exiles who are pawns in the hands of Trotsky) . . . . Trotsky’s attacks on the bloc of Bolsheviks and Plekhanov’s group are not new; what is new is the outcome of his resolution; the Vienna Club (read ‘Trotsky’) has organised a ‘general Party fund for the purpose of preparing and convening a conference of the RSDLP’. This . . is a clear violation of Party legality and the start of an adventure in which Trotsky will come to grief.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid; p. 19, 20) “Trotsky’s resolution.. . expresses the very aim of the ‘Golos’ group — to destroy the central bodies so detested by the liquidators, and with them, the Party as an organisation. It is not enough to lay bare the anti-Party activities of ‘Golos’ and Trotsky; they must be fought.” (V. I. Lenin: “The State of Affairs in the Party”, in: ibid.; p. 23). In March 1912 Trotsky attempted to take advantage of the expulsion of the liquidator Mensheviks from the Party by calling a preliminary conference in Paris, attended by delegates of the various organisations (some purely fictitious) the leaderships of which were opposed to the Bolsheviks: the Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region, the “Caucasian Regional Committee” of the RSDLP, the Bund, the Menshevik group around the newspaper “Golos Sotsial-Demokrata” (The Voice of the Social-Democrat), the “Vperyod” (Forward) Group, and the group around Trotsky’s Viennese “Pravda.” The meeting denounced the Sixth Party Conference, and the Central Committee elected by it, as “illegitimate”: “The conference declared that the conference (i.e., the Sixth Party Conference of the RSDLP — Ed) is an open attempt of a group of persons, who have quite deliberately led the Party to a split, to usurp the Party’s flag, and it expresses its profound regret that several Party organisations and comrades have fallen victims to this deception and have thereby facilitated the splitting and usurpatory policy of Lenin’s sect. The conference expresses its conviction that all the Party organisations in Russia and abroad will protest against the coup d’etat that has been brought about, will refuse to recognise the central bodies elected at that conference, and will by every means help to restore the unity of the Party by the convocation of a genuine all-Party conference.” (Resolution of March 1912 Paris conference in: “Vorwarts”; (Forward), March 26th., 1912). The conference set up an “Organisation Committee” with the official aim of convening a “legitimate Party Conference.” Lenin pointed out that Trotsky’s role’ in the projected anti-Bolshevik bloc was to screen the liquidator Mensheviks with “left”demagogic phrases: “The basis of this bloc is bloc is obvious: the liquidators enjoy full freedom to pursue their line . . ‘as before’, while Trotsky, operating abroad, screens them with r-r-revolutionary phrases, which cost him nothing and do not bind them in any way.” (V. I. Lenin: “‘The Liquidators against the Party”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; Moscow; 1963; p. 24). The Revolutionary Revival During the first half of 1912 the revolutionary movement in Russia began to revive. In April 1912; during a strike in the Lena goldfields in Siberia, more than 500 workers were killed or wounded by tsarist police. The workers replied with mass strikes and demonstrations, which reached their highest point on May Day. The “August Bloc” In August 1912 the anti-Bolshevik conference, to prepare which the “Organisation Committee” had been set up in March, took place in Vienna under the leadership of Trotsky, Martov and Dan. The organisations represented at the conferences — organisations which together formed what the Party called the “August Bloc” were: 1) liquidator Mensheviks grouped around the paper -“Golos Sotsial-Demokrata”; 2) The liquidator Menshevik group around “Nevsky Golos”(The Voice of the Neva), a legal newspaper published in St. Petersburg from May to August 1912; 3) The “Caucasian Regional Committee of the Social-Democratic Labour Party.” (described by Lenin as a fictitious body), a group of Mensheviks from the Caucusus headed by Noah Jordania); 4) The Ukrainian social-democratic organisation ‘Spillka”; 5) The seven Menshevik Duma deputies; 6) The “Vperyod” group; 7) The Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region; and 8) The group around Trotsky’s Viennese “Pravda.” Representatives of the Polish Socialist Party (not the Polish Social-Democratic Party) and of the Lithuanian Social-Democratic Party attended as observers. The “Vperyod” group withdrew from the conference on its first day, and a “Bolshevik” who attended from Moscow was subsequently exposed as a police agent. The conference adopted a resolution calling for the adaptation of the Party organisation to the “new forms and methods of the open Labour Movement’. It adopted a new programme virtually in line with that of the liberal capitalists in order to make it acceptable to the tsarist government and enable the new party which was planned to emerge from the conference to function legally. It also adopted a resolution on “national-cultural autonomy” in violation of the national programme of the RSDLP (to be discussed in the next section). The “Organisation Committee” continued in existence. Seventeen years later Trotsky commented critically on his role in initiating the formation of the “August Bloc”; “In 1912, when the political curve in Russia took an unmistakable upward turn, I made an attempt to call a union conference of representatives of all the Social-Democratic factions. . . Lenin, however, came out with all his force against union. The entire course of events that followed proved conclusively that Lenin was right. The conference met in Vienna in August 1912, without the Bolsheviks, and I found myself formally in a ‘bloc’ with the Mensheviks and a few disparate groups of Bolshevik dissenters. This ‘bloc’ had no common political basis.” (L. Trotsky: “My Life”; New York; 1970; p. 224-5). “Cultural-national Autonomy” The policy of “cultural-national autonomy” is based on the erroneous theory that nations are composed of individuals of a particular nationality, irrespective of the territory they inhabit. On the basis of this theory, the proponents of “cultural-national autonomy” propose that within a particular state there should be “separate bodies” with jurisdiction over the cultural affairs of each “nation,” bodies elected by individual persons of each nationality represented within the frontiers of the state concerned. In 1899, under the influence of Otto Bauer and Karl Renner, “cultural-national autonomy” had been included in the programme of the Austrian Social-Democratic Party: “What then is the national programme of the Austrian Social-Democrats? It is expressed in two words: cultural-national autonomy. This means, firstly, that -autonomy would be granted, let us say, not to Bohemia or Poland, which are inhabited mainly by Czechs and Poles, but to Czechs and Poles generally, . . no matter what part of Austria they inhabit. That is why this autonomy is called national and not territorial. It means, secondly, that the Czechs, Poles, Germans, and so on, scattered over the various parts of Austria, taken personally, as individuals, are to be organised into integral nations, and are as such to form part of the Austrian state. In this way Austria would represent not a union of autonomous regions, but a union of autonomous nationalities, constituted irrespective of territory. It means, thirdly, that the national institutions which are to be created for this purpose for the Poles, Czechs, and so forth, are to have jurisdiction only over ‘cultural’ not ‘political’ questions. Specifically political questions would be reserved for the Austrian parliament (the Reichsrat). That is why this autonomy is also called cultural, cultural-national autonomy.” (J. V. Stalin: “Marxism and the National Question”, in: “Works”; Volume 2; Moscow; 1953 p. 331-2). Lenin and Stalin strongly opposed the definition of a “nation” put forward by the “cultural-national autonomists” as well as their political proposals: “’Cultural-national autonomy implies precisely the most refined and, therefore, the most harmful nationalism, it implies the corruption of the workers by means of the slogan of national culture and the propaganda of the profoundly harmful and even ‘anti-democratic’ segregating of the schools according to nationality. In short, this programme undoubtedly contradicts the internationalism of the proletariat and is in accordance only with the ideals of the nationalist petty bourgeoisie.” (V. I. Lenin: “The National Programme of the RSDLP”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 19; Moscow; 1963; p. 541). “‘cultural-national autonomy’ . . aims at introducing the most refined, most absolute and most extreme nationalism. . Consolidating nationalism within a certain ‘justly’ delimited sphere, ‘constitutionalising’ nationalism, and securing the separation of all nations from one another by means of a special state institution — such is the ideological foundation and content of cultural-national autonomy. This idea is thoroughly bourgeois and thoroughly false. The proletariat cannot support any consecration of nationalism; on the contrary, it supports everything that helps to obliterate national distinctions and remove national barriers; it supports everything that makes the ties between nationalities closer and closer. . To act differently means siding with reactionary nationalism.'” (V. I. Lenin: “Critical Notes on the National Question” in: “Questions of National Policy and Proletarian Internationalism”; Moscow; 1967; P. 26,. 28) “The idea of national autonomy creates the psychological conditions for the division of the united workers’ party into separate parties built on national lines. The break-up of the party is followed by the breakup of the trade unions, and complete segregation is the result. In this way the united class movement is broken up into separate national rivulets.” (J.V. Stalin: “Marxism and the National Question”; In: “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 342-3). At its Fourth Congress in 1901, the General Jewish Labour League of Lithuania, Poland and Russia (known as the “Bund”) had adopted a resolution declaring the Jewish people to be a “nation” and demanding “national autonomy” for the Jewish people within the Russian state. As Stalin pointed out, the autonomy demanded by the Bund could only be cultural-national autonomy: “The Bund could seize upon any autonomy at all, it could only be … cultural-national autonomy; there could be no question of territorial–political autonomy for the Jews, since the Jews have no definite integral territory.” (J. V. Stalin: “Marxism and the National Question”, in: “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 347). At the Second Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (to which the Bund was affiliated) in July/August 1903, the Bund had proposed that the Party’s Programme should include the demand for “cultural-national autonomy.” The proposal was rejected, only three votes being cast in its favour, and the Bund withdrew from the congress and (until 1906) from the Party. The conference of the anti-Bolshevik “August Bloc” in August 1912 adopted a resolution on this question which declared: “The Caucasian comrades expressed the opinion that it is necessary to demand national-cultural autonomy. This conference, while expressing no opinion on the merits of this demand, declares that such an interpretation . . . does not contradict the precise meaning of the programme.” (Resolution on National-Cultural Autonomy, “August Conference”, cited in: J. V. Stalin: “Works,” Volume 2; Moscow; 1953; p. 295). Stalin commented on this resolution: “It was not only the laws of logic that were violated by the conference of the Liquidators. By sanctioning cultural national autonomy it also violated its duty to Russian Social-Democracy. It most definitely did violate ‘the precise meaning’ of the programme, for it is well known that the Second Congress; which adopted the programme, emphatically repudiated cultural-national autonomy”. (V. I. Lenin: “Marxism and the National Question,” in: “Works”, Volume 2; Moscow; 1953;- p. 370). It was this controversy on cultural-national autonomy which stimulated Stalin to write, in Vienna in 1913, the classic Marxist work on the national question, “Marxism and the National Question,” published in March-May 1913. Lenin approved heartily of Stalin’s work: “As regards nationalism, . . we have a marvellous Georgian who has sat down to write a big article for ‘Prosveshcheniye’, for which he has collected all the Austrian and other material.” (V.I. Lenin: Letter to Maxim Gorky, February 1913, in: “Collected Works”; Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p. 84). “This situation and the fundamentals of a national programme for Social-Democracy have recently been dealt with in Marxist theoretical literature (the most prominent place being taken by Stalin’s article).” (V. I. Lenin: “The National Programme of the RSDLP”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 19; Moscow; 1963; p. 539) . “Europeanisation” The campaign of the liquidator Mensheviks for a legally tolerated “open labour party” was associated with the concept that the “backward” Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party should “Europeanised” i.e. transformed into a social-democratic party of the type existing in Western Europe, where capitalist “democracy” had long been established and, furthermore, where the domination of opportunist trends was already clearly discernible. Trotsky played an important role in this campaign for the “Europeanisation” of the Russian Party: “The vaunted ‘Europeanisation’ . . .is being talked about in every possible tone by Dan and Martov and Trotsky and all the liquidators. It is one of the main points of their opportunism. . . The liquidators play at ‘European Social-Democracy’, although — in the country where they amuse themselves with their game — there is as yet no constitution, as yet no basis for ‘Europeanism’’, and a revolutionary struggle has yet to be waged for them . . The liquidators describe as ‘Europeanism’ the conditions in which the Social-Democrats have been active in the principal countries of Europe since 1871, i.e., precisely at the time when the whole historical period of bourgeois revolutions was over and when the foundations of political liberty had taken firm shape for a long time to come. Opportunist intellectuals transplant the slogans of such ‘European’ campaigns to a soil lacking the most elementary foundations of European Constitutionalism, in an attempt to bypass the specific historical evolution which usually precedes the laying of these foundations.” (V. I. Lenin: “How P. B. Axelrod Exposes the Liquidators”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 18; Moscow; 1963; p. l83-4; 185; 186). 1912-1913: Trotsky in the Balkans Within a few weeks of the founding conference, it was clear to Trotsky that the “August Bloc” had already been proved abortive. He says in his autobiography, referring to September 1912: “The August conference had already proved to be abortive”; (L. Trotsky: “My Life”; New York; 1970; p. 226.) In this month he was offered the post of Balkan correspondent to the newspaper “Kievskaya Mysl” (Kievan Thought), and he left Vienna in October, just as there began the First Balkan War (October-December 1912) between Turkey on the one hand and Serbia, Greece, Montenegro and Bulgaria on the other. This was continued as the Second Balkan War (January-May 1913). The Viennese “Pravda” ceased publication in December 1912. Trotsky returned briefly to Vienna at the beginning of 1913, and then returned to the Balkans to cover the Third Balkan War (June-August 1913) between Serbia and Greece on the one hand and Bulgaria on the other. The 1912 Duma Elections In July 1912 the Third State Duma was formally dissolved, and the elections for the Fourth State Duma took place in the autumn. The Bolsheviks and the Menshevik dominated “August Bloc” put forward rival candidates for the Duma. The Bolshevik candidates went to the working people on a revolutionary platform: “The Social-Democratic Party needs a platform for the elections to the Fourth Duma in order once more to explain to the masses . . the need for, the urgency, the inevitability of the revolution… The Social-Democratic Party wishes to utilise the elections in order, over and over again, to stimulate the masses to see the need for revolution; to see precisely the revolutionary revival which has begun. Therefore the Social-Democratic Party, in its platform, says briefly and plainly to the electors to the Fourth Duma: not constitutional reforms, but a republic, not reformism, but revolution.” (V. I. Lenin: “The Platform of the Reformists and the Platform of the Revolutionary Social-Democrats”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 184-5). The “August Bloc,” on the other hand, put forward a platform based on the demand for democratic reforms, falsely implying that these could be obtained without revolution through mass pressure of the working people upon the tsarist regime: “Look at the platform of the liquidators. Its liquidationist essence is artfully concealed by Trotsky’s revolutionary phrases. Our answer is – criticism of the utopia of constitutional reforms, explanation of the falsity of hopes placed in them, all possible assistance to the revolutionary upsurge, utilisation of the election campaign for that purpose. . . They, the liquidators, need a platform ‘for’ the elections, i.e., in order politely to push back the consideration of’ a revolution as an indefinite contingency and to declare as ‘real’ the election campaign for a list of constitutional reforms. . . The liquidators are using the elections to the Fourth Duma in order to preach constitutional reforms and to weaken the idea of revolution.” (V.I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 180, 184, 185). Of the nine deputies elected from the workers’ curiae, six were Bolsheviks; they were elected from the larger industrial centres, where four-fifths of the working class was concentrated. Seven liquidator Mensheviks were elected, the majority from non-working class curiae. These deputies — the Bolshevik “Six” and the Menshevik “Seven” — at first formed a single “Social-Democratic” fraction in the Duma, which opened in November 1912. The fraction elected Nikolai Chkheidze, the Georgian Menshevik leader, as its Chairman. The “Vperyod” Group Cooperate with the Bolsheviks In November 1912 the “Vperyod” group severed their connection with the “August Bloc” and offered their cooperation to the Bolsheviks. Lenin accepted the offer of cooperation gladly – but dubiously: “I am ready to share with all my heart in your joy at the return of the ‘Vperyod’ group, if . . if your supposition is justified that ‘Machism, god-building and all that nonsense has been dumped for ever’, as you write. . . I underline -‘if’ because this, so far, is still a hope rather than a fact. . . . I don’t know whether Bogdanov, Bazanov, Volsky (a semi-anarchist), Lunacharsky, Alexinsky, are capable of learning from the painful experience of 1908-11. Have they learned that Marxism is a more serious and more profound thing than it seemed to them, that one cannot scoff at it. . If they have understood this — a –thousand greetings to them. . . But if they haven’t understood it, then . against attempts to abuse Marxism or to confuse the policy of the workers’ party we shall fight without sparing our lives.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Maxim Gorky, January 1913, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p. 70, 71). 1913: The January 1913 Conference In January 1913 a conference of the Central Committee of the RSDLP with leading Party workers was held in Cracow (Poland). One resolution adopted by the conference noted the revolutionary revival that had marked the year 1912 and declared that one of the immediate tasks of the Party was: “The organisation of revolutionary street demonstrations, both in conjunction with political strikes and as independent manifestations.” (Resolution of January 1913 Conference, cited in: N. Popov: “Outline History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union”; London; n.d: p. 282). The conference once again condemned liquidationism, placing on record that, following the “August Bloc” conference, the liquidator Mensheviks were advocating with still greater energy: “a) an open party; b) their opposition to the illegal organisations; c) their opposition to the Party programme (as expressed in their defence of national-cultural autonomy, the demand for the revision of the agrarian laws of the Third Duma, the slurring over of the demand for a republic, etc.; d) their opposition to revolutionary mass strikes; and e) their approval of reformist and exclusively legal tactics. Accordingly, one of the tasks of the Party is, as formerly, to wage determined warfare against the liquidationist groups ‘Nasha Zarya’ and ‘Luch’, and to explain to the working class masses the sinister character of their teachings”. (Resolution of January 1913 Conference, cited in N. P.Popov: ibid.; p. 282-3). The conference advocated the unification from below of the existing illegal working class organisations, in contrast to the unity from above proposed by the conciliators. Lenin, who attended the Conference, considered that it was: “Very successful and will play its part.” (V. I. Lenin: Letter to Maxim Gorky, January 1913, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 35; Moscow; 1966; p. 77). Trotsky’s Letter to Chkheidze In “April 1913 Trotsky wrote a letter to Nikolai Chkheidze, Chairman of the Duma Menshevik fraction, in which he said: “And what a senseless obsession is the wretched squabbling systematically provoked by the master squabbler, Lenin . . , that professional exploiter of the backwardness of the Russian, working class movement. . . The whole edifice of Leninism at the present time is built up on lies and falsifications and bears within it the poisoned seed of its own disintegration.” (L. Trotsky: Letter to Nikolai Chkheidze, April 1913, cited in: N.Popov,:, “Outline History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union”; Volume 1; London; n.d.; p. 289). Sixteen years later Trotsky did not challenge the authenticity of the letter: “My letter to Chkheidze against Lenin was published during this period (i.e., l924- Ed.). This episode, dating back to April 1913, grew out of the fact that the ‘official Bolshevik newspaper then published in St. Petersburg had appropriated the title of my Viennese publication, ‘The Pravda — a Labour Paper’. This led to one of those sharp conflicts so frequent in the lives of the foreign exiles. In a letter written to Chkheidze, I gave vent to my indignation at the Bolshevik centre and at Lenin. Two or three weeks later, I would undoubtedly have subjected my letter to a strict censor’s revision; a year or two later still, it would have seemed a curiosity in my own eyes. But that letter was to have a peculiar destiny. It was intercepted on its way by the Police Department. It rested in the police archives until the October revolution, when it went to the Institute of History of the Communist Party.” (L. Trotsky: “My Life”; New York; 1970: p. 514-5). but described its use by the leadership of the CPSU in the campaign to expose the role of Trotsky as “one of the ‘greatest frauds in the world’s history”: “In 1924, the epigones disinterred the letter from archives and flung it at the party. . The people read Trotsky’s hostile remarks about Lenin and were stunned. . . The use “that the epigones made of my letter to Chkheidze is one of the greatest frauds in the world’s history. The forged documents of the French reactionaries in Dreyfus case are as nothing compared to the political forgery perpetrated by Stalin and his associates.” The “Summer Conference” 1913 In October 1913 another conference of the Central Committee of the Party with leading Party workers, attended by 22 persons, was held at Poropino (Polarid) — a conference referred to in Party literature as the “Summer” Conference of 1913. One of the principal resolutions adopted by the Conference dealt with the position of the Party’s Duma fraction. Since the seven Menshevik deputies had a majority in the fraction over the six Bolshevik deputies, the latter were constantly being pressed, in the name of “democracy,” to adopt the rightist viewpoints of the majority. The conference protested at the conduct of the seven Menshevik deputies and decided that the bloc of six Bolshevik deputies, who were following the political line of the Party’s Central Committee, should have equal rights with the bloc of Mensheviks. The seven Menshevik deputies refused to accept this resolution, and the Bolshevik “six” formed an independent “Russian Social-Democratic Workers’ Fraction.” Another important resolution dealt with the national question, and clarified the meaning of “the self-determination of nations,” as the right of an oppressed nation to secede and form an independent state: “As regards the right of the nations oppressed by the tsarist monarchy to self-determination, i.e., the right to secede and form independent states, the Social-Democratic Party must unquestionably champion this right.” (Resolution on the National Question, “Summer Conference”, 1913, cited in: V. I. Lenin: “Collected Works”, Volume 19; Moscow; 1963; p. 428) The delegation of the Social Democratic Party of Poland and Lithuania at the “Summer Conference” refrained from voting on the question of the right of nations to self-determination, “Declaring themselves opposed to any such right in general.”‘ (V. I. Lenin: “On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p.286). The Polish delegation to the Second Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party in 1903 had similarly opposed recognition of this right in the Programme Commission of the congress, but, receiving no support, did not raise their objections in the full congress but withdrew from it. The Polish Party based their attitude on the ideas put forward by Rosa Luxemburg in her article “The National Question and Autonomy”; published in “Przeglad Socjal-Demokratyczny” (Social-Democratic Review) in 1908-09). Although the Polish Party rejoined the RSDLP in 1906, its leaders continued to oppose the principle of the right of nations to self-determination, and in March 1914, Trotsky used this opposition to attack the Bolsheviks: “The Polish Marxists consider that ‘the right to national self-determination’ is entirely devoid of political content and should be deleted from the programme.” (L. Trotsky: “Borba”, No. 2, 1914, p. 25). Lenin replied to these attacks in his article “On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”: “Unless we in our agitation advance and carry out the slogan of the right to secession we shall play into the hands, not only of the bourgeoisie, but also of the feudal landlords and of the absolutism of the oppressing nation. . . In her anxiety not to ‘assist’ nationalistic bourgeoisie of Poland, Rosa Luxemburg by her denial of the right to secession in the programme of the Russian Marxists, is in fact assisting the Great Russian Black Hundreds.” And Lenin commented again on Trotsky’s role in such controversies: “Trotsky has never yet held a firm opinion on any serious question relating to Marxism; he always manages to creep into the chinks of this or that difference of opinion, and desert one sided for the other.” 1914: The Collapse of the “August Bloc” In February 1914 the Fourth Congress of the Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region held in Brussels and attended by Lenin, resolved to withdraw from the “August Bloc.” With the withdrawal of the Latvian Party, described by Lenin as “The only genuine organisation in the ‘August Bloc.” (V. I. Lenin: “Violation of Unity under Cover of Cries for Unity”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p.; 199), The “August Bloc” collapsed. “The August bloc turned out to be a fiction and collapsed.” Shortly afterwards the “Caucasian Regional Committee of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party” — in the shape of Noah Jordania — considered it expedient to dissociate itself from the liquidator Mensheviks on a number of questions. Trotsky’s “Borba” With the collapse of the “August Bloc,” in February 1914, Trotsky withdrew from the editorial board of the Menshevik paper “Luch” (The Torch) and, together with some of his Viennese supporters, began to publish a legal journal called “Borba” (The Struggle), which continued to come out until July 1914. In this paper, as Lenin noted, he put forward liquidationist ideas in a disguised form. “In his magazine Trotsky has tried to say as little as possible about the essence of his views, but “Pravda” (No . 37) has already pointed out that Trotsky has not uttered a word either on the question of illegal work, or on the slogan of the struggle for an open party, etc… But although Trotsky has avoided expounding his views directly, a whole series of passages in his magazine indicate the ‘kind of ideas he is stealthily introducing and concealing. Trotsky repeats the liquidationist libels upon the Party . . repeating . . what in essence are their pet ideas.” (V. I. Lenin: ‘Violation of Unity under Cover of Cries for Unity”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 203, 204, 208) The appearance of “Borba” stimulated Lenin to write one of his fullest analyses of the disruptive role of Trotsky and his supporters, the article “Violation of Unity under Cover of’ Cries for Unity,” written in May 1914: “Trotsky calls his new magazine ‘non-factional’. He puts this word in the forefront in his advertisements, he stresses it in every way in the editorials of ‘Borba’. . . Trotsky’s ‘workers’ magazine’ is Trotsky’s magazine for the workers, for it bears no trace either of workers’ initiative or of contact with the workers’ organisations.. . . . By this label of ‘non-factionalism’ the worst representatives of the worst remnants of factionalism mislead the young generation of workers…. Since 1912, for more than two years, there has been no factionalism in Russia among the organised Marxists. There is a complete break between the Party and the liquidators . . . The word ‘factionalism’ is a misnomer. Trotsky talks to us about the ‘chaos of factional struggle’ …. Trotsky is fond of sonorous and empty phrases –this is known, but the catchword ‘chaos’ is not only a phrase; in addition to that it is . . .a vain attempt to transplant to Russian soil in the present epoch the émigré relationships of the epoch of yesterday. It is impossible to describe as chaos a struggle against a tendency which has been recognised by the entire Party as a tendency, and has been condemned since 1908. . . . To treat the history of one’s own party as ‘chaos’ means that one is suffering from unpardonable empty-headedness …. Apart from the ‘Pravda’-ists and the liquidators, there are no fewer than five Russian factions, i.e., separate groups, which claim to belong to the same Social-Democratic Party: Trotsky’s group, the two ‘Vperyod’ groups, the ‘Party Bolsheviks’, the ‘Party Mensheviks’. And here Trotsky is to a certain extent correct! This is real factionalism, this is real chaos… During the whole of those two years (i.e., 1912 and 1913– Ed.) not one, not a single one of those five factions abroad made the slightest impression on any of the manifestations of the mass labour movement in Russia…. This fact proves that we were right in referring to Trotsky as the representative of the ‘worst remnants of factionalism’… Although Trotsky professes to be non-factional, he is known to all who are in the slightest degree acquainted with the labour movement in Russia as the representative of ‘Trotsky’s faction’. . . This is a remnant of factionalism for it is impossible to discover in it anything serious in the way of contacts with the mass labour movement of’ Russia. Finally, it is the worst kind of factionalism, for there is nothing ideologically and politically definite about it…. It cannot be denied that sections of the factions which, like Trotsky’s faction, really exist only from the Vienna-Paris, and not at all from the Russian, point of view are definite. But Trotsky completely lacks a definite ideology; and policy, for having the patent for ‘non-factionalism’ only means . . having a patent granting complete freedom to flit to and fro from one faction to another…. Under the flag of ‘non-factionalism’ Trotsky is upholding one of the factions abroad which is particularly devoid of ideas and has no basis in the labour movement in Russia…. Not all is gold that glitters. Trotsky’s phrases are full of glitter and noise, but they lack content…. Recently (between August 1912 and February 1914) he followed in the footsteps of F. Dan, who, as is known, threatened and called for the ‘killing’ of anti-liquidationism. Now Trotsky does not threaten to ‘kill’ our tendency (and our Party –); he only prophesies that it will kill itself . . .. ‘Suicide’ is merely a phrase, an empty phrase, it is just ‘Trotskyism’ . . . If our attitude towards liquidationism is wrong in theory and principle then Trotsky should have said plainly . . . . wherein he found it to be wrong. Trotsky, however, has for years avoided that essential point. If our attitude towards liquidationism is refuted in practice by the experience of the movement, this experience should be analysed, and this again Trotsky fails to do. He admits: ‘advanced workers become the active agents of ‘schism’ (read — active agents of the ‘Pravda’-ist line, tactics, system, organisation). Why is this regrettable development taking place that. . . .the advanced workers, and numerous workers at that, are supporting; ‘Pravda’? Trotsky answers — owing to the state of ‘utter political perplexity’ of these advanced workers. This explanation is no doubt extremely flattering to Trotsky, to all the five factions abroad, and to the liquidators. Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events ‘with the learned mien of an expert’ in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to Trotsky. If ‘numerous advanced workers’ become ‘active agents’ of the political and Party line, which does not harmonise with the line of Trotsky, then Trotsky settles the question unceremoniously, directly and immediately: these advanced workers are ‘in a state of utter political perplexity, and he, Trotsky, is obviously in a ‘state’ of political firmness, clarity and correctness regarding the line! And this very same Trotsky, beating his chest, thunders against factionalism, against narrow circles, and against the intelligentsia foisting their will on the workers! . . . . Trotsky is trying to disrupt the movement and cause a split….Trotsky’s ‘non-factionalism’ is schism, in the sense that it is a most impudent violation of the will of the majority of the workers….You believe it is precisely the ‘Leninists’ who are the splitters? …. But if you are right, why did not all the factions and groups prove that unity with the liquidators was possible without the ‘Leninists’ and against the ‘splitters’? In August 1912 the conference of the ‘uniters’ met. Discord set in at once. The August Bloc turned out to be a fiction and collapsed. In concealing this collapse, from his readers, Trotsky is deceiving them. The experience of our opponents has proved we were right; it has proved that it is impossible to work with the liquidators. . . In his magazine Trotsky has tried to say as little as possible about the essence of his views. Trotsky has not uttered a word either on the question of illegal work, or on the slogan of the struggle for an open party, etc. Incidentally, that is why we say in this case, in which a segregated organisation wants to set itself up without having an ideological-political complexion, that it is the worst sort of factionalism…. Trotsky has avoided expounding his views directly. Trotsky avoids facts and concrete indications just because they mercilessly refute all his angry exclamations and pompous phrases. It is of course very easy to assume a proud pose and say: ‘coarse sectarian caricature’. It is equally easy to add more slashing and pompous catchwords about ‘emancipation from conservative factionalism’. But is this not too cheap? Is this not a weapon taken from the arsenal of the period when Trotsky was dazzling the schoolboys? The old participants in the Marxian movement in Russia know Trotsky’s personality very well, and it is not worth while talking to them about it. But the young generation of workers do not know him and we must speak of him, for he is typical of all the five grouplets abroad which in fact are also vacillating between the liquidators and the Party…. Trotsky was an ardent ‘Iskra’-ist in 1901-03. . At the end of 1903 Trotsky was an ardent Menshevik, i.e., one who deserted the ‘Iskra’-ists for the ‘Economists’; he proclaimed that ‘there is a deep gulf between the old and the new “Iskra.” In l904-5, he left the Mensheviks and began to vacillate, at one moment collaborating with Martynov (the ‘Economist’), and at another proclaiming the absurdly ‘Left’ theory of ‘permanent revolution’. In 1906-07 he drew nearer to the Bolsheviks, and in the spring of 1907 he declared his solidarity with Rosa Luxemburg. During the period of disintegration, after long ‘non-factional’ vacillations, he again shifted to the Right, and in August 1912 entered into a ‘bloc’ with the liquidators. How he is again abandoning them, repeating, however, what in essence are their pet ideas. Such types are characteristic as fragments of the historical factions of yesterday, when the mass labour movement of Russia was still dormant and every grouplet was ‘free’ to represent itself as . . a ‘great power’ talking of uniting with others. The young generation of workers must know very well with whom it has to deal.” (V. I. Lenin: “Violation of Unity Under Cover of Cries for Unity”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 4; London; 1943; p. 187-88, 189, 190; 191, 194, l95, 197, 198, 203, 206-08). The Brussels Conference, 1914 In July 1914 the Executive Committee of the International Socialist Bureau (ISB) took up Trotsky’s concilationist mantle by convening a conference in Brussels of all the groups connected with the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party. Apart from representatives of the ISB (who included Karl Kautsky, and Emile Vandervelde), the conference was attended by delegates from: 1. the (Bolshevik) Central Committee of the RSDLP; 2. the (now Bolshevik) Social-Democratic Party of the Latvian Region; 3. the “Vperyod” Group; 4. the (now purely Menshevik) “Organisation Committee”; 5. the “Bund”; 6. Plekhanov’s “Yedinstvo”(Unity) Menshevik group; 7. the Social-Democratic Party of Poland and Lithuania; 8. the Polish Socia1-Democratic Opposition; 9. the Polish Socialist Party; and 10. Trotsky’s “Borba” group. The leader of the Central Committee delegation, Inessa Armand, delivered a statement, (drafted by Lenin) setting out fourteen conditions under which the Central Conmittee considered unification possible. These conditions included: the renunciation of views condemned by the Party, the recognition of the necessity of illegal as well as legal work, submission to the Central Committee and dissolution of factions. Although, under the terms of reference under which it had been convened, the conference was for the purpose of an exchange of opinions only, Kautsky moved a resolution declaring that there were “no substantial disagreements” between the various groups to justify a continuation of “the split” in the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party. The resolution was adopted by a majority of the delegates present, with the delegates of the Central Committee of the RSDLP and the Latvian Party abstaining. The question of actual unification was to have been taken up at the next congress of the Second International, due to be held in Vienna in August l9l4, but the outbreak of the First World War prevented this congress from taking place. After the conference, the anti-Bolshevik groups continued to collaborate for a time in what came to be called the “Brussels Bloc.” END OF PART ONE Posted in Asia, Bill Bland, Class Struggle, Communist League (UK), History, How Will Communism Work, Internationalism, Lies & Propaganda, Life in Socialist Countries, Marxism-Leninism, Revisionism, Russia, Socialist Revolution, The Classics, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.), Theory, Trotskyism, Vladimir Lenin In Ukraine War, Kremlin Leaves No Fingerprints Russian special forces and mercenaries that started the war in Donbas, Ukraine DONETSK, Ukraine — Not long ago, Alexander Borodai, a fast-talking Muscovite with a stylish goatee, worked as a consultant for an investment fund in Moscow. Today he is prime minister of the self-declared Donetsk People’s Republic, zipping around town in a black S.U.V. with tinted windows and armed guards and commanding what he says are hundreds of fighters from Russia. Mr. Borodai is Russian, but says he has come to eastern Ukraine out of a surge of patriotism and a desire to help Russian speakers here protect their rights. As for the Kremlin, he says, there’s no connection. “I’m an ordinary citizen of Russia, not a government worker,” said Mr. Borodai, 41, whose face crinkles easily into a smile. “A lot of people from Russia are coming to help these people. I am one of them.” The Cold War-style standoff over Ukraine may have subsided for now. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has drawn his troops back from the border and has promised to work with Ukraine’s new government. But the shifting reality here in eastern Ukraine suggests the crisis has simply entered a new phase. In contrast to Crimea, which was seized by Russian troops in unmarked uniforms this spring, eastern Ukraine is evolving into a subtle game in which Russian freelancers shape events and the Kremlin plausibly denies involvement. Here in the green flatlands of eastern Ukraine, reminders of Russia are everywhere. Outside a former Ukrainian National Guard base, now occupied by a rebel militia, a jovial fighter from Ossetia in southern Russia, who goes by the nickname Mamai, said he crossed the border about a month ago with other volunteers. The central government building that Mr. Borodai’s forces now control, after sweeping out the ragtag local separatists who occupied it weeks ago, is festooned with a slick, Hollywood-style banner featuring Mr. Borodai’s friend, Igor Strelkov, a Russian citizen who is a rebel leader in the stronghold of Slovyansk. And on Thursday, rebel leaders shipped 33 coffins back to Russia through a remarkably porous border, announcing that the overwhelming majority of those killed in Monday’s battle with the Ukrainian Army were Russian citizens. Mr. Putin may not be directing these events, but he is certainly their principal beneficiary. Instability in Ukraine’s east makes the country less palatable to the European Union and more vulnerable to Russian demands, forming a kind of insurance policy for future influence by Russia, which, at least so far, has avoided further sanctions from the West. Leaders of the Group of 7 countries will meet in Brussels on Wednesday, including President Obama, and Russia’s role in Ukraine is at the top of the agenda. “They are creating facts on the ground,” said Dmitry Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center. “The goal is clear: build structural guarantees against Ukraine’s potential NATO accession. Plausible deniability is key.” Russia’s Foreign Ministry on Thursday expressed “deep concern in connection with the further escalation of the situation in eastern Ukraine,” but did not address the Russian deaths. A request for comment on the Russian bodies and on Mr. Borodai went unanswered. Reality in Ukraine seems constantly in flux, and the fact that the country has a new president-elect after careening headless for months could shift the kaleidoscope again. Petro O. Poroshenko, who was elected in a landslide last Sunday, is expected to meet Mr. Putin this summer, and if the two men are able to strike a deal, then Russian support for the separatists may wane, some experts said, though that will not necessarily stop them. “Russia will keep supporting separatists below the radar as insurance to make sure Poroshenko agrees to a deal,” said Dmitry Gorenburg, a senior research scientist for the CNA Corporation, a nonprofit research group in Washington. “Once the deal is done, I think Putin will drop them.” But much has changed between Ukraine and its giant neighbor in recent months and it is not clear how much their interests will overlap. Nor is Kiev entirely without cards to play. On Monday its military inflicted serious damage on the largely Russian separatist force, killing more than 40 fighters and raising the possibility that the military has at least some chance of succeeding. What Russia would do if that started to happen is an open question. But for now, at least, the strategy seems to be to destabilize Ukraine as much as possible without leaving conclusive evidence that would trigger more sanctions. “I don’t think he has blinked,” said Matthew Rojansky, director of the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Kennan Institute, referring to Mr. Putin’s not invading eastern Ukraine. “He has eased up because he sees a situation that he likes better.” That leaves Mr. Borodai as a central figure in Ukraine’s immediate future. He may seem to have come out of nowhere, but in Russia he is a known quantity. He comes from a group of ultranationalists who were part of the far-right Zavtra newspaper in the 1990s. Their Pan-Slavic ideas, aiming for the unity of Slavic peoples, were considered marginal at the time. But they have now moved into the mainstream, helping formulate the worldview of today’s Kremlin, said Oleg Kashin, a Russian investigative journalist who has written extensively about Mr. Borodai. “He’s the Karl Rove of Russian imperialism,” said Irena Chalupa, a fellow at the Atlantic Council. When Mr. Borodai talks, people here listen. Surrounded by armed guards with scowling faces, Mr. Borodai stood with a microphone at the center of a large crowd that had gathered last weekend outside the compound of a local oligarch. They wanted to break in and declare it national property. “I know many of you want a tour,” he said smiling, as the crowd cheered. “I respect that desire. But right now a tour is not possible.” In an interview, Mr. Borodai said that he and Mr. Strelkov, the Russian rebel commander in Slovyansk, had both gone to Transnistria, a breakaway area in Moldova, to defend the rights of Russians in the 1990s. He named the cities in Russia that volunteers have come from, including Novosibirsk, Vladivostok and Chita. He said he believed in the idea of a Greater Russia, and that he had come to Ukraine to realize it. “Real Ukrainians have the right to live as they like,” he said. “They can create their own state which would be named Ukraine, or however they like, because the word Ukraine is a little humiliating,” he said, asserting that the literal translation meant “on the border of.” (The etymology is disputed.) He explained that Ukrainians “have their heroes, their values, their religion,” but that “we also want to live as we want to live. We think that we have that right. And if we need to, we will assert that right.” Roman Szporluk, emeritus professor of Ukrainian history at Harvard University, said such language was worrying. “Putin would like to Yugoslavize Ukraine,” he said. “He wants to create an ethnic conflict where one did not exist.” No one here seems to know where Mr. Borodai came from or what his allegiances are. But such things do not matter. “They are good guys, they are our guys, they are protecting us against Kiev’s aggression,” said Lidia Lisichkina, a 55-year-old geologist who is an ethnic Russian. Mr. Kashin, the investigative journalist, does not believe that either Mr. Borodai or Mr. Strelkov is acting on behalf of the Russian government. “This is not the hand of Moscow, it’s just Borodai,” Mr. Kashin said. Local rebel leaders say their goals coincide. Roman Lyagin, an election specialist from Donetsk who is responsible for pensions and wages in the new republic (so far they are still paid by Kiev), said one of the main tasks is to push separatist control farther west to “create a land route from Russia to Crimea.” “People there need oatmeal, television and underwear,” he said. At the regional administration building on Friday, Mr. Borodai was busy consolidating his power, holding his first government meeting after his forces swept out the local separatists. The former National Guard base was buzzing with activity. A white minivan full of armed men in black balaclavas zoomed out of a large metal gate, its purple curtains pulled partly closed. A man wearing civilian clothes carried two large black bags to a hatchback station wagon and sped away. Outside the gate, Mamai, the Ossetian fighter, said he had not come to Ukraine for money. He had a business doing security for banks in Vladikavkaz, where he lives. “Everyone who wants to be with Russia,” he said, “those are our brothers.” Posted in Asia, Europe, Fascist Massacres, Hypocrisy, Imperialism & Colonialism, Imperialist War, Internationalism, Reactionary Watch, Russia, Russian Imperialism, Ukraine Putin’s Western Allies Why Europe’s Far Right Is on the Kremlin’s Side By Mitchell A. Orenstein Given that one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stated reasons for invading Crimea was to prevent “Nazis” from coming to power in Ukraine, it is perhaps surprising that his regime is growing closer by the month to extreme right-wing parties across Europe. But, in both cases, Putin’s motives are not primarily ideological. In Ukraine, he simply wants to grab territory that he believes rightly belongs to him. In the European Union, he hopes that his backing of fringe parties will destabilize his foes and install in Brussels politicians who will be focused on dismantling the EU rather than enlarging it. In Hungary, for example, Putin has taken the Jobbik party under his wing. The third-largest party in the country, Jobbik has supporters who dress in Nazi-type uniforms, spout anti-Semitic rhetoric, and express concern about Israeli “colonization” of Hungary. The party has capitalized on rising support for nationalist economic policies, which are seen as an antidote for unpopular austerity policies and for Hungary’s economic liberalization in recent years. Russia is bent on tapping into that sentiment. In May 2013, Kremlin-connected right-wing Russian nationalists at the prestigious Moscow State University invited Jobbik party president Gabor Vona to speak. Vona also met with Russia Duma leaders including Ivan Grachev, chairman of the State Duma Committee for Energy and Vasily Tarasyuk, deputy chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources and Utilization, among others. On the Jobbik website, the visit is characterized as “a major breakthrough” which made “clear that Russian leaders consider Jobbik as a partner.” In fact, there have been persistent rumors that Jobbik’s enthusiasm is paid for with Russian rubles. The party has also repeatedly criticized Hungary’s “Euro-Atlantic connections” and the European Union. And, more recently, it called the referendum in Crimea “exemplary,” a dangerous word in a country with extensive co-ethnic populations in Romania and Slovakia. It seems that the party sees Putin’s new ethnic politics as being aligned with its own revisionist nationalism. The Kremlin’s ties to France’s extreme-right National Front have also been growing stronger. Marine Le Pen, the party leader, visited Moscow in June 2013 at the invitation of State Duma leader Sergei Naryshkin, a close associate of Putin’s. She also met with Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin and discussed issues of common concern, such as Syria, EU enlargement, and gay marriage. France’s ProRussia TV, which is funded by the Kremlin, is staffed by editors with close ties to the National Front who use the station to espouse views close to National Front’s own perspective on domestic and international politics. The National Front wishes to replace the EU and NATO with a pan-European partnership of independent nations, which, incidentally, includes Russia and would be driven by a trilateral Paris-Berlin-Moscow alliance. Le Pen’s spokesman, Ludovic De Danne, recently recognized the results of the Crimea referendum and stated in an interview with Voice of Russia radio that, “historically, Crimea is part of Mother Russia.” In the same interview, he mentioned that he had visited Crimea several times in the past year. Marine Le Pen also visited Crimea in June 2013. The list of parties goes on. Remember Golden Dawn, the Greek fascist party that won 18 seats in Greece’s parliament in 2012? Members use Nazi symbols at rallies, emphasize street fighting, and sing the Greek version of the Nazi Party anthem. The Greek government imprisoned Nikos Michaloliakos, its leader, and stripped parliamentary deputies of their political immunity before slapping them with charges of organized violence. But the party continues to take to the streets. Golden Dawn has never hidden its close connections to Russia’s extreme right, and is thought to receive funds from Russia. One Golden Dawn­­–linked website reports that Michaloliakos even received a letter in prison from Moscow State University professor and former Kremlin adviser Alexander Dugin, one of the authors of Putin’s “Eurasian” ideology. It was also Dugin who hosted Jobbik leader Vona when he visited Moscow. In his letter, Dugin expressed support for Golden Dawn’s geopolitical positions and requested to open a line of communication between Golden Dawn and his think tank in Moscow. Golden Dawn’s New York website reports that Michaloliakos “has spoken out clearly in favor of an alliance and cooperation with Russia, and away from the ‘naval forces’ of the ‘Atlantic.’” Finally, a cable made public by WikiLeaks shows that Bulgaria’s far right Ataka party has close links to the Russian embassy. Reports that Russia funds Ataka have swirled for years, but have never been verified. But evidence of enthusiasm for Russia’s foreign policy goals is open for all to see. Radio Bulgaria reported on March 17 that Ataka’s parliamentary group “has insisted that Bulgaria should recognize the results from the referendum for Crimea’s joining to the Russian Federation.” Meanwhile, party leader Volen Siderov has called repeatedly for Bulgaria to veto EU economic sanctions for Russia. In addition to their very vocal support for Russia’s annexation of Crimea within the EU, Jobbik, National Front, and Ataka all sent election observers to validate the Crimea referendum (as did the Austrian Freedom Party, the Belgian Vlaams Belang party, Italy’s Forza Italia and Lega Nord, and Poland’s Self-Defense, in addition to a few far-left parties, conspicuously Germany’s Die Linke). Their showing was organized by the Russia-based Eurasian Observatory For Democracy & Elections, a far-right NGO “opposed to Western ideology.” The EODE specializes in monitoring elections in “self-proclaimed republics” (Abkhazia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh) allied with Moscow, according to its website. The Putin government’s cordial relations with Europe’s far right sit oddly, to say the least, with his opposition to “Nazis” in the Ukrainian government. Yet Putin’s dislike for Ukrainian “fascists” has nothing to do with ideology. It has to do with the fact that they are Ukrainian nationalists. The country’s Svoboda and Right Sector parties, which might do well in the post–Viktor Yanukovych Ukraine, stand for independence in a country that Putin does not believe should exist separate from Russia. Similarly, Russian support of the far right in Europe has less to do with ideology than with his desire to destabilize European governments, prevent EU expansion, and help bring to power European governments that are friendly to Russia. In that sense, several European countries may only be one bad election away from disaster. In fact, some would say that Hungary has already met it. As support for Jobbik increases, the anti-democratic, center-right government of Prime Minister Viktor Orban has tacked heavily to the right and recently signed a major nuclear deal with Russia. Russia plans to lend Hungary ten billion euro to construct two new reactors at its Paks nuclear plant, making Hungary even more dependent for energy on Russia. Jobbik’s Vona wants to go even further, taking Hungary out of the EU and joining Russia’s proposed Eurasian Union. European parliamentary elections, which are scheduled for the end of May, are expected to result in a strong showing for the far right. A weak economy, which was weakened further by the European Central Bank’s austerity policies, has caused the extreme right vote to surge. Current polls show the far-right parties in France and Holland winning the largest share of seats in their national delegations. Brussels strategists worry that 20 percent of members of the new European parliament could be affiliated with parties that wish to abolish the EU, double the current number. That could cause an EU government shutdown to rival the dysfunction of Washington and deal a major blow to efforts to enlarge the Union and oppose Russian expansionism. It is strange to think that Putin’s strategy of using right-wing extremist political parties to foment disruption and then take advantage — as he did in Crimea — could work in southern and western Europe as well. Or that some of the extreme right parties in the European parliament, who work every day to delegitimize the European Union and whose numbers are growing, may be funded by Russia. Yet these possibilities cannot be dismissed. Russia might soon be able to disrupt the EU from within. To counter Russia, European leaders should start launching public investigations into external funding of extreme-right political parties. If extensive Russia connections are found, it would be important to publicize that fact and then impose sanctions on Russia that would make it more difficult for it to provide such support. Pro-European parties must find a way to mobilize voters who are notoriously unwilling to vote in European parliament elections. Europe will also have to rethink the austerity policies that have worsened the grievances of many Europeans and pushed them to support the anti-system, anti-European right. Although Germany has banned extreme right parties from representation, other countries have not. Germany may have therefore underestimated the extent of damage austerity policies could do to the European project and should rethink how its excessive budget cutting, monetary prudence, and export surpluses are affecting politics in the rest of Europe. Putin’s challenge to Europe must be taken seriously. Rather than making another land grab in his back yard, he might watch patiently from the sidelines at the end of May as pro-Russia far-right parties win a dramatic election victory in European parliamentary elections. These elections could weaken the European Union and bring Russia’s friends on the far right closer to power. Posted in Asia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Restoration and Counterrevolution, Common Sense, Europe, Fascism, France, Greece, Hungary, Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Italy, Khrushchevism/ Brezhnevism, LGBTQ Rights, Myth-Busting, Oddities, Poland, Polemics & Refutations, Racism, Reactionary Watch, Revisionism, Russia, Russian Imperialism, Theory ‘Novorossiya’s’ ‘Leftist’ Friends Anti-NATO meeting with supporters of ‘Novorossiya’ in Munich The frenzied world-wide front is expanding Mercy to no one, no one, no one! Stanza from 1989 Russian anarchists’ song Vintovka – eto prazdnik (The Rifle is a Holiday) By the Russian punk bank Grazhdanskaya Oborona (Civil Defense) The annexation of Crimea, the “Novorossiya” project, and the fight against the “Kyiv junta” are not supported in Russia alone. There are political forces around the world, both marginal and relatively respectable, which voice their support for the separatists in the Donbass. At times, activists themselves travel to the war zone as volunteers, but they mostly hold demonstrations in support of the separatist republics and pressure their governments to renounce their support for Ukraine and “stop the aggression against Russia.” These political forces may identify as left-wing, right-wing, or deny any conventional political identity (although their “political neutrality” usually conceals one ideology or another). Novorossiya’s foreign friends who, in 99% of cases, are also friends of Russia and worshippers of Putin, may explain their views from various, sometimes incompatible positions. Novorossiya can be supported both by a white racist and a communist who talks about the fight against “Ukrainian fascism” and “Western imperialism.” But despite the apparent differences in their theoretical ideological grounding, their political practice is remarkably similar. Eventually, they arrive at the same conclusions and stand on the same side of the barricade. Not that long ago, an “antifascist forum” took place in the Donbass, which was attended by representatives of not major, but still quite notable Stalinist organizations from Europe and the United States. Around the same time, a forum of ultra-right, nationalist, and conservative activists took place in the Donbass. The fact that these events coincided is more than revealing. We will talk about both left-wing and right-wing supporters of Novorossiya and attempt to find similarities in their modes of thinking. The first text mostly focuses on leftists, but there are certain elements which are also relevant to the right-wing camp. Lies and Truth European and US radicals, both left- and right-wing, do not trust the media. Leftists mistrust mainstream outlets because the latter, according to their worldview, are controlled by oligarchs or their puppets. Far-rightists do so because, in their version of reality, the media are controlled by Zionist, cultural-Marxist, and homosexual lobbies. In general, a critical approach to any kind of information is advisable, but the conspiratorial and critical approaches are seldom compatible. A conspiracy theorist judges information as follows: If the media work for oligarchs, then everything they report must be a lie serving the interests of the men behind the scenes. But they still need to get their information somewhere. While they can get news about their own country from blogs, party newsletters, and congenial news websites, learning about foreign countries is more complicated, particularly due to the language barrier. It is necessary to find an independent source, with adequate resources at its disposal, which could send its correspondents to different parts of the world; at the same time, this source must be independent from the “secret masters,” whoever these might be. And here, Russia Today(RT.com) comes to the rescue. Russian propaganda is not limited to the spouting of [Kremlin propagandist Dmitry] Kiselyev, who is only needed for the domestic consumer. For the Western audience, there is Russia Today, an information product unique in its nature. This TV channel often shows high-quality broadcasts of protest movements and demonstrations in Western countries; on other occasions, RT talks about events which other media ignore for one reason or another. A great deal of material is broadcast in the form of raw video footage without commentary or voice-over, which creates the effect of objectivity. RT.com actively attracts Western journalists and gives them carte blanche to honestly and uncompromisingly criticize their governments. All of the above definitely affords the channel a certain credit of trust. And it actively utilizes this credit when it finds it necessary to compel a Western viewer to believe in blatant lies and propaganda. For instance, in the notion that the EuroMaidan movement consisted exclusively of fascists directly controlled by the United States. While Russian propagandists need only to present their domestic audience with pure lies without any admixture, the lies shown to a foreign consumer must be craftily alternated and combined with truth. Soviet Ressentiment Western leftists often perceive the USSR not at all like those who would seem to be their likeminded Ukrainian counterparts. In our country, overt Soviet sympathies are only voiced by parties which are direct successors of the Soviet nomenklatura, such as the Communist Party of Ukraine. Or those who are trying to win over the pension-age electorate, filled with Soviet nostalgia. All other leftists – anarchists, Trotskyists, left-communists, social democrats – are more than critical toward the USSR; after all, it was that state which virtually eradicated these political movements in the territory under its control. In the West, particularly in the countries which never found themselves under Soviet rule, the left’s attitude toward its legacy is softer. To them, the USSR was a kind of remote abstraction which did not pose a direct threat, but frightened the rulers of their countries which in turn were forced into compromises and concessions favoring domestic worker and trade union movements. The USSR’s existence inspired a hope that a different, non-capitalist world was possible. Active attacks on the USSR during the Cold War would, indirectly, amount to support for one’s “own” government. Thus, leftists preferred not to pay any special attention to Soviet politics, instead concentrating on critique of Western imperialism. The further away from the GULAG, the easier it is to assess the edifying results of the Soviet experiment and observe its “positive aspects.” For instance, in the United States, even the anarchists considered the hammer and sickle the perfect symbol for outraging local conservatives, rather than the emblem of a totalitarian regime which completely exterminated their comrades. Now, the USSR’s place has been taken by Russia, which continues to be regarded as the antipode to “Western capitalism,” even though the Russian Federation has long exhibited much fewer characteristics of a welfare state than the countries of Western Europe. Those leftists which fell into the trap of geopolitical thinking ended up in the same camp as the right-wingers. In this respect, the coalition which the Greek Syriza party was forced to join, having previously won a majority in the latest parliamentary election, is telling — the “socialists” were forced to cooperate with overt right-wing populists. The only things that the two have in common are sympathy toward the Russian Federation and criticism of the European Union. This illustration clearly demonstrates how the supporters of Novorossiya present the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine is simply a virgin territory encroached upon by Western imperialists. The latter are opposed by the Russian bear. Not man, mind you, but bear. We are dealing with a kind of “positive dehumanization.” The Russian is presented as a creature belonging to another species, to whom human ethical norms need not apply; therefore, Russia is easily pardoned for the actions which, if conducted by the West, are harshly criticized. Information “Warfare” As a rule, left-wing organizations eagerly lend an ear to their counterparts in other countries. It is always more simple and agreeable to listen to those who say things close to one’s heart in a familiar language. During the Maidan protests and immediately thereafter, the Borotba [Struggle] organization, which initially supported the Anti-Maidan movement and subsequently the “People’s Republics,” successfully imitated before the Western audience, completely ignorant of Ukraine, a “mass left-wing party,” which waged a “relentless antifascist struggle in the underground.” Their success is easily explained: Borotba had a budget that covered the services of translators who rebroadcast their materials in different languages. Furthermore, they use the language of the left more aptly than the Communist Party of Ukraine does. However, the Communist Party has also made its contribution – the magical word “communist” in its name has won the ears of many a naive Western leftist, who sincerely believe that “communists are being persecuted and suppressed in Ukraine,” and who see in communists the continuers of the ideas of Marx and Engels, not a party bureaucracy which has sold out many times over. What we get is a simple, convenient, and completely unambiguous picture, which perfectly matches the line of official Russian propaganda: a fascist putsch and an antifascist underground. What questions are there left to ask when one group is toppling monuments to Lenin and the other is defending them with their lives? Especially given that independent media, not controlled by “Western governments” and “transnational corporations,” such as Russia Today, are saying more or less the same thing using almost exactly the same words. Other Ukrainian leftists produced fewer articles (because there were no staffers to write them), and these texts are more difficult to understand, because they do not always paint such a simple, unambiguous, and heroic picture. Propaganda and simple clichés will inevitably be more successful than analysis. And while Ukrainian anarchists more or less managed to align the sentiments among many of their Western counterparts, most adherents of the Bolshevik tradition remained at the level of “the people of the Donbass are waging a national liberation struggle against the junta which seized power through a fascist putsch.” The Myth of the Odessa Khatyn An important element in the mythology of “leftist” supporters of Novorossiya was the fire in the Odesa Trade Unions Building. It was a very powerful image: “the fascists burned people alive.” And not just anywhere, but in the Trade Unions Building! Across the world, trade unions are directly associated with left-wing movements, which means that people who died there would automatically be perceived as left-wing activists, especially given that Borotba and the Communist Party of Ukraine lost a few of their supporters there and took the trouble to paint them as heroes. And it is secondary that the backbone of the Odessa Anti-Maidan consisted of people professing right-wing, even far-right pro-Russian views, and that it included those of the Black-Hundred and imperialist persuasions. For a Western leftist, imperialism is by no means such an obvious right-wing symbol as, for instance, a Wolfsangel or the Azov Battalion’s “black sun.” All the more so because the Anti-Maidan members sported St. George’s ribbons which, not without the help of official Russian propaganda, were actively exported as an “antifascist symbol,” including to the West. The deaths in the Trade Unions Building finally convinced many Western leftists of the “fascist” essence of the Maidan and the new Ukrainian authorities. This entire situation (from the location of the tragedy to the death by fire) fits perfectly into the existing set of clichés. It is revealing that most people who now recall the “burned martyrs of Odessa” do not know about, or prefer not to mention, the deaths in the Kyiv Trade Unions Building, where many Maidan protesters lost their lives, including the wounded. That’s because it would not fit into the general picture — the “antifascist [now defunct riot] Berkut police force” could not have possibly burned wounded people alive. Even moderate forces, such as the German Die Linke party, which reject direct support or solidarity with the self-proclaimed republics, are inclined to sympathize with the victims of the May 2 fire, while completely ignoring the violence which the Odessa Anti-Maidan had regularly carried out from the moment of its formation up to and during the events of May 2. The Prizrak Brigade and Its Communists There is no point in enumerating all the organizations which support Novorossiya in one form or another. The reader need not decipher the multitude of names and abbreviations; it is far more important to understand the general pattern of thought which caused hundreds of people from different countries of the world to travel in March to Alchevsk in search of the phantom of communism in [now deceased separatist militant Aleksei] Mozgovoy’s Prizrak Brigade. Most European volunteers travel to the Donbass from Spain and other South European countries. A great contribution to that was made by Banda Bassotti, a prominent Italian punk group. The mobilizing potential of musicians can sometimes be greater than that of parties and civic movements. European communists fighting in the ranks of Mozgovoy and other field commanders fell into Novorossiya’s trap largely due to the unsophisticated propaganda ventilated by these “punks” professing Stalinist views. They actively channel all aforementioned clichés while diluting them with their own stupidity. They mix “leftist” rhetoric with national-chauvinist propaganda – Lenin and Trotsky might not have executed them, but they would have definitely expelled them from the party. For instance, during interviews, members of Banda Bassotti say without a hint of doubt that Ukraine was created artificially, in defiance of Russia, citing “a book they read recently.” It is important to understand that until 2014, most Western leftists supporting Novorossiya did not have the slightest idea of the political situation in Ukraine, let alone its history, ethnic and cultural groups populating its territory, the history of Ukraine-Russia relations, and so forth. In 2014, they quickly acquired that “knowledge,” thoughtfully offered to them by Russian propaganda. The language barrier allowed for all types of suggestions. Even the most anti-scientific source gains legitimacy if it is translated from a foreign outlet. That is precisely why the Spanish volunteers subsequently arrested in their homes explained during an interview their desire to fight on the side of the separatists with the fact that “they were helping defend Russia against Ukrainian aggression.” Indeed, for some Spanish Stalinists who have a vague idea of Ukraine’s geographical location, the words “Ukrainian” and “fascist” have become synonymous. Last fall, a telling episode took place: a 56-year-old Ukrainian was attacked by a group of Catalan nationalists and slipped into a coma. This episode caused very strong indignation, including in left-wing circles, but was condemned mostly by anarchists; there was no reaction whatsoever on the part of major leftist parties. The German Antiimperialistische Aktion group cooperates with ANNA News, a popular propagandist channel. Their cooperation likely dates as far back as the Syrian war. Both the pro-Russian TV channel and the “anti-imperialists” actively supported Assad in this war. The ideology of the “anti-imps,” as they are called in Germany, can be briefly summarized as follows: radical anti-Americanism, a partiality to conspiracy theories, covert (and sometimes overt) anti-semitism, and thoroughly uncritical support for all regimes opposed to the United States and Israel. The official flag of Antiimperialistische Aktion resembles the antifascist flag, but instead of a red-and-black banner in a circle, it depicts the flag of the USSR and the “anti-imperialist” regime which they currently love most. There are variations depicting the flags of Libya, Syria, and Palestine. There has recently appeared an “anti-imperialist” flag on which the Soviet flag is accompanied by the two-headed Novorossiya eagle, and the pantheon of antifascist and anti-imperialist heroes was supplemented not only by Strelkov and Mozgovoy, but also by Ramzan Kadyrov. It sometimes feels like the anti-imps are a kind of parody of the left-wing supporters of Novorossiya (their performance at an anti-NATO meeting with dogs sporting Berkut uniforms was more amusing than any parody). Regrettably, however, they are absolutely real. “Anti-imperialists” at the Munich Meeting Not only are they absolutely real, but they also have supporters both in different cities of Germany and beyond the country’s borders – in Sweden, for instance. They do not only actively accept the Kremlin propaganda, but also rebroadcast it to European audiences with great enthusiasm. This propaganda video, which tells the “truth about Euromaidan,” is one example of that. Many admirers of Russia in the West like to set up accounts on the VKontakte social network (which they also consider anti-imperialist and a counterweight to the corporate Facebook). With the use of automatic translation services, they try to communicate with Russian-language audiences, and even receive occasional feedback. A photo from Tobias Nase’s VK profile. The anti-imps still permitted themselves to use Ukrainian in April 2014. Eventually, however, they decided it is a fascist language and switched their automatic translators to Russian. Active support for Novorossiya is also expressed by numerous Greek left-wing organizations. The ruling Syriza party has already stuck in people’s memory with its pro-Russian stance and, consequently, with its loyalty to Russia-controlled regimes. However, many of Syriza’s opponents (today we are talking about their opponents “on the left,” the ultra-rightists from the Golden Dawn party will be discussed in another article) have gloated over the puppet regimes of the LPR and DPR even more strongly. Not only overt worshippers of Stalin and the Soviet legacy, but also many forces identifying themselves as followers of the Maoist tradition have supported the LPR and DPR. They are driven by the same anti-imperialist (read “anti-American”) logic. Everything that is opposed to the West with all its corporations and capitalist expansion is perceived as an absolute good, “anti-imperialist” regimes are easily forgiven what is considered a taboo in leftist circles: from racism to homophobia. Furthermore, Maoists are inclined to romanticize rebellion and armed struggle and, in this context, they certainly find the image of Novorossiya quite attractive. Certain Trotskyists have also taken a liking to the myth of the left-wing Donbass. Notable in this respect are the International Marxist Tendency (an international group known for its overt and completely uncritical support of the Venezuelan model of state socialism) and the International Committee of the Fourth International. If they consider the USSR a “deformed workers’ state,” then the post-Soviet space consists of “workers’ states” which are even more deformed are still preferable to the capitalist, neo-liberal West. Therefore, the thought of reunifying the USSR is no less attractive to them than to Stalinists, except that the former seek to re-establish the USSR without the cult of the moustached leader, and believe that this can be done without forming a new party establishment and bureaucracy. It is important to note that there are a great number of Trotskyist organizations and internationals around the world, their names are often similar, and behind familiar abbreviations there often lie unappeasable enemies with diametrically opposite stances on Ukraine. Whenever you throw a stone at a Stalinist, you will almost definitely hit a supporter of Novorossiya; before throwing one at a Trotskyist, it is worthwhile asking him a few leading questions. Living in a special, completely parallel universe are leftists from the United States, who prefer to fight the evil empire directly from within. In their view, the war in the Donbass started at the instigation of the United States and, obviously, because of oil. After all, every global conflict is waged by the United States and always because of oil. And yes, the “Odessa carnage” was also planned by the United States, in case you had any doubts on that score. This video footage (recorded, by the way, by the aforementioned Russia Today channel) can be understood without any knowledge of English, and has already been commented on a thousand times. Putin’s Cautious Friends Many political forces feel they are too respectable to stoop to cheap clownery. They do not fling up wild slogans about the “junta” and “conspiracy.” However, they say essentially the same things using more civilized, diplomatic language. And, in a way, they are even more dangerous, given that such parties as Die Linke and Syriza are members of the European Parliament. And though they do not send volunteers to the Donbass, they do contribute to blocking aid to Ukraine (as do their right-wing twins). Deputy Andrej Hunko (who on account of his surname is considered a foremost expert on Ukraine within the party), together with his colleague Wolfgang Gerke, became notorious in the Ukrainian media owing to a photo in which he is seen posing with Zakharchenko. Earlier, however, both he and his associates made a lot of effort to indirectly support the separatists. Through their efforts, Borotba party leader Sergey Kirichuk was granted political asylum in Germany; they helped him broadcast propaganda about the “workers’ rebellion in the Donbass,” including at the level of the European Parliamentary. And despite the fact that Die Linke publicly dissociated itself from Borotba, cooperation with its leader continues. The rhetoric of “peace” and “intolerance for inciters of war” is very popular among such politicians. Except that when saying “peace,” they mean exclusively “peace with Russia,” and they agree to only see inciters of war in the West. At the same time, they deny Ukraine any kind of subjecthood, and its population is allotted the unenviable roles of Western puppets, blood-thirsty fascists, or their victims. And once again it turns out that the “leftists” are speaking the same “geopolitical” language as the “rightists” whom they criticize. But even the formal difference between them is getting smaller – Sara Wagenknecht of Die Linke has already publicly called for a dialogue with the ultra-right anti-immigration Pegida organization, appealing, first and foremost, given the proximity of their position on the Ukrainian and Russian question. One can assume that this rapprochement will continue; European countries have yet to see in action the “red-brown” synthesis, which is so popular in the post-Soviet space. Posted in Armed Struggle, Asia, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Restoration and Counterrevolution, Common Sense, Europe, Fascism, Fascist Massacres, Hypocrisy, Imperialism & Colonialism, Imperialist Massacres, Imperialist War, Internationalism, Myth-Busting, NATO imperialism, Polemics & Refutations, Reactionary Watch, Revisionism, Russia, Russian Imperialism, Social-Fascism, Theory, U.S. Imperialism, Ukraine Alliance Marxist-Leninist: Chechnya, Oil and the Divided Russian Capitalist Class 1. INTRODUCTION. 4 1. THE WAR ITSELF – MUTINY OF THE GENERALS 5 2. WHAT LIES BEHIND THIS WAR ? THE OIL BACKGROUND 8 3.VIEW OF STALIN VERSUS KHRUSHCHEV AND VOSNOSENSKY UPON INDUSTRY 9 4. DIVISIONS INSIDE THE USSR CAPITALIST CLASS SINCE STALIN 15 5. THE ERA OF GORBACHEV AND YELTSIN 21 6. THE CRASH OF THE ROUBLE 22 The nation of CHECHNEYA, under the former socialist state of the USSR, enjoyed full national rights up to and including the right of secession. This lasted until the German invasion of Soviet USSR in 1941, when part of the Chechen-Ingush people allied themselves with the German fascists. For that reason, a correct policy of transportation of the rebels away from the Front, was undertaken (See forthcoming reprint of address to the Stalin Society by Bill Bland; Alliance 14). Following the war, full national rights were restored and Chechnya-Ingush was once more part of the Soviet Socialist Federation of Republics. The democratic government of Chechnya-Ingush stated its wishes for autonomy in 1991. Since then, they have endured attacks by troops of the Russian Federation. Recently, this “hidden war” became a full scale vicious assault, led by Boris Yeltsin‘s Russian Government, against the Chechen Government. Yet the Chechen Government and its peoples led by General Dzokar Dudayev, have waged a determined and resolute battle of self-defence. The Chechen bravery is only matched by the relentless bombardments of the Russian invading army. In the midst of a brutal war, once more, the utter bankruptcy of Yeltsin’s regime is exposed. BUT THE CONDUCT OF THIS WAR, SHOWS THAT THERE IS AN OPEN CONFLICT WITHIN THE RULING CLASS OF RUSSIAN CAPITALISTS. WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR THIS DIFFERENCE? Even during Stalin’s lifetime, hidden revisionists advocated a shift away from emphasis on heavy industry. Stalin successfully defeated these hidden revisionists led by Khrushchev. But after his death, the division between advocates of Heavy industry on one side; and advocates of Light industry on the other, took on the character of a battle between two sections of the capitalist class. There remains now a fundamental division of interests in the Russian capitalist class, between capitalists based in heavy industry, and capitalists based in light industry. The detailed evidence for this is presented below. This article tries to answer the following questions: “Yeltsin must have had some reasons to launch this war. What were these?” “What explains the divisions between the army and Yeltsin?” “What is the nature of the open conflict between Yeltsin and his capitalist opponents?” “What is the meaning of this for the working class of Russia and the other nations?” and, “What is the attitude of Marxist-Leninist to Chechenya? 1. THE WAR ITSELF – MUTINY OF THE GENERALS Marxist-Leninists recognise that the Army is part of the “armed might” of the state itself. If so we must explain the : “Near-mutiny in the upper ranks of the army.. at least half a dozen senior generals and probably many more have refused to fight in Chechnya or give their support to the campaign there.. those who have signalled open dissent are high-profile, sometimes politically active and popular men in their early middle years.” Financial Times, London UK. Dec 31/1 Jan, 1995. p.7. In this mutiny, Major General Ivan Babichev, refused to fire on the people of Grozny. THE CURRENT MUTINY OF THE ARMY GENERALS, AGAINST THE WAR IS DUE TO THREE FACTORS: i) A Proletarian refusal to fire upon the people. Some generals probably are genuinely moved by the plight of the people; and refuse to fire as an international proletarian duty. ii) A Military and strategic refusal to engage. Some generals realise that the war cannot be won in this manner. High echelons of Army elsewhere, like senior Commanders in the British army see Major General Ivan Babichev’s behaviour as follows: “I think he knew they were going about the operation entirely the wrong way and he didn’t have the means to complete the task, “One said.. “Tanks and armoured vehicles are almost useless in fighting in built up areas, said a British general who helped devise NATO tactics for the defence of Berlin during the Cold War.” Daily Telegraph, London, UK, reprinted Globe and Mail, Toronto, 3.1.95. p.A9. BUT THERE IS A THIRD REASON WHY THE ARMY IS IN MUTINY: iii) An Inter-Capitalist battle aimed at Yeltsin. The army and its advocates, benefit largely from the advocates of heavy industry. Part of the army’s refusal is, explained by the lining up of the army with the scions of heavy industry based capitalists in Russia. THE OBJECTIVE OF THE MUTINY WAS TO HUMILIATE YELTSIN AND LEAD HIS GOVERNMENT INTO A SERIOUS CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE IN ITS CONTINUATION. THE TACTICS OF THE ARMY GENERALS IN RELATION TO THIS WAR WERE : First to lure Yeltsin into a seeming “short lived war”. Obviously Yeltsin was led to believe that a military venture would be a short lived and “un-costly” war in terms of Russian dead and political consequences. Second; to then refuse his directions when the war was palpably failing. Third; to refuse to disengage when he ordered to do so. After foreign pressure was brought to bear following the brutal air bombing, Yeltsin was compelled to order the troops to stop bombing. Yet this order has been repeatedly ignored: “Mr. Yeltsin demanded to know why the bombing of Grozny was not stopped when he ordered it at end last week. He has now ordered two bombing halts, and.. the artillery assault on the city has never been heavier. Looking directly at Mr. Grachev, he said : “I want to hear absolutely precise information from the Defense Minister (Mr. Grachev).” New York Times, 7.1.95; p.1-4. Reasons offered for ignoring Yeltsin’s orders have been clearly insubordinate, but have mainly hinged on military imperatives : “Col Gen.Pavel S.Grachev, commander of Russia’s airborne troops – said :”Once we’ve launched the operation we must finish it. There is no way back.” New York Times, New York, 7.1.95. p.4. “Yevgeny Podkolzin, commander of Russia’s airborne troops in Chechnya, said the President’s order would cause serious problems for Russian soldiers inside Grozny.. If “Bombings stop, men from each window and basement and from behind each corner will fire at our soldiers..” He warned that it could take the military until the end of January to capture Grozny. Instead of storming the city, the military should have simply surrounded it and blockaded it, he said. But he added: “Once we have launched this operation, we must finish it. There is no way back”. Globe and Mail, Toronto, 7.1.95. p. A11. The results for Mr. Yeltsin to date are depressingly clear, he is “between rock and a hard place”: “Mr Yeltsin finds himself caught between two clear dangers: the political and moral cost of pressing on militarily in Chechnya, and the political and strategic cost of giving up.. it seems he has decided that the costs of giving up are worse for himself and the country than pressing ahead.” New York Times, 7.1.95.; p.4. IN FACT THE OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF THE ARMY GENERALS’ MUTINY APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY ACHIEVED: “The economic and personal costs of the war continued to mount. Russian newspapers and agencies have estimated Russian casualties in the fighting to date at anywhere between 256 to more than 1000. Another victim is the Russian currency, which has fallen 2.7% over the last two days to a rate of 3,661 roubles to the dollar. The Russian central bank, which estimates has spent at least $200 million over the past 2 days to prevent a larger fall, raised its key re-financing rate to a nine month high of 200 %, up from 180%. “The Russian economy has started to feel the consequences of the Chechen crisis,” Mr. Alexander Livshits, the president’s chief economic adviser said.. warning of inflationary pressures.” Financial Times, London, 7.1.95. p.26. “The economy is suffering.. the expense threatens to blow a hole in a budget designed to be tough.. it is a critical time. The budget depends on a phased series of loans from the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. The stabilisation of the currency- the main aims of the loan- depends in its turn on making the budget even tougher than that approved by the state duma, parliaments’ lower house this month. Moreover the government will have to stick to its budgeted targets. Last year it squandered opportunities for economic reform by printing money when the going got rough..Mr. Yeltsin humbled his Government after “Black Tuesday” in October, when the rouble lost a quarter of its value against the hard currencies. This re-established his pre-eminence, but no international financial institution or government will now find it a stabilisation programme credible unless they also believe he is committed to it. At present however, he is committed only to wining in Chechnya.” Financial Times, London, 1.1.95, p.7 Mr. Yegor Gaidar, until recently a staunch ally of Yeltsin’s, warned of a military coup: “There is a great danger of a military coup.” Russian democracy has never been shakier since the break up of the Soviet Union. Mr. Gaidar who broke with the President over the Chechnya policy, called events there “a massive military crime.” He urged Mr. Yeltsin to get rid of those “who pushed him into this adventure,”, including Defense Minister Pavel S. Grachev; Deputy Prime Minister Nikolai D. Yegoroav and Oleg Lobov, the secretary of the National Security Council.” New York Times, 4.1.95. pA1-A6. It is precisely because the foreign imperialists see their man, Yeltsin, under such intense difficulties; that they give him advice. This advice consists on the whole to stop the battle in Chechnya to search for a negotiated settlement. These efforts are led by France and Germany, and would use “experts” from the Organisations for Security and Cooperation In Europe (OSCE) (New York Times 4.1.95, p.A1). The USA also concedes Yeltsin’s mistakes, but continues to fully support Yeltsin as “their man”, also urging Yeltsin to use the OSCE (NY Times, 7.1.95. p.A4). In fact, the international imperialists have not criticised Yeltsin’s basic stand of denial of national rights to Chechnya. Thus President Clinton: “Reiterated his Administration’s support for Russia’s unity and territorial integrity and its opposition to any attempt to change the international border by force.” New York Times, 7.1.95. p.A4. 2. WHAT LIES BEHIND THIS WAR ? THE OIL BACKGROUND Data from recent trade negotiations over oil indicate something is more at stake in Chechnya than simple autonomy. Azerbaijan, itself a victim of recent aggression launched by Russian imperialist forces, tried to exert national rights. The suppression of these rights was directly linked to the oil reserves. Prospects of oil prompted fervent bargaining by Russian capitalists with foreign imperialism. But the deal cut, antagonised a section of the Russian capitalist class, enough to spur them on to struggle with foreign imperialism: “A leaked letter sent by Andrei Kozyrev, Russia’s Foreign Minister to Viktor Chernomyrdin, his prime minister, reveals that Russia plans to prevent Western oil companies from going ahead with a $8Bn (PS 5bn) agreement to exploit offshore field in the Caspian The agreement advertised as “the deal of the century”, was signed by Azerbaijan and a consortium of Western oil companies led by British petroleum.. Mr. Kozyrev stresses the importance of Russia retaining its share of the Caspian reserves.. and proposes that Russia will impose economic sanctions on Azerbaijan if it does not back down.. Russia is unlikely to retreat because the way it deals with Azerbaijan sets a precedent for Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, the two other republics with long Caspian coast lines and growing oil industries.” The Independent; London UK; 3.11.94. p.14 This agreement would link the British owned British Petroleum, owning 30% of shares; with the US Oil companies of Pennzoil and Amoco which together holding 40% of shares; and Azerbaijan’s Socar Company holding 20%, and Russian owned Lukoil owning 10%. The Carnegie Endowment For International Peace commented : “If the Russians throw a monkey wrench in the oil deal there will be a strong reaction here in Washington because so much money is involved.” A diplomat said : “It shows Russia will not allow any of the ex-Soviet states to move towards full economic independence.” Independent, Ibid, 3.11.94. p.14. The War in Chechneya shows that this interpretation is correct. BUT WHO IS MR. CHERNOMYRIDIN, THE PRIME MINISTER, AND WHY DOES THE ABOVE CONCERN CHECHNYA? “The oil and gas lobby is very powerful with Mr. Viktor Chernomyridin, former head of Gazprom, as prime minister. Ensuring that oil and gas from Central Asia is transported to Europe via Russian pipelines and ports is an obsession. the main oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea to the oil export harbour of Novorossiisk passes through Chechnya.. at stake is.. control over the main rail, road and gas rich Caspian sea and the central Asian republics.” Financial Times, London, UK, 7-8.1.95. p.2. Thus, Chechnya is critical as a conduit for the oil reservs of the Caspian coastal areas. Naturally Chernomyridin has financial interests stemming from his previous job, to protect. But, to fully understand the complexity of the stands taken by Chernomyridin, Kozyrev and the other new Russian ruling capitalists, we have to understand their class positions. 3. WHAT LIES BEHIND THIS WAR ? THE BATTLES BETWEEN HEAVY AND LIGHT INDUSTRY ADVOCATES i) Under Socialism : View of Stalin Versus Khrushchev and Vosnosensky Upon Industry There is a basic difference between two types of industry. The split is between Heavy (Marx’s Department A) and Light (Marx’s Department B). This, split, is an important consideration for the development of a country’s industrial, and economic independence. As Stalin said: “We must maintain the present rate of development of industry; we must at the first opportunity speed it up in order to pour goods into the rural areas and obtain more grain from them, to supply agriculture, and primarily the collective farms and state farms, with machines, so as to industrialise agriculture and to increase the proportion of its output for the market. Should we perhaps, for the sake of greater “caution”, retard the development of heavy industry so as to make light industry, which produces chiefly for the peasant market, the basis of our industry? Not under any circumstances! That would be.. suicidal; it would mean abandoning the slogan of industrialising our country, it would mean transforming our country into an appendage of the world capitalist system of economy.” Stalin J.V.S. 28 May, 1928. “Speech to the Institute of Red Professors, On the Grain Front”, ‘Works’, Volume 11, Moscow 1954, p.98. Stalin was arguing here, mainly against Nikolai Bukharin, who had argued that the economic measures proposed by Stalin were: “A disastrous going over to the Trotskyist positions.” An industrialisation based on the “impoverishment of the country, the degradation of agriculture, and the squandering of reserves.” Stephen F.Cohen, “Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution A Political Biography 1888-1938″, Oxford, 1980, p.306. Nonetheless, a successful industrialisation was achieved leading to the establishment of socialism in 1936. But hidden revisionism later resurrected the Bukharin line, in its new life under Khrushchev. Khrushchev and allies wished to reintroduce profit as a regulator of production. Moreover they wished to place more emphasis on increasing the availability of consumer goods. This of necessity, would lead to a dominance of consumer based industry – or light industry, over heavy industry. The countryside became one focus of this sharp conflict, and took the form that: “Some members of the Politburo.. urged that the traditional course be modified in the direction of increased reliance on economic levers.. and relaxation of central controls over kolkhozes.. this was current among leaders.. like.. Voznosensky.. and Khrushchev.. and opposed by Malenkov and Beria.” Sidney Ploss Conflict and Decision Making in Soviet Russia. A case study of agricultural policy 1953-1963. Princeton, 1965. p.28. The general line of Khrushchev in the countryside was completely in keeping with Vosnosensky‘s own stated views. Thus Vosnosensky had allied with a wing of economists and party officials who wished to relax the planning priority for Department A goods: “Vosnosensky, Mikoyan, Kosygin and Rodionov came in 1945 explicitly together as a managerial grouping which favoured establishing a place in the eacetie economy of the Soviet Union of light as well as heavy industries.. Vosnosensky’s Five Year Plan speech of March 1946 assigned priority on the immediate level to reconstruction tasks, civilian housing and consumer goods.. After 1945 this group and particularly Rodionov was involved in political intrigues.. Rodionov was a Russian nationalist.” William O McCagg, Junior:”Stalin Embattled: 1943-1948″, Detroit; 1978; p.134-135. The Vosnosenky clique, effected their programme in their own power base of Leningrad: “After 1945.. in the Russian republic a number of administrative reforms to increase consumer production.. ministries for technical culture, cinematographic, luxury goods, delicatessen products light industry and the like was established.” McCagg bid, p. 135, 163. In 1947, Vosnosenky published a major work, entitled “The War Economy of the USSR In the Period of the Patriotic War.” This work took significant departures from Marxism-Leninism. Amongst others, it favoured relaxing the priority of Department A goods: “It is proposed to increase the portion of the social product earmarked for consumption.” Nikolai Vosnosensky “War Economy of the USSR in the Period of the Patriotic War”; Moscow; 194; p.147. Khrushchev, now allied with Vosnosensky, argued that the self-interest of the peasants be boosted by a “link” system of small unit production which would aid incentive related payment. These policies all aimed to “enrich” the peasant and reinforce individual small scale capitalist tendencies in the countryside. “They adopted measures to reward diligent work in both the private and socialised sectors. The policies of one-cow-per-house-hold, commercial trade, and the small work unit in grain farming were all directed at this end. The leaders most closely associated with these incentive policies were Khrushchev and Voznosensky.” Ploss Ibid. p.39-40. “N.A.Voznosensky.. promoted greater material encouragement.. defense of the collective farmers rights to conduct private activities and enhanced autonomy and payment for on the spot technicians.” Ploss. p.29. Powerful agrarian party officials supported Khrushchev. At the February 1947 CPSU(B) CC Plenum, Vosnosensky was raised to full membership in the Politburo. Khruschevites dominated the 1947 CC Plenum : “Within the CPSU(B) CC Plenum in February 1947, Andreyev promoted the same views.. and with Dronin (a key Khruschevite supporter from the Ukraine).. authorized incentive driven “link” in grain farming. Still another concession to peasant self-interest which resulted from the Plenum was broader allowance for consumer cooperatives to act as commission agents in disposing of kolkhoz surpluses in urban markets. The cooperative shops paid higher than official state purchase prices for foodstuffs bought under decentralized procurement and offered urban consumers an alternative to the free kolkhoz market in supplementing their purchases. In the early part of 1947, 19,000 commission shops opened.” Ploss p.32-33. Initially, as Stalin was in a minority on the Politburo, his counter-attack was tangential; but effective, in that no changes at the kolkhozes could be made without the direct participation of practical specialists at the kolkhozes: “Stalin came forward at the February 1947 CC Plenum with one of his rare overt interventions of the day. Andreyev revealed.. that Stalin recommended that agricultural experts not working in farms and MTS, but in administrative posts remote from the barnyards should receive a quarter less pay than those in operational jobs. This would have logically complemented a recent directive prohibiting anyone from rescinding or altering agro-technical measures formed by kolkhozes.. without the knowledge of the specialists involved or permission of the district representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture. p.33 Ibid. Ploss. Stalin also effected the removal of Khrushchev from the party First Secretaryship of the Ukraine, subordinating him to Kaganovich. But Khrushchev remained premier of Ukraine. BY 1949, THE PLANS OF THE LENINGRAD CLIQUE OF VOSNOSENSKY TO RESURRECT CAPITALISM WAS EVEN MORE CLEAR. ACCORDING TO KHRUSHCHEV HIMSELF, STALIN HAD SAID ABOUT VOSNOSENKY’S 5 YEAR PLAN: “You are seeking to restore capitalism in Russia.” Khrushchev, cited by Wolfgang Leonard:”The Kremlin Since Stalin”, London; 1962; p.177. Accordingly under Stalin’s directives Vosnosensky was dismissed as Chairman of the USSR State Planning Committees on 5 March 1949. The trial of Vosnosensky and the other members of the “Leningrad Affair” took place on 29-30 September 1990; and Vosnosensky was sentenced to death. (See “The Leningrad Affair”, extracted from W.B.Bland; ” Restoration of capitalism in the USSR.” Wembley, London 1979; ISBN; re-printed Alliance Number 9). Meanwhile, Khrushchev soon launched a campaign aimed at creating “agro-towns” to “improve the lot” of the peasant, at a Moscow Regional Soviet meeting in March 1950 he unveiled a grand plan: “He tabled proposals to consolidate the many medium and small sized kolkhozes into large scale units and provide them with elementary urban amenities like electric lighting and plumbing.. the Kolkhozes were also entitled, he held, to build their own subsidiary enterprises.. he envisioned model plans for administration, public and recreational buildings.” Ploss, Ibid, p.46-7. “Khrushchev.. championed the village improvement program in speeches.. abridged in Pravda on March 4 1951.” Sidney Ploss. Ibid, p.49. THESE POLICIES OF THE KHRUSCHEVITES WOULD INCREASE THE DEMAND FOR CONSUMER LIGHT INDUSTRY. STALIN WAS OPPOSED TO THESE MANOUEVRES: “Stalin decisively intervened in the matter of rural reconstruction on March 5 1951. At his behest, the editors of Pravda informed readers that, through an oversight.. word had been omitted that Khrushchev’s article of the previous day was offered only for purposes of discussion and did not express.. official opinion.. Malenkov at the 19th Party Congress, rebuked “some of our leading workers” (Khrushchev) who.. had forgotten the principal production tasks facing the collective farms”.. Malenkov claimed also that building materials produced in kolkhozes were more expensive .. than those of state industry.” Ploss, Ibid, p.49-50. AS PART OF STALIN’S COUNTER-ATTACK ON REVISIONISM, HE PUBLISHED “ECONOMIC PROBLEMS OF SOCIALISM IN THE USSR”, IN 1952. IN THIS WORK STALIN ATTACKED IDEAS THAT : PROFIT SHOULD BE THE REGULATOR OF PRODUCTION; THE LAW OF VALUE SHOULD BE THE REGULATOR OF PRODUCTION; LAWS OF POLITICAL ECONOMY NO LONGER APPLY UNDER SOCIALISM. STALIN ALSO ATTACKED THE NOTION THAT HEAVY INDUSTRY WAS NOT THE BASIS OF SOCIALIST CONSTRUCTION: “Stalin made permanent the priority status of heavy engineering over that of light and food industries.. In the course of his monologue, Stalin revealed that one of his critics outside the Kremlin had appealed to the Politburo at large to start creating badly needed material incentives for the peasantry. The statistician Yaroshenko affirmed at a plenary session of the economic conference in November 1951, and in a letter sent on March 20th, 1952, to members of the Politburo, that Marx’s theory for the normalcy for preferential development of heavy industry was applicable only to capitalist economies and was inappropriate under socialism.” Cited Ploss, Ibid, p.53-54. Later, Khrushchev following Stalin’s death, effected the very changes he had earlier argued for unsuccessfully against Stalin. Khrushchev, first dismantled the Machine and Tractor Stations in the countryside (MTS), then actively promoted the proponents of light industry over and above that of heavy industry. During his lifetime, Stalin fought against each of these retrogressive steps introduced by Khrushchev. Ill informed commentators see the struggle between the Marxist-Leninists, led by Stalin (pro-Heavy Industrial) and the revisionists led by Khrushchev (pro-Light Industry), as hinged on how hard to “squeeze” the peasant. It is alleged that Stalin wished to squeeze the peasant, and that his resistance to “consumerism” or light industry was based on this. In fact, Marxist-Leninist resistance at that time to further expenditure on light industry was based on the overwhelming necessity to increase the heavy industrial base in order to improve the well being of the people. Stalin makes this clear in “Economic problems of socialism”: “Insuring the maximum satisfaction of the continual growing material and cultural needs of society – that is the goal of socialist production : a continuing growth and development of socialist industry on the basis of an even higher technology that is the means for its attainment.” J.V.Stalin Cited F.A.Durgin Jr. “The relationship of Stalin’s death to the economic change of the post-Stalin era” In R.C.Stuart. The Soviet rural economy. New Jersey, 1984. p. 78. Durgin writing in 1984, comments how modern this concept is: “This postulate…is one that the current generation for US economists has come to recognise…in the new ‘supply side’ economics.” During points out the higher expenditures on consumer goods under Stalin, rather than Brezhnev: “One of the most salient and overlooked features of the post-Stalin era has been the ever decreasing share of GNP going to consumption and the ever increasing share going to investment.. consumption’s share fell from 62.4% of the total in 1950 under Stalin to some 56.5% in 1974 under Brezhnev. Investments’ share during the same period doubled, rising from 14.8% of the total to 28.4%. The “imbalance”.. of the Stalin years seems not to have improved, but rather in a certain sense have worsened.” Durgin concludes : “All of the Stalin Five Year Plans called for significant increases in consumption. While consumption’s share of the national income during the First Five year Plan was to fall from 77.4 to 66.4 %, in absolute terms it was to increase by some 75%. The Second Plan called for a 133 % increase in the output of consumer goods and a two fold increase in the urban workers consumption of food and manufactured products.. The priority that Stalin gave to consumption in the post war period..was also high.” Durgin, Ibid. p.121-2. But Stalin’s priority was to increase consumption as the heavy industrial base could be expanded. ii) DIVISIONS INSIDE THE USSR CAPITALIST CLASS SINCE STALIN; TO BREZHNEV After the death of Stalin, the revisionists, succeeded in the resurrection of capitalism. But, the new Russian capitalist class, was divided between a section of capitalist linked to Heavy Industry and that section linked to Light Industry. This was first reported to Marxist-Leninists, by “The Communist League” UK; in Compass. This section is drawn from that. The basic division, between heavy based industrial capitalists and light based industrial capitalists has persisted, down to the current time. The conflict between the then embryonic, state capitalists involved in heavy industry and those involved in the consumer goods industries came into the open within a few months of Stalin’s death. On August 8th, 1953 the new Prime Minister Georgi Malenkov cast off his socialist cloak, to show his erst-while hidden revisonism. He told the Supreme Soviet : “On the basis of the success achieved in the development of heavy industry, all the conditions exist for a sharp rise in the production of consumer goods. However, while the output of means of production as a whole has risen in the last 28 years by almost 55 times, the production of consumer goods during the same period had only increased 212 times, which cannot be considered satisfactory. Hitherto we have had no possibility of developing light industry and the food industry at the same rate as heavy industry. We must, therefore , in the interests of ensuring a more rapid increase in the standard of life of the people, promote the development of the light industry by every means.” G. Malenkov :Speech to the Supreme Soviet, August 8th, 1953, Cited in :Kessings Contemporary Archives”, Volume 9; p.13,096. It took the state capitalists involved in heavy industry eighteen months to secure the official reversal of this policy and the removal of its leading proponent, Malenkov. In his letter of resignation of February 8th; 1955, Malenkov humbly recanted: “On the initiative and under the leadership of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, a general programme has been worked out.. The programme is based on the only correct principle– the further development of heavy industry to the maximum. The further fulfilment of this programme alone can create the necessary conditions for a real advance in the output of all the consumer goods needed.” G. Malenkov: Letter of Resignation to Supreme Soviet, February 8th., 1955; Cited in “Keesings Contemporary Archives”, Volume 10; p.14,033. Malenkov’s successor as Prime Minister was Marshall Nikolai Bulganin, who as a representative of the armed forces, might be expected to give full support to the principle of higher priority for heavy industry in the name of “defence.” In his first speech as Prime Minister, in fact, Bulganin emphasised: “Heavy industry is the basis of the defensive capacity of our country and of our military forces.. Heavy industry provides for the development of all branches of our national economy, and is the source of the constant growth of the well being of the people.” N. Bulganin: Speech February 9th., 1955, Cited Keesings Ibid, p.14,033. In May 1957 First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev presented to the Supreme Soviet his scheme to “decentralise” the state’s control of the economy. 25 industrial Ministries were to be abolished and replaced by 92 Regional Economic Councils. In June 1957 the representatives of Russian heavy industry on the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU allied themselves with the surviving Marxist-Leninists, headed by Vyacheslav Molotov, to reject this scheme. Khrushchev appealed to the Central Committee itself and succeeded in winning a majority of this body to condemn his opponents as an “anti-Party group” and to secure their removal. In November 1957, Khrushchev felt his position strong enough to be able to say that industrial development: “Had reached a such a level that without detriment to the interests of consolidating the defence of the country, without detriment to the development of heavy industry ad machine building, we can develop light industry at a considerably higher speed.” N.S.Khrushchev :Speech at 40th Anniversary of October Revolution, in : “Pravda”, November 7th, 1957. In March 1958, Bulganin was removed as Prime Minister, and in November denounced for having been a member of the “anti-Party group.” His successor was Nikita Khrushchev himself, who retained the post of First Secretary of the Party. At the May meeting of the Central Committee, Khrushchev put forward the view that the “decisive” branch of “heavy industry” was the chemical industry, and proposed that the expansion of the chemical industry, with “aid” from the older capitalistic countries, should be a prime element in the Seven Year Plan– painting a glowing picture of the consumer goods applications of this expansion. At the 21st Congress of the CPSU in January/February 1959, Khrushchev’s basic theme was that eh Soviet Union was now in process of passing from “socialism” to “communism,” a process which could be complete when: “We shall have a provided a complete abundance of everything to satisfy the requirements of all the people.” And he elaborated further the doctrine put forward at the 20th Congress, that war was “no longer inevitable,” and that the danger of war was “receding.” His report thus laid a theoretical basis for according greater scope to the development of the consumer goods industries. On January 17th, 1961 Khrushchev declared : “Today our country has such a powerful industry, such a powerful defence force that it can, without jeopardising the development of industry and the strengthening of its defence, devote more funds to the development of agriculture and increase the production of consumer goods,” and he deplored the fact that : “An appetite had developed in some of our comrades for giving more metal to the country.” (N.S. Khrushchev: Speech Jan.17th., 1916, In Soviet Embassy (London) Press Dept Release). At the 22nd Congress of the CPSU in October 1961 Khrushchev referred to the Seven Year Plan target of 68-91 million tons of steel a year to say: “Some people proposed increasing steel output to 100 million tons a year. But we restrained them, saying that all branches of economy had to be developed evenly.” (N.S.Khrushchev:Report to the CC to the 22nd Congress of the CPSU; London; 1961; p.40.) And in his report to the congress on the following day on the new party programme, Khrushchev said: “The 20 year national economic development plan- the general perspective- provides for the rates of growth in the output of means of production and of consumer goods to come considerably closer together.” N.S.Khrushchev : Report on the Programme of the CPSU; London; 1961; p.24. As a result of this lead, the congress adopted a resolution which said : “The revenues accumulated as a result of the over-fulfilment of industrial production plans should be channelled mainly towards agriculture, light industry and the food industry.” Khrushchev Report on the Programme of the CPSU; London; 1961; p.24. On September 9th., 1962 “Pravda,” the organ of the CC of the CPSU, published an article by the Kharkov economist, Professor Yevsey Liberman, advocating a discussion on the question of reorientering the Soviet economy on the basis of the profit motive. On Khrushchev’s initiative, a Plenum of he Central Committee on November 19th-23rd 1962 took an important step to weaken the Party’s control over the economy. The party organs up to, but not including, the level of Republic Central Committees were divided into two separate branches: one concerned with industry, the other with agriculture. At a press conference in October 1963 (reported in “Pravda” on October 27th) Khrushchev declared that the time was now ripe for diverting immense funds from heavy industry to chemicals, agriculture and the consumer goods industries. At the end of February 1964 “Pravda” published an article by A.Arzumanyan, Director of the Institute Of World Economics and International Relations, attacking the “dogmatists” who defended priority for heavy industry and recommending equal growth rates for heavy and consumer goods industries, with future priority to the latter. In July 1964 an official press campaign began to popularise Liberman’s theories. The Bulletin of the Soviet Embassy in London summed this up as follows: “In recent years.. the consumer goods industries have been greatly enlarged, It has become clear that the planning of the production of consumer goods must be brought closer to market demands. It has also become clear that economic incentives must be provided in order to induce industry to produce what the consumers want and adapt themselves quickly to changes in fashion, and also so as to ensure that the whole factory from the director to the worker is interested in meeting the demands of the consumer.” Soviet Embassy, London Bulletin, Cited in “Keesings’ Contemporary Archives”, Volume 15; p. 21,036. The base of support which Khrushchev had built up among the intelligentsia and petty bourgeois enabled him to survive against growing opposition for more than 10 years. But on October 15th, 1964, Khrushchev was forced to resign both as First Secretary of the CC of the Party and as Prime Minster. One of the changes levelled against him later was that of: “Neglecting the priorities of heavy industry by over-emphasising light and consumer goods industries.” “Keesings Contemporary Archives,” Volume 14; p. 20,390. Khrushchev was succeeded as First Secretary by Leonid Brezhnev, and as Prime Minister by Aleksei Kosygin. This was to some extent a balanced coalition, as Kosygin was inclined towards consumer industires. This is shown by his sponsorship of economic measures advocated by Professor Abel Aganbegyan. (Later these measures would be more energetically enacted by Gorbachev. See below). Therefore the new leadership of the party and the state went some way to placating the demands of the state capitalists involved in the consumer good industries (e.g. By the adoption of Liberman’s theories, providing for increased independence of enterprises and the gearing of production to the market through the profit motive). However Brezhnev’s influence prevailed, and the regime demonstrated its’ basic interest in serving the state capitalists involved in heavy industry by greatly strengthening party and state control of the allocation of material resources, investment funds, etc. The new line was summarised by General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev in his report to the 23rd Congress of the CPSU in March/April 1966 : “Strengthening the centralised planned direction of the national economy is now combined with the further development of the initiative and independence of the enterprises.” L.Brezhnev: Report to the 23 rd Congress of the CPSU, cited in “Keesings Contemporary Archives”, Volume 15, p. 21, 466. On November 16th, 1964 the Central Committee of the CPSU abolished the division of the party introduced in 1962, with the aim of strengthening the party’s control over the economy. On the other hand, in January 13th 1965, it was announced that 400 consumer goods factories would go over to the system of production abased on market demand. On April 1st, 1965 textile, lather and some other factories were transferred to the new system, under which they would gear their production to the basis of orders from retailers. These factories were permitted to retain a considerably larger amount of their gross profit than previously, this to be used partly for self-investment and partly for renumeration of management and workers over ad above basic salaries and wages. In August-September 1965, the new leadership began punitive action against intellectuals representing objectively the interests of the state-capitalists involved in the consumer goods industries. In these months 30 Ukrainian intellectuals were arrested, Andrie Sinyavsky and Yuli Danile were arrested, as was Aleksandr Yessenin-Volpin and Vladmir Bukovsky. Meanwhile on September 28th, 1965, the CC of the CPSU resolved to abolish the Regional Economic Councils of Khrushchev, established in May 1957; and to re-establish the industrial Ministries which had been abolished. The same resolution resolved to extend the “economic reform” introduced experimentally earlier in the year to the economy as a whole. The Supreme Soviet gave legislative effect to this resolution on October 1st-2nd 1965. On December 10th, 1968, Nikolai Baibokov (Chairman of the State Planning Committee) told the Supreme Soviet that enterprises working under the new “profit motive” system now produced 75% of total industrial production and 80% of profit. At the 23rd Congress of the CPSU (March 26th-April 8th 1966) Ivan Kazanets (Minister of the Iron and Steel Industry) complained that the Khrushchev regime had lowered the planned rate of increase in iron and steel output as a result of “the wrong and subjectivist counterposing of the chemical industry against the iron and steel industry.” However the main reports presented at the congress revealed that the state capitalists involved in the consumer goods industries had fought successfully for an increased allocation of material resources, investment funds, etc, to their field. In his report on the new 5 Year Plan from 1966-70, Prime Minister Aleksei Kosygin said: “Funds will be re-distributed in favour of the production of consumer goods, while continuing to give priority to the development of the output of means of production. Their output will rise by 49-52% and that of consumer goods by 43-46%, compared with 58% and 36% respectively during 1961-65.” A. Kosygin: Report on the 5 Year Plan, 23rd Congress CPSU, Cited in “Keesings Contemporary Archives”, Vol 15; p.21,468. Backed by propaganda from the dissident intellectuals, the political representatives of the state capitalists involved in the consumer goods industries continued to press their case. In the economic plan for 1968 it was still maintained that: “The emphasis will continue to be on the development of heavy industry”, “Keesings Contemporary archives”, Vol 16; p. 22,508. But in that year, 1968, the planned growth on the output of consumer goods for the first time exceeded (at 8.6%) that of the panned growth of the output of heavy industry (at 7.9%). This picture was repeated in the economic plan for 1969, which provided for a planned growth rate of consumer goods of 7.5% against 7.2% for heavy industry, and in the economic plan for 1969 where the figures were 6.8% and 6.1% respectively. At the 24th Congress of the CPSU (March 30th – April 9th 1971), General Secretary L. Brezhnev said: “The CC considers that the accumulated productive potential permits of a somewhat higher rate of growth for Department 2 (ie the consumer goods industries).. This does not invalidate our general policy based on the accelerated development of the output o the means of production.” Brezhnev L: Report to the 24th Congress of the CPSU, in: “Keesings Contemporary Archives”, Vol 18; p. 24,656. And the Five Year Plan for 1971-75 adopted by the congress provided for the first time in any Five Year Plan for a higher rate of the output of consumer goods industries (at 44-48%) than that of heavy industry (at 41-45%). But as the intellectuals were repressed, and as the movements for “freedom ” in the Baltic states were repressed, the leadership of the party and state felt able to reverse this dominance of consumer industry. By 1975, the representatives of the state capitalists involved in heavy industry had again won temporarily. On December 2nd, 1975 Nikolai Baibakov reported to the Supreme Soviet that it was planned to increase the output of heavy industry in 1976 by 4.9% (against 8.3% achieved in 1975) and that of the consumer goods industries by 2.7% (against 7.2% achieved in 1975). iii) INDUSTRY IN THE ERA OF GORBACHEV AND YELTSIN Following the death of Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov came to power in 1982. Andropov had been the director of the state security forces the KGB, since 1967. Using this base, Andropov launched a so called “anti-corruption” drive, especially targeted at the Brezhnev faction. This allowed the pro-Consumer goods industries faction to regain control of the state. Andropov had built up the careers of younger pro-Consumer advocates, such as Mikhail Gorbachev; Eduard Shevardnadze; Nikolai Ryzhkov; and Yegor Ligachev. All these individuals would follow the same “liberal” programme aimed at aiding the consumer based industries. In a short space of time, Andropov made changes aimed at: “The independence of assciation and enterprises of collecvtive farms and state farms to be increased.” Cited: “Gorbachev: Chistian Schmidt-Hauer: “The Path to Power”; Topsfield, MA; 1986; p.84. But Andropov was ill, and died after 8 months, on February 9th, 1984. His successor Konstantin Chernenko, was himself severely ill. His accession was a temporary reprieve for the heavy based faction, in whose favour Chernenkov’s report of November 15th 1984, “Accelerate The Intensification of the Economy,” was given (Schmidt-Hauer; Ibid; p.109). However his death on March 10 1985, left the path open for the vigorous proponents of light consumer industry. By 11 March 1985, Gorbachev had taken the post of General Secretary of the CPSU. Gorbachev now took up the programme outlined by Professor Abel Aganbegyan, whose Institute of Economics was in Novosibirsk. His programme, first outlined in 1965, and promoted by Kosygin, identified as the major problem in the USSR economy: “The staggering share of resource that the economy committed to defence, with something like a third of the entire workforce involved in the defence sector, and ‘the extreme centralism and lack of democracy in economic matters.” Cited in “The Waking Giant: The Soviet Union Under Gorbachev,” Martin Walker, London, 1986; p.38. This then was a programme targeted against the heavy industrial base, and was pro-light industry. However the programme also aimed to openly acknowledge and allow “profit.” These changes were similar to those proposed by Liberman i.e. further decentralisation and self contained “planning,” and local profit sharing under the guise of “incentives.” This was embided under the principle of “autonomous financial accounting” or Khozraschet. Kosygin’s attempts to fully implement Aganbegyan’s changes met with resistance, because they entailed an increased unemployment. But since both wings of the capitalist class (heavy and light based industrialists) stood to gain, they collaborated to push some of Aganbegyan’s programme through : “In 1970…the Khozraschet experiment…decreed that not only each factory, but the industry itself had to become self-financing…By 1980, four of the biggest industrial ministries had been transferred to the self-financing system: tractors and farm machinery, heavy and transport engineering, energy engineering, and electrotechnical. The principles of self-financing and management autonomy had also been adopted for…the creation of territorial-production complexes (TPCs), the new industrial complexes… in Siberia.” Walker Ibid, p.43. But enforcing the Russian workers towards capitalist norms was not easy, and the capitalist class wished for a speedier transformation. Professor Popov of Moscow now advocated in Pravda on 27 December 1980: “Wage cuts to increase incentives and a system of planned unemployment with a minimum wage of 80 rubles a month for the redundant.” To facilitate this, one of Aganbegyan’s pupils, Dr. Tatiana Zaslavsaya offered an updated programme in 1983 targeting “bureaucracy” who were “preventing further dissolution of central planning.” This programme was accepted by Gorbachev. In February 1986, he reported to the 27th Congress of the CPSU: “Prices must be made flexible. Price levels must be linked not only to the costs of production, but also with the degree to which they meet the needs of society and consumer demand..it is high time to put an end to the practice of ministries and departments exercising petty tutelage over industrial enterprises.. enterprises should be given the right to sell to one another, independently what they produce over and above the plan.. enterprises and associations are wholly responsible for operating without a loss, while the state does not bear any responsibility for their debts.. Increase of the social wealth as well as losses should affect the income level of each member of the collective.” Walker Ibid, p.51-52. But as well as these general steps to increae market forces, a narrower sectional interest became also clear. An underlying aim apart from completely raising the lid on private market forces and profit was to enhance consumer industry: “Gorbachev’s requirements (are).. set out in the “Prinicpal Directiosn fo the Economic nad Soical Development of the USSR Fro the Year 1986 to 1990 and For the Period up to 2000”.. “More consumer goods and better serives are vital.. says the new Chairman of the State Planning Commision (Gosplan) Nikolai Talyzin.. over the past 5 years the supply of consumer goods had grown at an averae of below 4%.. the “Complex Programme For the Development of the Production of Consumer Goods and the Service Sectors for the Year 1986-2000”, .. meant.. production of Consumer goods is to increase by as much as 30 % during the first 5 Year Plan period (1986-90) “mainly tough intensification of production on the basis of improved organisation and full use of existing capacity..the programme aims at “perfecting the production and consumption of light industry goods, cultural and domestic articles, reacting in good time to changes in public demand”… The long term plan .. prescribes that the contribution made by heavy and defence industries to supplying the public with high-quality industrial goods as well as modern electrical household goods must be “substantially increased.” Maria Huber : The Prospects for Economic Reform”, in C.Schmidt-Hauer, Ibid; p.171-179. Furthermore, as part of Gorbachev’s strategy, links with foreign capital were actively encouraged: “At the beginning of 1985, Oleg T.Bogomolov, Director of the Institute For the Economics of the Socialist World System, in lecture in Vienna announced that eh Soviet Union would make it possible for joint-venture companies to be set up with capitalist enterprises.. an important step for decentralisation.. trade relations with the industrialised capitalist countries are to be likewise intensified.. the joint resolution of the Central Committee and of the Council of Ministers of July 1985.. foresaw the promotion of exports at enterprise level.” Maria Huber; Ibid; p.174. But the division of interests and between the two basic groups of capitalists, is now much more acute. It has also taken a new form. The most current form it has taken, is that of a division between those who wish to be an appendage to the foreign imperialists, and those who wish to be totally independent of the foreign imperialists. As Mikhail Leontiev:

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511929

__label__wiki

Category Archives: National Liberation Published in Evrensel, 23 October 2017. Claims and facts about the right of nations to self-determination, following the independence referendums in Iraqi Kurdistan and Catalonia. Arif KOŞAR Following the independence referendums in Iraqi Kurdistan and Catalonia, the right of nations to self-determination has become a popular debate. Here are some of the claims and facts about this right: Claim 1. Defending the right of nations to self-determination ignites separatism The right of self-determination is a way of respecting a nation’s right to live the way it chooses to. Lenin states that this right applied even to the most ‘extreme’ options, including the ‘right to secession’. For this reason, the right of nations to self-determination forms the ‘right to establish a separate state’. This means that even if a majority of a nation now calls to ‘break off from’, i.e. ‘secession’, this right must be recognised. However, Lenin did not want this right because he wanted a separation, but because he wanted to advocate a genuine fraternity and unity among peoples. According to the programme of the Bolsheviks, the solution to the national question was to recognise the right of self-determination, and through this, removing all national privileges under a single state framework as a voluntary union based on equal rights. In order for the peoples to live together, the ‘right to secession’ must be recognised. Prohibition of this right encourages separation. For example, the more the demand of Turkey’s Kurds to have autonomous life is repressed, the more the Kurdish people gain a sense of need for ‘separation’. Therefore, the right of nations to self-determination does not mean to advocate separation but to defend the removal of national privileges and the conditions of voluntary unity. 2. The national question has already been resolved in Iraq. Language, cultural freedoms and autonomy have been provided. The Kurds are no longer an oppressed nation. The referendum serves the interests of Barzani, the President of Kurdistan Regional Government. It is true that the recent independence referendum is linked with Barzani’s political interests. However, reducing the national question to the issue of language and culture is a liberal approach. For example, why has the national question in Catalonia not been resolved? They have their language, culture, local government and own parliament, but the national question still was not resolved. There is a similar situation in Iraqi Kurdistan and the Kurdish question in Turkey. Even if we assume that language and cultural equality were to be provided, the Kurdish question would not be resolved without the demands of the Kurds for autonomy were met. The national question cannot only be seen as a cultural rights issue. The problem will continue as long as the Kurds request for autonomy is interfered with and prevented from the outside. In the final analysis, the national question is the rejection of the right of a nation to self-determination. In some cases, this will include matters such as language, culture and so on (just like the situation in Turkey for instance) and not in others (Catalonia and Iraqi Kurdistan). And so the national question can not be solved without the recognition of the right to self-determination. For this reason, Turkey’s left’s refusal of this right in ‘good faith’ opens the way to the nationalism of the oppressive nation. 3. To defend the right to a referendum that will clearly lead to separation is to support separatism through the rhetoric of ‘principles’ and ‘rights’. A socialist from Turkey cannot handle this issue abstractly without taking into consideration the historical context as if they were living in Australia. In Turkey, the nationalism of the oppressive nation is institutionalised and is highly effective among the working people. This nationalism is based on anti-Kurdishness and therefore there is a hysterical hostility to a possible Kurdish state. Establishing a state is seen as a privilege that the Turks hold and therefore a Kurdish state is not deemed appropriate. This is why socialists of Turkey firstly have the duty to help the working people gain an internationalist consciousness and to oppose all national privileges. The question is as follows: How will an equal friendship-fraternity relationship be established between the Turkish workers and the Kurdish workers? How will the common struggle be achieved? If socialists of Turkey will not respect the will of the Kurds demanding independence in Iraqi Kurdistan, can equality and fraternity even be considerable? The only way to establish trust, fraternity and equality between the nations in the medium term so that a common way of fighting is achieved is only through the recognition of the right to self-determination. 4. Those who support the right to self-determination do not care about the common struggle of the peoples. For the common struggles and fraternity of peoples and show to them that we are brothers, it is necessary to respect their preferences in order to break the prejudices of a people who have been massacred for centuries. This is the foundation of voluntary unity. The right to self-determination is not only a defence of an abstract principal but also a compulsory principle to provide for the fraternity, common struggle and voluntary unity of the peoples. As Lenin says “Humanity … can only achieve the inevitable union of nations by getting over a transition period when all oppressed nations are liberated, i.e. when they have the freedom of secession from the oppressive nation.” 5. Kurdish parties did not support the referendum. Therefore, the referendum does not reflect the will of the Kurdish nation. It is true that there are differences between the Kurds and their parties. However, the objection of Kurdish parties is not to the referendum itself, but Barzani’s desire to make the referendum an instrument to serve his own political future. Nearly all Kurdish parties criticized this and called for a ‘yes’ vote the day before the referendum. There will always be division and political infighting within a national movement; their existence does not invalidate the right of people to self-determination; especially for the socialist of another country. 6. In the age of imperialism, the right of people to self-determination is invalid. It is not possible. Small countries get annexed to imperialism. This is exactly the content of Lenin’s polemics with Luxemburg on the right of people to self-determination. Lenin naturally defends the right of people to self-determination as the solution to the national question. As the right of people to self-determination does not solve patriarchy, press freedom or lowered wages problems, nor does it solve the problem of imperialist economic hegemony. In his polemic with Luxemburg, Lenin argued this democratic principle not as a solution to all the problems in the world but as an idea to put an end to the national oppression in a multinational country. Of course, this country will be united with the struggle against imperialism and its stance under revolutionary conditions, i.e. progressive or socialist party leadership of the nation. This is the call of the III. International and we defend it. Unfortunately, this is not what is happening in the case of Iraqi Kurdistan. 7. While the concept of the right of people to self-determination is the revolutionary concept of yesterday, this question cannot be discussed ‘idealistically’ unless the concept of imperialism in others dependent on itself is seen today. Imperialism wants to use the right of people to self-determination to serve its own interests. This was done in Yugoslavia. This, however, requires the socialist not to reject the right of people to self-determination, but the perspective to struggle against and combat imperialism. Big monopolies may suggest control of unregistered employment, in part due to the fact that it is an element of “unfair competition”. As seen in WTO meetings, some representatives of imperialist countries may oppose low pay in countries like Bangladesh, in fear of competition. Imperialist countries such as the USA and Russia may fight against ISIS. All this does not require socialists to give up on these claims and defend ISIS. However, it requires one to struggle and act in a revolutionary context. Therefore, apparent defence of this principle by imperialists in some cases cannot be an excuse for socialists to give up. As Lenin expressed in the then current circumstances, “Just as in the example of Latin countries, conditions, where people were lied to with republican slogans and these were used by financial oligarchy for financial pillage cannot be a reason for social-democrats to give up on republicanism; in the same way, in the fight for freedom against the imperialist state, the condition that this could be used by another ‘bigger’ imperialist state for imperialist intentions of same order, cannot be a reason for social-democrats to reject the right of people to self-determination”. 8. If the national movement is collaborative or bourgeois-led, the right of people to self-determination cannot be defended. If a national movement was not led by the bourgeoisie, there would be no debate on the right of people to self-determination. The reason for the debate is the bourgeois nature of national movements. Thus, the right of people to self-determination is valid under conditions of bourgeois-led national movements; or even co-operation with imperialism. Socialists recognize it but fights against the nationalistic exercise of this right. For example, some in the Turkish left opposition to the referendum in Iraqi Kurdistan openly reject the right of people to self-determination. The referendum is to be respected. The fact that the referendum was brought about by Barzani for various reasons is an internal problem for the people of Kurdistan. When these internal problems are dealt with, there will be no such thing as the right of people to self-determination. Excuses such as “Talabani is a compromiser”, “Goran is a nationalist”, “PKK is nationalist” etc. to deny the right of people to self-determination will never seize to exist. Because an immaculate national movement in human history can never be found. Therefore, it is not the referendum that we should oppose. What we should criticise is Kurdish support for Barzani. And our friendly call to Kurdish workers and labourers is thus: “Do not support Barzani, the representative of the Kurdish co-conspirator bourgeoisie, take your fate into your own hands, do your own politics. Do not let independent Kurdistan become a toy for imperialism.” This call is a sign of our friendly, revolutionary support and solidarity, not a “lecture”. The right of people to self-determination and support for Barzani are two separate things. This is what separates internationalists from Kurdish nationalism. 9. For Lenin, the right of people to self-determination was not a principle but a tactic. It was beyond a dilemma of whether it was tactics, principles or strategy. It was all of them; tactical principle and strategic principle. Along with being a democratic principle, it was the only way to safeguard the unity of the working class. From this point of view, it had an unbreakable connection with socialist goals. By his statement; “Wherever we see ties relating to international oppression – without preaching for the need to separate – we will vigorously defend the right to self-determination and the right to separation for each nation. To defend, recognise and side with this right means: to defend equal rights between nations; to resist oppression; to fight against national privileges of any nation; and hence, to develop the class struggle between workers of every individual country”. 10. Independent Kurdistan will be a second Israel in the region. The basis of this thesis is clearly the traditional bourgeois-nationalist sensitivity to an independent Kurdish state. If it remains in Barzani’s leadership, Kurdistan will indeed be an important figure in US imperialism, and therefore Israel’s anti-Iran strategy. It will be a co-conspirator state. However, it will not be a second Israel because there is no Palestine in Kurdistan, there is no Zionism. As a co-conspirator administration to imperialism, it will look more like Turkey than Israel. However, with its size, population and economic dependency it will probably be a weaker partner than Turkey. 11. Kurdistan will be an advanced outpost of imperialism. It seems likely to be so under the collaborator Barzani administration. At the referendum, the decision was for independence. It must be implemented in accordance with the right of people to self-determination. However, there is great opposition amongst Kurds too. Perception of an independent Kurdistan as an “unchanging, collaborator country” is also linked to the nationalist hysteria of hate against the Kurds. Barzani can be overthrown, independent Kurdistan can advance in a popular, anti-imperialist and democratic line. This popular option is not blocked by independence. In other words, Kurdistan does not have to be an imperialist outpost just because it is Kurdistan. Kurdish people harbour a vigorous vein of opposition in their collective historical memory that advocates the opposite. 12. Independent Kurdistan will trigger a war in the region. Independent Kurdistan is not a disaster. In fact, Kurdish autonomous region operates like an independent country already. The administration is now a collaborator of imperialism. For that reason, unless war originates from hostility to Kurds; it should be seen as a disaster for the region. Disaster can only happen when politics of Kurdish hate leads to a war, started by reactionary countries in the region. In that case, it is not the Kurds demanding independence, but the reactionary states of the region that should be blamed and fought against. 13. ‘Socialists’ on Turkish left that reject the right of the people to self-determination are fascists. Of course, rejection of the right of people to self-determination is a step in support of oppressive state nationalism. However, some parties that reject this right on a theoretical level defend recognition of the results of the referendum and oppose military action or oppression against Kurdistan. These parties and movements cannot be accused of fascism. What we see is the result of being influenced by a deviation to the right and oppressive state nationalism. 14. Lenin defended the right of revolution to self-determine, not right of people to self-determination. Lenin’s perspective was undoubtedly revolutionary. He addressed the solution of every problem with a revolutionary perspective. For this reason, he unfalteringly defended the right of people to self-determination. He did not point to a tautology of “right of revolution to self-determine” because revolution cannot be expressed in terms of a right; it is a matter of power. When sufficient power is gained, neither counter-revolution nor revolutionary forces will be trapped in an abstract notion of right. Revolution does not take place by rights but by the force. However, the right of people to self-determination is defensible and defended as a right and principle. 15. Independence of Iraqi Kurdistan will also open Turkey’s borders to debate. It is a pity that this argument came from the ‘left’. Of course, the struggle cannot be carried out without considering existing borders. However, today’s borders were drawn by imperialists on the basis of oppression and division of Kurdish peoples. It is the duty of socialists to defend their unity on the basis of equal rights and not act as “border guards” in a geography where peoples are oppressed and massacred, and in order to do this unfailingly, they must recognize the right of people to self-determination. 16. The father of the right of people to self-determination is US President Wilson. Lenin quickly adopted this principle to gain the support of colonial peoples against Wilson. This principle entered socialist agenda long before Wilson expressed it. This principle was included in the decisions of the Second International Congress held in London in 1896. It has been in the program of Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDIP) since its first Congress. 17. Lenin defended this principle not in the era of imperialism but in the era of socialist revolutions. The right of people to self-determination was the subject of a further four comprehensive discussions for Lenin and the Bolsheviks after being re-admitted into the 1903 program. First; In 1913, the right of people to self-determination was defended against the Austrian national-socialist Otto Bauer’s “national cultural autonomy” formulation and its reflections in Russia. In 1914, Lenin defended the right of people to self-determination in the Bolshevik Party against rising national movements, and in opposition to those who claimed it will inflame apartheid. In 1916, Lenin again explained in detail the right of people to self-determination against the Bukharin and Kievsky thesis that “the right of people to self-determination cannot be realized in the era of imperialism” and that “it will serve imperialism”; he described their opposition as “Marxism’s cartoon” and “imperialist economics”. Finally, it was proposed by Lenin in the Third International, expanding the scope of the formulation of the struggle against the imperialism of the colonial countries. Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Repression, Common Sense, Europe, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Iraq, Kurdistan, Labour Party (EMEP), Marxism-Leninism, Middle East, Myth-Busting, National Liberation, Polemics & Refutations, Rosa Luxemburg, Spain, The Classics, Theory, Turkey, U.S. Imperialism, Vladimir Lenin June 5 marks 50 years since the defeat of 1967, which had among its most prominent results, the completion of the occupation of the rest of Palestine, as well as the Syrian Golan Heights and the Egyptian Sinai. This occasion deepened the concept of defeat and its implication in Arab thought and practice and has sparked numerous efforts and political settlement projects under the pretext of resolving the Arab-Zionist conflict. The defeat of June 5 came to confirm the nature and essence of the Zionist project and its aspirations for expansion, hegemony and occupation of a central area of the Arab region. This occupation included the Zionist project and its colonial and imperialist partners and allies, with shared goals, interests and ambitions in the Arab world, including the plundering of its resources, ensuring its fragmentation and continued underdevelopment. It also highlighted the weakness of the overall Arab situation, intensifying the contradictions of that situation. Despite all of these factors, it also opened the door to the intensification and escalation of the Palestinian resistance movement and popular defiance in the face of colonial aggression. This intensification and escalation of Palestinian people’s resistance and the Arab response have shown, along with the Zionist project and its objectives of expansion, that the comprehensive and historical conflict with the Zionist enemy as a struggle for existence is not only between the Palestinian people and this enemy alone, but in essence is a conflict between the Arab nation as a whole and the Zionist project which aims at the dependence, subordination and fragmentation of this nation and the Arab homeland and the continued plundering of its resources and wealth, ensuring the security and stability of the Israeli occupation and its continued technological superiority and progress. To the Palestinian and Arab masses… Despite 50 years after the defeat, we continue to suffer its effects very clearly. In terms of the Zionist project, we see the continued occupation of Palestine and other Arab lands, despite numerous international resolutions that do not recognize the occupation and calling for withdrawal. In practice, colonization on the ground has increased continually since that time. The leaders of the Zionist project have continued the terror and ethnic cleansing that began before 1948 against the Palestinian people and its armies and aircraft have continued their attacks on the Arab countries. Their support for reactionary and extremist forces seeks to add new burdens and costs to the Arab situation, which suffers from division, weakness and fragmentation of the national and social fabric. This comes in accordance with the open and secret wars that are hurting all with the continued erosion and exhaustion of the Arab body with violence and pressure in political, economic and military forms to impose almost complete complacency before the imperialist project. In light of the ongoing U.S.-Zionist attacks, colonialism and occupation, we in the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine emphasize: First, rejection of the political and military outcomes of the defeat of June and all of the desperate attempts to lead the Arab-Zionist struggle to the gateway of so-called “peaceful settlement solutions” that depend on recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity and its existence, from Camp David through the Oslo Accords and Wadi Araba. We reject all attempts to normalize between Arab states and the Zionist enemy, part of an apparent attempt to erase the essential nature of the struggle. This is a confrontation between, on one side, the imperialist powers, the Zionist project and its tool “Israeli occupation,” and on the other, the entire Arab nation. This struggle is for the liberation of the entire land of Palestine and the return of its people who were displaced to the corners of the earth through systematic uprooting and ethnic cleansing, and for the liberation of the Arab people and control over their destiny, wealth and resources, on the road to the dismantling of the Zionist state, a state of occupation, aggression and permanent warfare against the Palestinian and Arab people. Second, rejection of the so-called Arab-American-Islamic Summit in Riyadh and its results, which aim to distort the main contradiction in the region with the Zionist project and the Israeli state and shift the conflict to one with Iran through the formation of a so-called “Sunni”-Israeli-American alliance. This is an attempt to tailor Arab politics to the requirements of the imperialist and Zionist project and confirm the dominance of the Zionist state in the region. It also aims to target Arab and Palestinian resistance forces, which were described in this summit, in the words of US President Donald Trump as “terrorism.” Third, confrontation of the results of this summit with the broadest official and popular Arab alliance, uniting all Arab progressive forces struggling for liberation and freedom from imperialism and Zionism in the region. This struggle requires activating the role of the Arab Progressive Front based on clear strategies and tactics and comprehensive planning. Fourth, ending all Palestinian and Arab reliance on the path of so-called negotiations, which have proven through experience to be painful, damaging and a complete failure in achieving any Arab or Palestinian objectives. Any reliance on a positive role played by Trump confirms the continued cultivation of illusions and losing bets. This administration comes in continuation and intensification of the ongoing strategic policy of US administrations, designed to ensure the security, stability, progress and technical and military superiority of the Zionist occupation. Therefore, it will only strive to impose a political solution in conformity with a U.S./Israeli vision. Our choice is that of the Palestinian people, resistance and struggle for national liberation and ending all forms of absurd negotiations with the Zionist enemy. This includes full commitment to the resolutions of the Palestinian Central Council and PLO Executive Committee, including the end of negotiations and security coordination with the occupation, on the road to a complete break with the Oslo agreement, its political and economic consequences and its disastrous impact on the Palestinian liberation struggle and our rights. Fifth, prioritizing the Palestinian reconciliation file and undertaking hard work to end the division. This begins by ending all actions taken against the Gaza Strip and collective resolution of the issue of the administration committee and implementing reconciliation agreements. This also includes the rebuilding and restoration of Palestinian national institutions, particularly the Palestine Liberation Organization, on the basis of national and democratic foundations. It is not acceptable to deal with these institutions as a site of exclusivity, domination and monopoly, and instead it is critical to open the field widely for all forces, institutions and social strata to participate in the management of Palestinian national affairs. Sixth, our salutes and appreciation to the brave prisoners and their struggle in the battle for freedom and dignity that they fought for 41 days of empty stomachs, confronting the occupation and its inhumane policies. We affirm our full and continued support for the prisoners’ struggle until freedom, liberation and the return of our people to their homes, lands and homeland. Glory to the Palestinian People, the Arab nation and the brave resistance! Glory to the martyrs and freedom for the prisoners! Victory is inevitable Posted in Arab & Mid-East Liberation, Armed Struggle, Colonialism, History, Imperialism & Colonialism, Imperialist War, Internationalism, Iran, Marxism-Leninism, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, U.S. Imperialism, Zionism May Day Statement of the Party of Labour Iran (Toufan) Hail May 1st, The International Workers’ Day ! May 1, the day of unity and solidarity of the working class all over the world, is upon us at a time when the Western imperialists headed by the U.S. imperialism, with the adoption of policy of invasion, of violation of the Charter of the United Nations and even without the consent of the United Nations Security Council, and against the will of overwhelming majority of the countries of the world, have created a new world order reminiscent of the old colonial times. The U.S. imperialism, the number one enemy of the mankind and the biggest state terrorism in the world, neither recognizes the right to self-determination nor accepts independence nor respect the territorial integrity of nations. The imperialists do not recognize any international agreement that opposes or restricts their interests. They occupy or violate the airspace of countries and act like criminal bandits and kill civilians, without being held accountable. The U.S. imperialists want to impose the decisions of their Congress, that is, their legal system, on all countries of the world. They have brought all foreign exchanges and payment services under their control in order to bully nations. Among others, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Syria, Libya, Palestine and Yemen are the victims of this inhuman policy. The renewed bombardment of Syria that is ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump is a serious warning signal for endangering the world peace and for the possible beginning of a bloody world war. In Iran, the capitalist regime of the Islamic Republic continues to oppress the working class. The workers’ just demands for the formation of independent trade unions, for work, bread and freedom, for job security, against privatization, and against mass dismissals are met with arrest, imprisonment and torture. Though the social expert groups estimate the minimum living cost of a 3.5-member family to be near two million and 489 thousand Tuman per month (about $750) , the ” High Council of Labour” has set the minimum wage of 930 thousand Tuman ( $270)! This is a further step in the implementation of neoliberal policies, to meet the demands of the International Monetary Fund, to provide cheap labor and to increase the rate of capitalist profit. According to the statements made by the official press, more than 80% of Iranian workers now live under the poverty line. The implementation of the bill of “Target Subsidiaries”, has worsened the living condition of the working class. Only the united struggle of the workers and labourers under the leadership of their working class party can emancipate the people from the yoke of capitalist slavery. The Party of Labour of Iran is boycotting the Presidential elections in Iran. There is no legitimacy in the criminal regime of the Islamic Republic for which the Iranian officials are trying to display through elections. We celebrate May 1st this year with the knowledge that the Great October Socialist Revolution took place 100 years ago, the first revolution which established the dictatorship of the proletariat and the real democracy for workers and toilers, and opened a new horizon to mankind. The revolution was realized under the red flag of Lenin. The Bolshevik Party under Lenin’s leadership, and later under the leadership of Stalin, had defended the achievements of the October Revolution. For liberation from destructive bloody wars, for elimination of the nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, for the realization of genuine human rights, liberation from exploitation, poverty, unemployment and economic misery, there is no other path but the path of socialist revolution under the leadership of the working class. Long live proletarian internationalism! Down with the regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran! The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) www.toufan.org Posted in Afghanistan, Anti-Imperialism, Arab & Mid-East Liberation, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Exploitation, Capitalist Repression, Colonialism, Fascist Massacres, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Imperialist War, Internationalism, Iran, Iraq, Joseph Stalin, Libya, May Day, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan), Reactionary Watch, Syria, The Classics, U.S. Imperialism, Vladimir Lenin, Yemen, Yugoslavia J.V. Stalin: The Prospects of the Revolution in China Speech Delivered in the Chinese Commission of the E.C.C.I. Comrades, before passing to the subject under discussion, I think it necessary to say that I am not in possession of the exhaustive material on the Chinese question necessary for giving a full picture of the revolution in China. Hence I am compelled to confine myself to some general remarks of a fundamental character that have a direct bearing on the basic trend of the Chinese revolution. I have the theses of Petrov, the theses of Mif, two reports by Tan Ping-shan and the observations of Rafes on the Chinese question. In my opinion, all these documents, in spite of their merits, suffer from the grave defect that they ignore a number of cardinal questions of the revolution in China. I think it is necessary above all to draw attention to these shortcomings. For this reason my remarks will at the same time be of a critical nature. CHARACTER OF THE REVOLUTION Lenin said that the Chinese would soon be having their 1905. Some comrades understood this to mean that there would have to be a repetition among the Chinese of exactly the same thing that took place here in Russia in 1905. That is not true, comrades. Lenin by no means said that the Chinese revolution would be a replica of the 1905 Revolution in Russia. All he said was that the Chinese would have their 1905. This means that, besides the general features of the 1905 Revolution, the Chinese revolution would have its own specific features, which would be bound to lay its special impress on the revolution in China. What are these specific features? The first specific feature is that, while the Chinese revolution is a bourgeois-democratic revolution, it is at the same time a revolution of national liberation spearheaded against the domination of foreign imperialism in China. It is in this, above all, that it differs from the 1905 Revolution in Russia. The point is that the rule of imperialism in China is manifested not only in its military might, but primarily in the fact that the main threads of industry in China, the railways, mills and factories, mines, banks, etc., are owned or controlled by foreign imperialists. But it follows from this that the questions of the fight against foreign imperialism and its Chinese agents cannot but play an important role in the Chinese revolution. This fact directly links the Chinese revolution with the revolutions of the proletarians of all countries against imperialism. The second specific feature of the Chinese revolution is that the national big bourgeoisie in China is weak in the extreme, incomparably weaker than the Russian bourgeoisie was in the period of 1905. That is understandable. Since the main threads of industry are concentrated in the hands of foreign imperialists, the national big bourgeoisie in China cannot but be weak and backward. In this respect Mif is quite right in his remark about the weakness of the national bourgeoisie in China as one of the characteristic facts of the Chinese revolution. But it follows from this that the role of initiator and guide of the Chinese revolution, the role of leader of the Chinese peasantry, must inevitably fall to the Chinese proletariat and its party. Nor should a third specific feature of the Chinese revolution be overlooked, namely, that side by side with China the Soviet Union exists and is developing, and its revolutionary experience and aid cannot but facilitate the struggle of the Chinese proletariat against imperialism and against medieval and feudal survivals in China. Such are the principal specific features of the Chinese revolution, which determine its character and trend. IMPERIALISM AND IMPERIALIST INTERVENTION IN CHINA The first defect of the theses submitted is that they ignore or underestimate the question of imperialist intervention in China. A study of the theses might lead one to think that the present moment there is, properly speaking, no imperialist intervention in China, that there is only a struggle between Northerners and Southerners, or between one group of generals and another group of generals. Furthermore, there is a tendency to understand by intervention a state of affairs marked by the incursion of foreign troops into Chinese territory, and that if that is not the case, then there is no intervention. That is a profound mistake, comrades. Intervention is by no means confined to the incursion of troops and the incursion of troops by no means constitutes the principal feature of intervention. In the present-day conditions of the revolutionary movement in the capitalist countries, when the direct incursion of foreign troops may give rise to protests and conflicts, intervention assumes more flexible and more camouflaged forms. In the conditions prevailing today, imperialism prefers to intervene in a dependent country by organising civil war there, by financing counter-revolutionary forces against the revolution, by giving moral and financial support to its Chinese agents against the revolution. The imperialists were inclined to depict the struggle of Denikin and Kolchak, Yudenich and Wrangel against the revolution in Russia as an exclusively internal struggle. But we all knew — and not only we, but the whole world — that behind these counter-revolutionary Russian generals stood the imperialists of Britain and America, France and Japan, without whose support a serious civil war in Russia would have been quite impossible. The same must be said of China. The struggle of Wu Pei-fu, Sun Chuan-fang, Chang Tso-lin and Chang Tsung-chang against the revolution in China would be simply impossible if these counter-revolutionary generals were not instigated by the imperialists of all countries, if the latter did not supply them with money, arms, instructors, “advisers,” etc. Wherein lies the strength of the Canton troops? In the fact that they are inspired by an ideal, by enthusiasm, in the struggle for liberation from imperialism; in the fact that they are bringing China liberation. Wherein lies the strength of the counter-revolutionary generals in China? In the fact that they are backed by the imperialists of all countries, by the owners of all the railways, concessions, mills and factories, banks and commercial houses in China. Hence, it is not only, or even not so much, a matter of the incursion of foreign troops, as of the support which the imperialists of all countries are rendering the counter revolutionaries in China. Intervention through the hands of others — that is where the root of imperialist intervention now lies. Therefore, imperialist intervention in China is an indubitable fact, and it is against this that the Chinese revolution is spearheaded. Therefore, whoever ignores or underestimates the fact of imperialist intervention in China, ignores or underestimates the chief and most fundamental thing in China. It is said that the Japanese imperialists are showing certain symptoms of “good will” towards the Cantonese and the Chinese revolution in general. It is said that the American imperialists are not lagging behind the Japanese in this respect. That is self-deception, comrades. One must know how to distinguish between the essence of the policy of the imperialists, including that of the Japanese and American imperialists, and its disguises. Lenin often said that it is hard to impose upon revolutionaries with the club or the fist, but that it is sometimes very easy to take them in with blandishments. That truth of Lenin’s should never be forgotten, comrades. At all events, it is clear that the Japanese and American imperialists have pretty well realised its value. It is therefore necessary to draw a strict distinction between blandishments and praise bestowed on the Cantonese and the fact that the imperialists who are most generous with blandishments are those who cling most tightly to “their” concessions and railways in China, and that they will not consent to relinquish them at any price. THE REVOLUTIONARY ARMY IN CHINA My second remark in connection with the theses submitted concerns the question of the revolutionary army in China. The fact of the matter is that the question of the army is ignored or underestimated in the theses. (A voice from the audience : “Quite right!”) That is their second defect. The northward advance of the Cantonese is usually regarded not as an expansion of the Chinese revolution, but as a struggle of the Canton generals against Wu Pei-fu and Sun Chuan fang, as a struggle for supremacy of some generals against others. That is a profound mistake, comrades. The revolutionary armies in China are a most important factor in the struggle of the Chinese workers and peasants for their emancipation. Is it accidental that until May or June of this year the situation in China was regarded as the rule of reaction, which set in after the defeat of Feng Yu-hsiang’s armies, but that later on, in the summer of this year, the victorious Canton troops had only to advance northward and occupy Hupeh for the whole picture to change radically in favour of the revolution? No, it is not accidental. For the advance of the Cantonese means a blow at imperialism, a blow at its agents in China; it means freedom of assembly, freedom to strike, freedom of the press, and freedom to organise for all the revolutionary elements in China in general, and for the workers in particular. That is what constitutes the specific feature and supreme importance of the revolutionary army in China. Formerly, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, revolutions usually began with an uprising of the people for the most part unarmed or poorly armed, who came into collision with the army of the old regime, which they tried to demoralise or at least to win in part to their own side. That was the typical form of the revolutionary outbreaks in the past. That is what happened here in Russia in 1905. In China things have taken a different course. In China, the troops of the old government are confronted not by an unarmed people, but by an armed people, in the shape of its revolutionary army. In China the armed revolution is fighting the armed counter-revolution. That is one of the specific features and one of the advantages of the Chinese revolution. And therein lies the special significance of the revolutionary army in China. That is why it is an impermissible shortcoming of the theses submitted that they underestimate the revolutionary army. But it follows from this that the Communists in China must devote special attention to work in the army. In the first place, the Communists in China must in every way intensify political work in the army, and ensure that the army becomes a real and exemplary vehicle of the ideas of the Chinese revolution. That is particularly necessary because all kinds of generals who have nothing in common with the Kuomintang are now attaching themselves to the Cantonese, as a force which is routing the enemies of the Chinese people; and in attaching themselves to the Cantonese they are introducing demoralisation into the army. The only way to neutralise such “allies” or to make them genuine Kuomintangists is to intensify political work and to establish revolutionary control over them. Unless this is done, the army may find itself in a very difficult situation. In the second place, the Chinese revolutionaries, including the Communists, must undertake a thorough study of the art of war. They must not regard it as something secondary, because nowadays it is a cardinal factor in the Chinese revolution. The Chinese revolutionaries, and hence the Communists also, must study the art of war, in order gradually to come to the fore and occupy various leading posts in the revolutionary army. That is the guarantee that the revolutionary army in China will advance along the right road, straight to its goal. Unless this is done, wavering and vacillation may become inevitable in the army. CHARACTER OF THE FUTURE GOVERNMENT IN CHINA My third remark concerns the fact that the theses say nothing, or do not say enough, about the character of the future revolutionary government in China. Mif, in his theses comes close to the subject, and that is to his credit. But having come close to it, he for some reason became frightened and did not venture to bring matters to a conclusion. Mif thinks that the future revolutionary government in China will be a government of the revolutionary petty bourgeoisie under the leadership of the proletariat. What does that mean? At the time of the February Revolution in 1917, the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries were also petty-bourgeois parties and to a certain extent revolutionary. Does this mean that the future revolutionary government in China will be a Socialist-Revolutionary-Menshevik government? No, it does not. Why? Because the Socialist-Revolutionary Menshevik government was in actual fact an imperialist government, while the future revolutionary government in China cannot but be an anti-imperialist government. The difference here is fundamental. The MacDonald government was even a “labour” government, but it was an imperialist government all the same, because it based itself on the preservation of British imperialist rule, in India and Egypt, for example. As compared with the MacDonald government, the future revolutionary government in China will have the advantage of being an anti-imperialist government. The point lies not only in the bourgeois-democratic character of the Canton government, which is the embryo of the future all-China revolutionary government; the point is above all that this government is, and cannot but be, an anti-imperialist government, that every advance it makes is a blow at world imperialism — and, consequently, a blow which benefits the world revolutionary movement. Lenin was right when he said that, whereas formerly, before the advent of the era of world revolution, the national liberation movement was part of the general democratic movement, now, after the victory of the Soviet revolution in Russia and the advent of the era of world revolution, the national-liberation movement is part of the world proletarian revolution. This specific feature Mif did not take into account. I think that the future revolutionary government in China will in general resemble in character the government we used to talk about in our country in 1905, that is, something in the nature of a democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry, with the difference, however, that it will be first and foremost an anti-imperialist government. It will be a government transitional to a non-capitalist, or, more exactly, a socialist development of China. That is the direction that the revolution in China should take. This course of development of the revolution is facilitated by three circumstances: firstly, by the fact that the revolution in China, being a revolution of national liberation, will be spearheaded against imperialism and its agents in China; secondly, by the fact that the national big bourgeoisie in China is weak, weaker than the national bourgeoisie was in Russia in the period of 1905, which facilitates the hegemony of the proletariat and the leadership of the Chinese peasantry by the proletarian party; thirdly, by the fact that the revolution in China will develop in circumstances that will make it possible to draw upon the experience and assistance of the victorious revolution in the Soviet Union. Whether this course will end in absolute and certain victory will depend upon many circumstances. But one thing at any rate is clear, and that is that the struggle for precisely this course of the Chinese revolution is the basic task of the Chinese Communists. From this follows the task of the Chinese Communists as regards their attitude to the Kuomintang and to the future revolutionary government in China. It is said that the Chinese Communists should withdraw from the Kuomintang. That would be wrong, comrades. The withdrawal of the Chinese Communists from the Kuomintang at the present time would be a profound mistake. The whole course, character and prospects of the Chinese revolution undoubtedly testify in favour of the Chinese Communists remaining in the Kuomintang and intensifying their work in it. But can the Chinese Communist Party participate in the future revolutionary government? It not only can, but must do so. The course, character and prospects of the revolution in China are eloquent testimony in favour of the Chinese Communist Party taking part in the future revolutionary government of China. Therein lies one of the essential guarantees of the establishment in fact of the hegemony of the Chinese proletariat. THE PEASANT QUESTION IN CHINA My fourth remark concerns the question of the peasantry in China. Mif thinks that the slogan for forming Soviets — namely, peasant Soviets in the Chinese countryside — should be issued immediately. In my opinion, that would be a mistake. Mif is running too far ahead. One cannot build Soviets in the countryside and avoid the industrial centres of China. But the establishment of Soviets in the industrial centres of China is not at present on the order of the day. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that Soviets cannot be considered out of connection with the surrounding situation. Soviets — in this case peasant Soviets — could only be organised if China were at the peak period of a peasant movement which was smashing the old order of things and building a new power, on the calculation that the industrial centres of China had already burst the dam and had entered the phase of establishing the power of the Soviets. Can it be said that the Chinese peasantry and the Chinese revolution in general have already entered this phase? No, it cannot. Consequently, to speak of Soviets now would be running too far ahead. Consequently, the question that should be raised now is not that of Soviets, but of the formation of peasant committees. I have in mind peasant committees elected by the peasants, committees capable of formulating the basic demands of the peasantry and which would take all measures to secure the realisation of these demands in a revolutionary way. These peasant committees should serve as the axis around which the revolution in the countryside develops. I know that there are Kuomintangists and even Chinese Communists who do not consider it possible to unleash revolution in the countryside, since they fear that if the peasantry were drawn into the revolution it would disrupt the united anti-imperialist front. That is a profound error, comrades. The more quickly and thoroughly the Chinese peasantry is drawn into the revolution, the stronger and more powerful the anti-imperialist front in China will be. The authors of the theses, especially Tan Ping-shan and Rafes, are quite right in maintaining that the immediate satisfaction of a number of the most urgent demands of the peasants is an essential condition for the victory of the Chinese revolution. I think it is high time to break down that inertness and that “neutrality” towards the peasantry which are to be observed in the actions of certain Kuomintang elements. I think that both the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang, and hence the Canton government, should pass from words to deeds without delay and raise the question of satisfying at once the most vital demands of the peasantry. What the perspectives should be in this regard, and how far it is possible and necessary to go, depends on the course of the revolution. I think that in the long run matters should go as far as the nationalisation of the land. At all events, we cannot repudiate such a slogan as that of nationalisation of the land. What are the ways and means that the Chinese revolutionaries must adopt to rouse the vast peasant masses of China to revolution? I think that in the given conditions one can only speak of three ways. The first way is by the formation of peasant committees and by the Chinese revolutionaries entering these committees in order to influence the peasantry. (A voice from the audience : “What about the peasant associations?”) I think that the peasant associations will group themselves around the peasant committees, or will be converted into peasant committees, vested with the necessary measure of authority for the realisation of the peasants’ demands. I have already spoken about this way. But this way is not enough. It would be ridiculous to think that there are sufficient revolutionaries in China for this task. China has roughly 400 million in habitants. Of them, about 350 million are Han people. And of them, more than nine-tenths are peasants. Anyone who thinks that some tens of thousands of Chinese revolutionaries can cover this ocean of peasants is making a mistake. Consequently, additional ways are needed. The second way is by influencing the peasantry through the apparatus of the new people’s revolutionary government. There is no doubt that in the newly liberated provinces a new government will be set up of the type of the Canton government. There is no doubt that this authority and its apparatus will have to set about satisfying the most urgent demands of the peasantry if it really wants to advance the revolution. Well then, the task of the Communists and of the Chinese revolutionaries in general is to penetrate the apparatus of the new government, to bring this apparatus closer to the peasant masses, and by means of it to help the peasant masses to secure the satisfaction of their urgent demands, either by expropriating the landlords’ land, or by reducing taxation and rents — according to circumstances. The third way is by influencing the peasantry through the revolutionary army. I have already spoken of the great importance of the revolutionary army in the Chinese revolution. The revolutionary army of China is the force which first penetrates new provinces, which first passes through densely populated peasant areas, and by which above all the peasant forms his judgment of the new government, of its good or bad qualities. It depends primarily on the behaviour of the revolutionary army, on its attitude towards the peasantry and towards the landlords, on its readiness to aid the peasants, what the attitude of the peasantry will be towards the new government, the Kuomintang and the Chinese revolution generally. If it is borne in mind that quite a number of dubious elements have attached themselves to the revolutionary army of China, and that they may change the complexion of the army for the worse, it will be understood how great is the importance of the political complexion of the army and its, so to speak, peasant policy in the eyes of the peasantry. The Chinese Communists and the Chinese revolutionaries generally must therefore take every measure to neutralise the anti-peasant elements in the army, to preserve the army’s revolutionary spirit, and to ensure that the army assists the peasants and rouses them to revolution. We are told that the revolutionary army is welcomed in China with open arms, but that later, when it installs itself, a certain disillusionment sets in. The same thing happened here in the Soviet Union during the Civil War. The explanation is that when the army liberates new provinces and instals itself in them, it has in some way or other to feed itself at the expense of the local population. We, Soviet revolutionaries, usually succeeded in counter-balancing these disadvantages by endeavouring through the army to assist the peasants against the landlord elements. The Chinese revolutionaries must also learn how to counter-balance these disadvantages by conducting a correct peasant policy through the army. THE PROLETARIAT AND THE HEGEMONY OF THE PROLETARIAT IN CHINA My fifth remark concerns the question of the Chinese proletariat. In my opinion, the theses do not sufficiently stress the role and significance of the working class in China. Rafes asks, on whom should the Chinese Communists orientate themselves — on the Lefts or the Kuomintang centre? That is a strange question. I think that the Chinese Communists should orientate themselves first and foremost on the proletariat, and should orientate the leaders of the Chinese liberation movement on the revolution. That is the only correct way to put the question. I know that among the Chinese Communists there are comrades who do not approve of workers going on strike for an improvement of their material conditions and legal status, and who try to dissuade the workers from striking. (A voice : “That happened in Canton and Shanghai.”) That is a great mistake, comrades. It is a very serious underestimation of the role and importance of the Chinese proletariat. This fact should be noted in the theses as something decidedly objectionable. It would be a great mistake if the Chinese Communists failed to take advantage of the present favourable situation to assist the workers to improve their material conditions and legal status, even through strikes. Otherwise, what purpose does the revolution in China serve? The proletariat cannot be a leading force if during strikes its sons are flogged and tortured by agents of imperialism. These medieval outrages must be stopped at all costs, in order to heighten the sense of power and dignity among the Chinese proletarians, and to make them capable of leading the revolutionary movement. Without this, the victory of the revolution in China is in conceivable. Therefore, a due place must be given in the theses to the economic and legal demands of the Chinese working class aimed at substantially improving its conditions. (Mif: “It is mentioned in the theses.”) Yes, it is mentioned in the theses, but, unfortunately, these demands are not given sufficient prominence. THE QUESTION OF THE YOUTH My sixth remark concerns the question of the youth in China. It is strange that this question has not been taken into account in the theses. Yet it is now of the utmost importance in China. Tan Ping-shan’s reports touch upon this question, but, unfortunately, do not give it sufficient prominence. The question of the youth is one of primary importance in China today. The student youth (the revolutionary students), the working-class youth, the peasant youth — all this constitutes a force that could advance the revolution with giant strides, if it was subordinated to the ideological and political influence of the Kuomintang.[*] It should be borne in mind that no one suffers from imperialist oppression so deeply and keenly, or is so acutely and painfully aware of the necessity to fight against it, as the Chinese youth. The Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese revolutionaries should take this circumstance fully into account and intensify their work among the youth to the utmost. The youth must be given its place in the theses on the Chinese question. SOME CONCLUSIONS I should like to mention certain conclusions — with regard to the struggle against imperialism in China, and with regard to the peasant question. There is no doubt that the Chinese Communist Party cannot now confine itself to demanding the abolition of the unequal treaties. That is a demand which is upheld now by even such a counter-revolutionary as Chang Hsueh-liang. Obviously, the Chinese Communist Party must go farther than that. It is necessary, further, to consider — as a perspective — the nationalisation of the railways. This is necessary, and should be worked for. It is necessary, further, to have in mind the perspective of nationalising the most important mills and factories. In this connection, the question arises first of all of nationalising those enterprises the owners of which display particular hostility and particular aggressiveness towards the Chinese people. It is necessary also to give prominence to the peasant question, linking it with the prospects of the revolution in China. I think that what has to be worked for in the long run is the confiscation of the landlords’ land for the benefit of the peasants and the nationalisation of the land. The rest is self-evident. Those, comrades, are all the remarks that I desired to make. * Note: Such a policy was correct in the conditions prevailing at the time, since the Kuomintang then represented a bloc of the Communists and more or less Left-wing Kuomintangists, which conducted an anti-imperialist revolutionary policy. Later on this policy was abandoned as no longer in conformity with the interests of the Chinese revolution, since the Kuomintang had deserted the revolution and later became the centre of the struggle against it, while the Communists withdrew from the Kuomintang and broke off relations with it. Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Asia, British Imperialism, China, Class Struggle, East Asian & South Asian Liberation, How Will Communism Work, Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Japanese Imperialism, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Maoism, Marxism-Leninism, National Liberation, Polemics & Refutations, Revisionism, Socialist Revolution, The Classics, Theory, U.S. Imperialism Filipino Communists Reaffirm ‘People’s War’ on US Imperialism The statement comes almost two months after Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte shut down peace talks with the insurgents. The Communist Party of the Philippines released a statement Wednesday reaffirming its commitment to fighting U.S. imperialism in the Southeast Asian country. Recapping its recently-held Second Congress, the CPP said it will continue to wage armed struggle against the imperialist country and its local supporters. Criticizing the Filipino government for bowing to the demands of the U.S., the militant group called for “people’s war towards complete victory.” Since its 1968 founding, the CPP has fought to eradicate foreign domination in the Philippines and implement a socialist, worker-run economy. “The Party program reaffirms the necessity of waging armed revolution in order to counter the armed violence employed by the U.S. imperialists and the local reactionary ruling classes and end the oppressive and exploitative semi-colonial and semifeudal system,” the CPP said. The statement comes almost two months after Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte shut down peace talks with the communist insurgents, ending 27 years of peace negotiations. Labeling the rebels “terrorists,” Duterte has promised a “long war” against the CPP and its armed wing, the New People’s Army. “Drawing lessons from the party’s rich history, the Second Congress presented a clearer picture of the strategy and tactics for taking advantage of the insoluble and worsening crisis of the world capitalist system, the strategic decline of U.S. imperialism and the chronic crisis of the domestic ruling system in order to advance the protracted people’s war towards complete victory.” The CPP and the NPA began fighting the Filipino government in the late 1960s after right-wing Filipino dictator Ferdinand Marcos took power. A staunch anti-communist, Marcos was responsible for the deaths of thousands of human rights activists and, supported by the U.S., the former dictator pocketed billions of dollars for his own personal wealth. Though the CPP and the NPA continued fighting the Filipino government after Marcos died in 1989, they agreed to reconciliation talks with succeeding governments. Those talks have since been rescinded. Today, the armed communist militants are continuing to organize the country’s impoverished peasants against the status quo. “The Second Congress presented an updated critique of the … social system, giving particular attention to the post-Marcos succession of pseudo-democratic regimes, the worsening forms of oppression and exploitation of the broad masses of workers and peasants and the deteriorating socio-economic conditions of the Filipino people in almost four decades under the neoliberal regime,” the CPP said. “The Party’s general program calls on all Filipino communists to ‘be ready to sacrifice their lives if necessary in the struggle to bring about a new Philippines that is completely independent, democratic, united, just and prosperous.’” Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Armed Struggle, Communist Party of the Philippines/ NPA, East Asian & South Asian Liberation, Fascist Massacres, Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, National Liberation, Philippines, U.S. Imperialism U.S. Hands Off North Korea! No To The Imperialist War Drive! Resistance Editorial The so-called “America First” budget put forward by Trump includes a 10% increase in military spending. This increases what is already the world’s largest military budget by $56 billion. The cost of this increase will be balanced on the backs of the most vulnerable sections of U.S. society — children, seniors, and those suffering from illness — as the increases are offset with slashed social spending. Long-term vital programs like “Meals on Wheels” are in the crosshairs in favor of yet more spending on an already bloated military. Trump has already engaged in military action from the failed raid in Yemen, which killed 30 civilians, to the drone strike on a Mosque in Aleppo, Syria, killing 46 worshipers. The administration claimed to have struck a meeting of al Qaida militants, an assertion that is contradicted by sources in Syria. U.S. troops are already on the ground acting as “advisers” in Syria — a program that was begun by Obama. Trump rode to the White House on a wave of saber rattling, reaction, immigrant bashing, and racism. This war drive is coupled with an all out attack on democratic rights and programs for the relief of the poor at home — medicaid, school lunch programs, meals on wheels. More tax breaks to the rich guarantee that the cost will be borne by working class people, the poor and oppressed communities. Tillerson’s threat toward North Korea Secretary of State Rex Tillerson signaled the end of U.S. “strategic patience” with North Korea, stating that a “preemptive strike” against North Korea is possible. An attack on North Korea is a high-risk scenario that raises the very real danger of a regional conflict involving China and North Korean retaliatory attacks on both South Korea and Japan. North Korea has the capability to strike back with conventional and nuclear weapons. North Korea’s heavy artillery could flatten South Korea with disastrous results. Millions would perish from such an ill-conceived U.S. adventure. A war with North Korea would create a refugee crisis, starvation, and billions of dollars in property destruction. The effect on world financial markets could be devastating. Trump’s bellicose threats towards China during the campaign, and since taking office, increase the possibility of China’s involvement as an ally of the North Koreans. For the time being, Beijing has indicated their willingness to cooperate with the U.S. on the question of the North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. However, tensions have been high, with China pressing its claims on islands in the South China Sea, and Trump’s missteps on Taiwan and the US’s “One China Policy” all helping make the region a powder keg. From 1950-1953, the U.S. fought a bloody war in Korea as the first violent engagement of the Cold War between the USSR and the West. More than 33,000 U.S troops perished in the war as well as more than a half million combined combat and civilian deaths of South Koreans. North Korea suffered more than 200,000 killed in action and an additional 300,000 wounded. Chinese military losses were also high with more than 130,000 dead and 340,000 wounded. The Korean War was fought to a stalemate and there was never a peace accord between the involved parties. The combat death toll for all sides is estimated by some experts at more than 1.2 million. During the war, the South Korean regime murdered tens of thousands of suspected communist sympathizers and their families. Mass Antiwar Movement Needed During the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, sections of the antiwar movement consciously de-mobilized themselves in order to provide cover for the Democrats. It remains to be seen whether the scattered antiwar forces will find their voice in time to mount opposition to a U.S. attack on North Korea. While Trump and Tillerson’s rhetoric has turned the region into a powderkeg, prominent Democrats have remained silent. To stop the drive towards war a united front mass action oriented movement is needed. The test for the U.S. left and antiwar movement is to create the broadest possible mobilizations against Trump’s grotesque militarism and aggression around the world, while demanding the funding of human needs at home. Going forward, we need to build a non-exclusionary, democratic movement that is independent from ruling class political parties. This is independent of positions about the character of North Korea. The first priority, regardless of attitude toward the Kim regime, is to prevent another imperialist war. That means turning the anti-Trump struggle into a fight to oppose war and re-orient the US economy to serve human need. Money for jobs, education and healthcare, not for war! Feed children and seniors, not the Pentagon! Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Asia, China, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, East Asian & South Asian Liberation, Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Japan, Lies & Propaganda, Middle East, South (Fascist) Korea, Syria, U.S. Imperialism Communist League: On Terrorism REPRINT FROM COMBAT – Journal of the Communist League – March 1975. TERRORISM OR REVOLUTION? The last decade has witnessed the emergence of a number of terrorist groups in various countries, together with the adoption of terrorist tactics by a number of national liberation groups. Britain for example, has experienced the bombing campaigns of the “Angry Brigade,” purporting to be a protest against corporatist and racist legislation and of the Provisional Irish Republican Army, purporting to form part of the Irish struggle for national liberation. In some countries, such as India, even groups claiming to be “Marxist-Leninist” pursue terrorist tactics. IT IS THEREFORE IMPORTANT THAT WE SHOULD BE CLEAR ON THE MARXIST-LENINIST ATTITUDE TOWARDS TERRORISM. A “Punishment for Opportunism” The victory of revisionism in the international communist movement has transformed the Communist Parties of most countries into parties which objectively serve the interests of monopoly capital by preaching the illusion of “peaceful, parliamentary transition to socialism.” These parties are seen ever more clearly by those who have become rebels against the evils of modern capitalist society to have become “left-wing” opportunist parties, drawn more and more into the political machinery of the capitalist state as instruments of deception of the working people. In the absence of scientific parties of socialist revolution, it is inevitable that rebelliousness should manifest itself to a certain extent in the form of unscientific “leftist” activity such as terrorism. In speaking of anarchism of which terrorism is one of the two fundamental concepts (the other being repudiation of the state in all its forms), Lenin made precisely this point when he described it as “a sort of punishment for opportunism” in the working class movement: “Anarchism was often a sort of punishment for the opportunist sins of the working class movement. Both monstrosities mutually supplemented each other.” (V. I. Lenin: “’Left-wing Communism’, An Infantile Disorder”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 10; London; 1946; p. 71). Petty-bourgeois Rebelliousness The rebelliousness which manifests itself in the form of terrorism is essentially that of persons drawn from, or with the outlook of, the petty-bourgeoisie: “Petty-bourgeois revolutionariness, which smacks of, or borrows something from anarchism . . in all essentials falls short of the conditions and requirements of sustained proletarian class struggle. . . The small proprietor, the small master, (a social type that is represented in many European countries on a wide mass scale) . . easily becomes extremely revolutionary, but is incapable of displaying perseverance, discipline and staunchness. The petty bourgeois in a ‘frenzy’ over the horrors of capitalism is a social phenomenon which, like anarchism, is characteristics of all capitalist countries. The instability of such revolutionariness, its barrenness, its liability to become swiftly transformed into submission, apathy, something fantastic, and even into a ‘mad’ infatuation with one or another bourgeois ‘fad’ — all this is a matter of common knowledge.” (V. I. Lenin: ibid; p. 70-71). The petty bourgeoisie is a class which is in process of rapid destruction by monopoly capital – so that, anarchism must be seen as a political reflection of the desperate and futile striving of the petty bourgeois to retain his individual freedom: “The philosophy of the anarchists is bourgeois philosophy turned inside out. Their individualistic theories and their individualistic ideal are the very opposite of socialism. Their views express, not the future of bourgeois society, which is striding with irresistible force towards the socialisation of labour, but the present and even the past of that society, the domination of blind chance over the scattered and isolated small producer.” (V. I. Lenin: “Socialism and Anarchism”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 10; Moscow; 1962; p. 73). “The point is that Marxism and anarchism are built up on entirely different principles in spite of the fact that both come into the arena of struggle under the flag of socialism. The cornerstone of anarchism is the individual, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the masses, the collective body. According to the tenets of anarchism, the emancipation of the masses is impossible until the individual is emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: ‘Everything for the individual’. The cornerstone of Marxism, however, is the masses, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: “Everything for the masses!” (J. V. Stalin: “Anarchism or Socialism?”, in: “Works”,’ Volume 1; Moscow; 1952; p. 299). Terrorism and economism (the theory that the working class can be expected to engage only in economic, and not political, struggles) have common, roots in the “theory of spontaneity” — which rejects the possibility of elevating the working class to socialist consciousness through the propaganda and day-to-day leadership of a vanguard party: “The Economists and the modern terrorists spring from a common root, namely, subservience to spontaneity… At first sight, our assertion may appear paradoxical, for the difference between these two appears to be so enormous: one stresses the ‘drab everyday struggle’ and the other calls for the most self-sacrificing struggle of individuals. But this is not a paradox. The Economists and terrorists merely bow to different poles of spontaneity: the Economists bow to the spontaneity of the ‘pure and simple’ labour movements while the terrorists bow to the spontaneity of the passionate indignation of the intellectuals, who are either incapable of linking up the revolutionary struggle with the labour movement, or lack the opportunity to do so. It is very difficult indeed for those who have lost their belief, or who have never believed that this is possible, to find some other outlet for their indignation and revolutionary energy than terror.” (V. I. Lenin: “What Is to be Done?”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 2; London; 1944; p. 94). “The present-day terrorists are really ‘economists’ turned inside out, going to the equally foolish but opposite extreme.” (V. I. Lenin: “Revolutionary Adventurism in Collected Works”, Volume 6 Moscow; 1961; p. 192. Thus terrorism — like economism — reflects the lack of faith of the petty bourgeoisie in the masses of the working people. Reviewing a leaflet issued by the Socialist-Revolutionaries in 1902, Lenin remarks: “The April 3 leaflet follows the pattern of the terrorists’ latest arguments with remarkable accuracy. The first thing that strike’s the eye is the words: ‘we advocate terrorism, not in place of work among the masses, but precisely for and simultaneously with that work’. They strike the eye particularly because these words are printed in letters three times as large as the rest of the text. But just read the whole leaflet and you will see that the protestation in bold type takes the name of the masses in vain. The day “when the working people will emerge from the shadows’ and ‘the mighty popular wave will shatter the iron gates to smithereens’ ‘alas’ (literally, ‘alas!’) ‘is still a long way off, and it is frightful to think of the future toll of victims!’ Do not these words ‘alas, still a long way off’ – reflect an utter failure to understand the mass movement and a lack of faith in it?” (V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p.190-91). “Individual” Terrorism In repudiating terrorism, Marxist-Leninists are speaking, of course, of what is generally termed “individual terrorism”, such acts as the assassination of a reactionary judge or the planting of a car-bomb outside the office of a government department. In the sense of “attempting to strike terror into an enemy” Marxist-Leninists by no means reject the use of terrorism. The socialist revolution can be brought about only against the armed men who form the core of the machinery of force of the capitalist state, and one of the aims of armed struggle is to strike terror into the enemy and so facilitate his defeat. Again, one of the functions of a state is to strike terror into those who might attempt to overthrow it. Thus, the dictatorship of the working class which must be installed on the victory of the socialist revolution has as one of its aims to strike terror into the overthrown capitalist class, and its active supporters, so as to restrain their desire to overthrow the power of the working class. Marxist-Leninists, therefore, repudiate individual terrorism not on the grounds that terrorism — in the sense of striking terror into the enemy – is unethical, but because acts of individual terrorism harm the cause they purport to serve: “In principle we have never rejected, and cannot reject terror. Terror is one of the forms of military action that may ..be perfectly suitable and even essential at a definite juncture in the battle, given a definite state of the troops and the existence of definite conditions. But the important point is that terror, at the present time, is by no means suggested as an operation for the army in the field, an operation closely connected with and integrated into the entire system of struggle. Without a central body and with weakness of local revolutionary organsations, this in fact, is all that terror can be. We, therefore, declare emphatically that under the present conditions such a means of struggle is inopportune and unsuitable; that it diverts the most active fighters from their real task, the task which is most important from the standpoint of the interests of the. movement as a whole, it disorganises the forces not of the government, but of the revolution.” (V. I.,Lenin: “Where to Begin”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 5; Moscow; 1961; p. 19). “Of course, we reject individual terrorism only out of considerations of expediency; upon those who ‘on principle’ were capable of condemning the terror of the Great French Revolution, or the terror in general employed by a victorious revolutionary party which is besieged by the bourgeoisie of the whole-world – upon such people even Plekhanov in 1900-0, when he was a Marxist, and a revolutionary, heaped ridicule and scorn.” (V. I. Lenin: “‘Left-wing’ Communism, an Infantile Disorder”, in: ‘Selected Works”, Volume 10; London; 1946;.p.72). While no one individual is generally capable of planning and carrying out a series of terrorist acts, such acts constitute “individual terrorism” in so far as the organisations involved in them are extremely small, composed of a few skilled persons (usually petty bourgeois intellectuals), and secret (to the working class if not to the police). The Spurious Arguments for Terrorism The advocates of terrorism argue that terrorist acts weaken the capitalist state machine and so assist the revolutionary process. But if a judge is assassinated, there are a dozen reactionary barristers waiting to step into his shoes; if a courthouse is destroyed, it can be rebuilt at the cost of the working people. The strength of the state relative to that of a small terrorist group, and the protective measures which the state has the power to take when a threat of terrorist acts becomes apparent, causes terrorism to be directed increasingly against the less well defended — because less important — aspects of the state. Indeed, this process often results in the activity of terrorist groups, in an effort to evade the defences erected by the state degenerating into mere indiscriminate acts of destruction in which working people are killed and maimed. Reviewing the leaflet of the Socialist-Revolutionaries already mentioned, Lenin poured scorn on the illusion that the state, could be significantly weakened by acts of terrorism: “Just listen to what follows: ‘every terrorist blow, as it were, takes away part of the strength of the autocracy and transfers (!) all this strength (!) to the side of the fighters for freedom’ . ‘And if terrorism is practised systematically (!) it is obvious that the scales of the balance will finally weigh down on our side’. Yes, indeed, it is obvious to all that we have here in its grossest form one of the greatest prejudices of the terrorists: political assassination of itself ‘transfers strength.” (V.I.Lenin “Revolutionary Adventurism”, In: “Collected Works”, Volume 6, Moscow; 1961; p. 191). The advocates of terrorism also argue that terrorist acts “excite” the masses to greater revolutionary enthusiasm. This theory too was discussed by Lenin: “It would be interesting to note here the specific arguments that ‘Svoboda’ (a terrorist group– Ed.) advanced in defence of terrorism. It . . . stresses its excitative significance. . . . .It is difficult to imagine an argument that disproves itself more than this one does! Are there not enough outrages committed in Russian life that a special ‘stimulant’ has to be invented? On the other hand, is it not obvious that those who are not, and cannot be aroused to excitement even by Russian tyranny will stand by ‘twiddling their thumbs’ –even while a handful of terrorists are engaged in a single combat with the government? The fact is, however, that that the masses of the workers are roused to a high pitch of excitement by the outrages committed in Russian life, but we are unable to collect, if one may put it that way, and concentrate all these drops and streamlets of popular excitement, which are called forth by the conditions of Russian life to a far larger extent than we imagine, but which it is precisely necessary to combine into a single gigantic-flood.. . Calls for terror . . are merely forms of evading the most pressing duty that now rests upon Russian revolutionaries, namely, to organise all-sided political agitation. ‘Svoboda’ desires to substitute terror for agitation, openly admitting that ‘as soon as intensified and strenuous agitation is commenced among the masses its excitative function will be finished”‘ (V I Lenin: “What Is. to be Done?.”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 2. London; 1944; p. 96-97). “Nor does the leaflet eschew the theory of excitative terrorism. ‘Each time a hero engages in single combat, this arouses in us all a spirit of struggle and courage’, we are told. But . . . single combat has the immediate effect of simply creating a short-lived sensation, while indirectly it even leads to apathy and passive waiting for the next bout, We are further assured that ‘every flash of terrorism lights up the mind’ which unfortunately, we have not noticed to be the case with the terrorism preaching party of the Socialist-Revolutionaries.” (V. I. Lenin: “Revolutionary Adventurism” in: “Collected Works”; Volume 6; Moscow; 1961; p. 193). A Pretext for Repression The Marxist-Leninist case against terrorism is not merely that it amounts to a repudiation of the need for the political mobilisation of the masses of the working class — the force which alone is capable of smashing the state machinery of force of monopoly capital: ‘Their tactics (i.e., of the anarchists — Ed.) . . . amount to a repudiation of the political struggle, disunite the proletarians and convert them in fact into passive participators in one bourgeois policy, or another.” (V. I. Lenin: “Socialism and Anarchism”; “Collected Works”; ‘Volume 10, Moscow; 1963; p. 73). In fact, far from weakening the state, acts of terrorism provide the pretext for the strengthening of the state machinery of force and for the imposition of repressive measures against the genuine progressive movement — measures which, without that pretext, would arouse much more vigorous opposition from the working people. In this respect, terrorist groups, whatever their intentions, objectively assist monopoly capital. Thus, the counter-productive hi-jacking of civilian airliners by Arab terrorists was, used by King Hussein of Jordan as the pretext for a war of extermination in September 1970 against the Palestine liberation forces in Jordan, an act necessary to the new policy of US imperialism in the Middle East. And in Britain terrorist acts have provided the pretext for the strengthening of Special Branch., for police raids on the homes of-anti-fascists and the offices of anti-fascist organisations, for pressure to reduce the rights of defendants in political trials, for the repeated army/police manoeuvres at London Airport, and for the “draconic” powers given to the police by the Labour government. Agents Provocateurs An agent of the class enemy who succeeds in entering a revolutionary, or pseudo-revolutionary, organisation is generally an agent of the state intelligence service. His aim, in doing so may simply be to collect information about the members, leaders, strength, etc.; of the organisation for the benefit of the state (that is, to act as a spy), or it may also be to seek to incite the members of the Organisation to commit a terrorist act which would provide a pretext- — a pretext that would seem a reasonable one to wide sections of working people — for some repressive measure or measures on the part of the state (that is, to act as an agent provocateur). Where it is not possible to incite a terrorist group to commit a terrorist act desired by the state, this may be performed directly by the intelligence service itself. And where one or more terrorist groups exist, it is difficult or impossible for an outsider to know whether a particular act of terrorism has been carried out by such a group or by the intelligence service. In either case, however, the act may provide the pretext for some repressive measure or measures on the part of the state directed at the genuine progressive movement. The most notorious example of such a terrorist act carried but by the state itself is, of course, the burning of the Reichstag in 1933 to provide the pretext for the repression of the Communist Party of Germany, even though that party was completely opposed to the carrying out of such acts of terrorism. Within a genuine revolutionary organisation, it, is difficult to distinguish an agent provocateur from an honest, but misguided, exponent of “left” adventurism; indeed this distinction can be made, not on the basis of political analysis, but only by means of counter-intelligence activity which reveals the agent’s connection with the state. But an agent provocateur is powerless to incite an act of terrorism on the part of a genuine revolutionary organisation unless there is support for such acts on the part of a majority of the members. The cardinal task, therefore, is to expose terrorism politically to its honest, but misguided, supporters, thus isolating the agent provocateur and opening the way to his exposure to the members and supporters of the organisation and his expulsion from it: “We must get the workers to understand that while the killing of spies, agents provocateurs and traitors may sometimes of course, be absolutely unavoidable, it is highly undesirable and mistaken to make a system of it, and that we must strive to create an organisation which will be able to render spies innocuous by exposing them and tracking them down. It is impossible to do away with all spies, but to create an organisation which will ferret them out and educate the working class masses is both possible and necessary.“ (V. I. Lenin. Footnote to: ‘ Letter to a Comrade on Our Organisational Tasks”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 6; Moscow; 1961; p. 245). And, of course, given a partially clandestine organisation with adequate security measures and tight discipline, the harm which agents may do to a Marxist-Leninist Party may be limited, and they can even be compelled to do positive Party work – as Lenin pointed out in the case of the tsarist police agent Roman Malinovsky: “In 1912 … an agent provacateur, Malinovsy got into the Central Committee, of the Bolsheviks. He betrayed scores and scores of the best and msot loyal comrades, caused them to be sent to penal servitude and hastened the death of many of them. If he did not cause even more harm than he did, it was because we had established proper coordination between our legal and illegal work. As a member of the Central Committee of the Party and a deputy in the Duma, Malinovsky was forced, in order to gain our confidence, to aid us in establishing legal daily paper. While with one hand Malinovsky sent scores and scores of the best Bolsheviks to penal servitude, and to death, with the other he was compelled to assist in the education of scores and scores of thousands of new Bolsheviks through the medium of the legal press.” (V.I. Lenin: ‘Left-wing’ Communism, an Infantile Disorder”, in: “Selected Works”, Volume 10; London; 1946; p. 85). Socialist revolution involves armed struggle — that is civil war – between, on the one hand, the machinery of force under the leadership of it’s Marxist-Leninist vanguard party, and on the other hand – the machinery of force of the capitalist state. Guerrilla warfare is a form of armed struggle waged by relatively small units of armed men against a considerably stronger armed force – in the case of revolutionary guerrilla warfare against the armed force of a reactionary state. The essence of guerrilla military tactics is to make localised “hit-and-run” attacks on the weakest and most exposed sectors of the enemy’s forces, so nibbling away at his strength without the losses to one’s own forces that would result from a direct confrontation with his main forces. Thus, revolutionary guerrilla warfare must be seen as a development of the struggle for socialist revolution — when this has reached the stage of armed struggle: Firstly, before this armed struggle has reached the stage of a country-wide armed uprising, and Secondly, when it has reached the stage of a country-wide armed uprising in the intervals between major engagements: “The phenomenon in which we are interested (i.e., guerrilla warfare – Ed.) – is the armed struggle. It is conducted by individuals and by small groups […] Guerrilla warfare is an inevitable form of` struggle at a time when the mass movement has actually reached the point of an uprising and when fairly large intervals occur between the ‘big engagements’ in the civil war [….] An uprising cannot assume the old form of individual acts restricted to a very short time and to a very small area. It is absolutely natural and inevitable that the uprising should assume the higher and more complex form of a prolonged civil war embracing the whole country […] Such a war cannot be conceived otherwise than as a series of a few big engagements at comparatively long intervals and a large number of small encounters during these intervals. That being so — and it is undoubtedly so – the Social-Democrats (i.e., Marxist Leninists – Ed.) must absolutely make it their duty to create organisations best adapted to lead, the masses in these big engagements and, as far as possible, in these small encounters as well.” (V. I. Lenin: “Guerrilla Warfare”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 11; Moscow; 1962; p. 216, 219, 222-23). Revolutionary guerrilla warfare has three principal aims: Firstly, to weaken the military and para-military armed forces of the capitalist state (and of fascist militia) by killing their officers and men: “The Party must regard the fighting guerrilla operations of the squads affiliated or associated with it as being, in principle, permissible and advisable in the present period; [….] the paramount immediate object of these operations is to destroy the government, police and military machinery, and to wage a relentless struggle against the active Black Hundred Organisations (i.e. rural fascist-type organisations — Ed.) which are using violence against the population and intimidating it.” (V. I. Lenin: Draft Resolution for Unity Congress of RSDLP, 1906, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 10; Moscow; 1962; p. 154). “In the first place, this (guerrilla – Ed.) struggle aims at assassinating individuals, chiefs or subordinates, in the army and police.” (V.I. Lenin: “Guerrilla Warfare”,- in: “Collected Works”, Volume 11; Moscow; 1962; p. 216). Secondly, to give practical military training to working class leaders: “The character of these fighting guerrilla operations must be adjusted to the task of training leaders of the masses of the workers at a time of insurrection, and of acquiring experience in conducting offensive and surprise military operations.” (V. I. Lenin: Draft Resolution for Unity Congress of RSDLP, 1906, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 10; Moscow; 1962; p.154). Thirdly, to confiscate funds in the possession of the capitalist class for the use of the revolutionary movement: “In the second place, it (i.e., guerrilla warfare — Ed.) aims at the confiscation of monetary funds both from the government and from private persons. The confiscated funds go into the treasury of the Party, partly for the special purpose of arming and preparing for an uprising, and partly for the maintenance of the persons engaged in the struggle we are describing.” (V. I. Lenin: “Guerrilla Warfare”, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 11; Moscow; 1962; p. 216). “Fighting operations are also permissible for the purpose of seizing funds belonging to the enemies, i.e., the autocratic government, to meet the needs of insurrection, particular care being taken so that the interests of the people are infringed as little as possible.” (V. I. Lenin: Draft Resolution for Unity Congress of RSDLP, l906, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 10; Moscow; 1962; p.154). (So deep was the respect for private property inculcated in the minds of a majority of the delegates to the 1906 Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, that the congress approved guerrilla warfare for the purpose of killing soldiers and police, but rejected Lenin’s clause approving it for the purpose of confiscating funds from the ruling class for the financing of the revolutionary movement). At first glance, the distinction between terrorism (which Marxist-Leninists oppose), and revolutionary guerrilla warfare (which Marxist-Leninists support) seems blurred. In fact, however, the distinction is quite clear. In the first place, guerrilla warfare becomes a correct revolutionary tactic only when it has the support of the mass of the working people in the locality in which it is carried out: “Fighting guerrilla organisations must be conducted ….. such a way as . .to ensure that the state of the working class movement and the mood of the broad masses of the given locality are taken into account.” (V. I.. Lenin: Draft Resolution to Unity Congress of RSDLP 1906, In “Collected Works”; Volume l0; Moscow; 1961; p. 154). In the second place, and following from the above, guerrilla war becomes a revolutionary tactic only when the class struggle has been elevated, as a result of correct day-to-day leadership by the Marxist-Leninist Party, to the stage where the mass of the working people have come to see the armed-forces of the capitalist state and the fascist bands as their irreconcilable enemies who must be fought — for only then will this guerrilla warfare have the support of the mass of the working people in the locality in which it is carried out. Terrorist acts, on the other hand, are carried out before this stage has been reached and in isolation from the class struggle of the working people: “This act (i.e., the assassination of Sipyagin –Ed) was in no way connected with the masses, and moreover could, not have been by reason of the very way in which it was carried out –that the persons who committed this terrorist act neither counted on nor hoped for any definitive action nor support on the part of the masses. In their naivete, the Socialist-Revolutionaries do not realise that their predilection for terrorism is most intimately linked with the fact that, from the very outset, they have always kept, and still keep, aloof from the working class movement, without even attempting to become a party of the revolutionary class which is waging the class struggle.” (Lenin: “Revolutionary Adventurism”; In “Collected Works” Volume 6; Moscow; 1961; p. 189). In the third place, guerrilla warfare becomes a correct revolutionary tactic in the special circumstance that it is conducted under the control of the Marxist-Leninist Party: “Fighting guerrilla organisations must be conducted under the control of the Party.” (V. I. Lenin: Draft Resolution for the Unity Congress of RSDLP, l906, in: “Collected Works”, Volume 10; Moscow, 1961; p. 154). The principles of guerrilla warfare advocated by “Che” Guevara are,thus completely opposed to the principles of Marxism-Leninism: “The revolutionary guerrilla force is clandestine. It is born and develops secretly […] The guerrilla force is independent of the civilian population in action as well as in military organisation; consequently it need not assume the direct defence of the peasant population […] Eventually the future People’s Army will beget the party […] The people’s army will be the nucleus of the party, not vice versa. The guerrilla force is the political vanguard in nuce, and from its development a real party can arise […] That is why, at the present juncture, the principal stress must be laid on the development of guerrilla warfare and not on the strengthening of existing parties or the creation of new parties’,” (R. Debray: “Revolution in the Revolution?”; London; 1968; p.41, 105, 115). The castroite principles of guerrilla warfare form part of an anti-Marxist Leninist revolutionary strategy which serves the interests of the national bourgeoisie of a colonial-type country with a weak state machinery of force. (This question is analysed in more detail in “The Theory of the in: RED VANGUARD,. No. l; p.83f). Contemporary Lessons The Provisional Irish Republican Army is an armed force of the Irish national-liberation movement. It is, however, not led by a Marxist-Leninist Party of the working class, which does not at present exist in Ireland, but by representatives of the Irish national bourgeoisie, who wish for independence from Britain in order to develop the country as an independent capitalist state. As long as the Provisional IRA was seen by the people of the Catholic areas of Northern Ireland as their defence against the armed forces and police of the colonial regime, and the fascist bands which had the “open support of the police, it had their enthusiastic support. To the extent however, that the IRA has turned to tactics of terrorism, often of an indiscriminate character in which working people have been killed and maimed, this support has been whittled away — and this has tended to make terrorism, increasingly the only form of activity which it is physically able to undertake. In Britain, too, the effect of indiscriminate bombing by the Provisional IRA has been to alienate sympathy from the Irish national-liberation struggle among the British working class, which is, objectively, the ally of the Irish people in the struggle against their common enemy British imperialism. The use that British imperialism can make of a movement whose activity is predominantly of a terrorist character was pointed out in a recent issue of CLASS AGAINST CLASS on the plan under consideration by the British imperialists for the creation of a united neo-colonial Ireland by creating the pretext for the military intervention in Northern Ireland of the army of the Republic of Ireland: “The aim is, under the slogan of ‘allowing the people of Northern Ireland to settle their own problems’, to permit the restoration of a fascist-type of state machine in Northern Ireland dominated by the right-wing Protestant leaders. These leaders are already pledging themselves to the pogroms against the ‘Catholic population which will inevitably follow — that, is, they are pledging themselves not to carry out such pogroms unless the Provisional IRA renews its campaign.” (“Ireland: New Tactics of British Imperialism”; in: CLASS AGAINST CLASS, No. 6; June 1974; p. 8). The British imperialists calculate that the Provisional IRA, as a result of its turn to tactics of terrorism, has lost too much strength and support to be capable of defending the Catholic population, so that the call for the “protective” intervention of the armed forces of the Republic will come from the Catholic working people of Northern Ireland themselves. Again, one of the most important tasks facing the British working class is the organisation of an anti-fascist united front, properly organised and with a correct tactical programme. Even at this early stage of the anti-fascist movement, certain maoist groups (such as the “Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist) and trotskyite groups (such as the International Marxist Group) have begun to launch assaults upon the police during anti-National Front demonstrations. But an assault upon the armed forces of the state becomes a correct tactic of revolutionary guerrilla warfare in a developed capitalist country only when the class struggle has reached a much higher level of development and when it is directed by a Marxist-Leninist Party, which does not yet exist in Britain. Such assaults on the police as that which took place in Red Lion Square in 1974, being completely premature, constitute mere terrorism, which tends to disorganise the embryo anti-fascist movement and provide the pretext for police violence and repressive measures on the part of the state against genuine anti-fascists “Leftist” groups which carry out such actions at the present time are objectively assisting fascism. Terrorism, whatever the motives of the terrorists, objectively serves the interests of the forces opposed to social and national liberation. It is necessary for Marxist-Leninists, therefore, to expose terrorism for what it is, and to wage a principled and consistent struggle against this ideology, in line with Lenin’s formula: “Bolshevism grew, took shape and became hardened, in long years of struggle against petty-bourgeois revolutionariness, which smacks of, or borrows something from, anarchism, and which in all essentials falls short, of the conditions and, requirements of the sustained proletarian class struggle.” (V. I. Lenin.: ‘”Left-wing’ Communism”, an Infantile Disorder”, in: “Selected Works Volume .10; London; 1946; p.70). Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Armed Struggle, British Imperialism, Capitalist Repression, Che Guevara, Communist League (UK), How Will Communism Work, Imperialism & Colonialism, Marxism-Leninism, Myth-Busting, National Liberation, Polemics & Refutations, Revisionism, Socialist Revolution, Theory, U.S. Imperialism, Vladimir Lenin Fidel Castro on the Character of the Cuban Revolution “At any rate, you wish to write that this is a socialist revolution, right? And write it, then… Yes, not only did we destroy a tyrannical system. We also destroyed the philoimperialistic bourgeois state apparatus, the bureaucracy, the police, and a mercenary army. We abolished privileges, annihilated the great landowners, threw out foreign monopolies for good, nationalized almost every industry, and collectivized the land. We are fighting now to liquidate once and for all the exploitation of man over man, and to build a completely new society, with a new class contents. The Americans (Cubans say just that, los americanos, to mean the United States) the Americans and the priests say that this is communism. We know very well that it is not. At any rates, the word does not frighten us. They can say whatever they wish. There is a song, which is popular among our peasants, that goes more or less like this: ‘Bird of ill omen — of treason and cowardice — that are throwing at my joy — the word: communism! — I know nothing about these ‘isms’ — Yet, if such a great welfare conquest — which can be been by my own eyes — is communism, then — you can even call me a communist!” – Fidel Castro, “L’Unita Interview with Fidel Castro: The Nature of Cuban Socialism” Posted in Armed Struggle, Class Struggle, Cuba, Fidel Castro, Latin American Liberation, Life in Socialist Countries, Marxism-Leninism, National Liberation, Revolutionary Quotations, Socialist Revolution Bruce Cumings on the North Korean Economy “My spirits brightened, however, when former Congressman Stephen Solarz, long interested in Korean affairs, found a ‘brilliant and breathtaking’ study by a CIA analyst and concluded it was for North Korea ‘what the Rosetta Stone was to ancient Egypt’. So rare and privileged was the author’s knowledge that it took him a decade to get the CIA to declassify the book. Helen-Louise Hunter was for two decades a ‘Far East Specialist’ in the CIA, which is where her first book appeared (if that is the right word) as a long internal memorandum. Here was the solution to another problem we hear a lot about from the Beltway pundits: ‘a country about which we knew virtually nothing’ (in Solarz’s words). That is, we have trouble penetrating and surveilling them: how scary! Hunter’s work has some excellent information on arcane and difficult to research subjects like North Korean wage and price structures, the self-sufficient and decentralized neighborhood living practices that mostly eliminated the long lines for goods that characterized Soviet-style communism, and the decade of one’s young life that almost every North Korean male is required to devote to military service in this garrison state. She points out the many achievements of the North Korean system, in ways that would get anyone outside the CIA labeled a sympathizer – compassionate care for war orphans in particular and children in general, ‘radical change’ in the position of women (‘there are now more college-educated women than college-educated men’), genuinely free housing, preventive medicine on a national scale accomplished to a comparatively high standard, infant mortality and life expectancy rates comparable to the most advanced countries until the recent famine, ‘no organized prostitution,’ and ‘the police are difficult, if not impossible, to bribe’. The author frequently acknowledges that the vast majority of Koreans do in fact revere Kim Il-Sung, even the defectors from the system whose information forms the core evidence for her book. According to Prince Sihanouk, a close friend of Kim’s who frequently stayed for months at a time in the North, ‘Kim ha[d] a relationship with his people that every other leader in the world would envy”; he described it as ‘much closer’ than his own with the Cambodian people (where he is both venerated and highly popular). American cheerleaders for the South never tire of saying that its GNP is ten times larger than North Korea’s; certainly it is much larger, but if, say, the World Bank were to value goods and services in the North in terms of what the equivalents would cost in the United States, as it did for China after it opened up, the North’s GNP would mushroom overnight. In Hunter’s account of the DPRK when its economy was still reasonably good, about twenty years ago, she found that daily necessities were very low priced, luxuries vastly overpriced. Rents were so nominal that most housing was effectively free, as was health care, and ‘the government subsidizes the low prices of rice, sugar, and other food necessities, as well as student uniforms and work clothes.’ All homes in the country had electricity by 1968, far ahead of where the South was at the time. To take a measure close to home, she estimates that a husband and wife who were both university professors would be able to save about 50 percent of their monthly salaries. Rice and corn, the major staples, were rationed by the state, as were cooking oils, meat, soy sauce, bean curd, and kimch’i. Other things – fruits, vegetables, nuts, noodles, beer – could be purchased at low prices, with meats and luxury food overvalued. The general egalitarianism of the society was remarkable, in her view, even if the elite lived much better than the mass.” – Bruce Cumings, “North Korea: Another Country,” The New Press, New York, 2003, pp. 194-196. Posted in Asia, Common Sense, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, East Asian & South Asian Liberation, Internationalism, Juche, Kim Il-Sung, Lies & Propaganda, Life in Socialist Countries, Myth-Busting, National Liberation, North Korea, Revolutionary Quotations, Theory, Workers' Party of Korea DPRK: Death of Fidel Castro Ruz Is Great Loss to Korean People The death of Fidel Castro Ruz, an outstanding leader of the Cuban revolution, is a great loss to not only the Cuban people but also the Korean people fighting on the same front against the imperialists. The Korean people have highly respected Fidel Castro Ruz as a national hero of Cuba, outstanding leader of the Cuban people and a prominent anti-imperialist fighter. He was a close friend of the Korean people and an eternal revolutionary comrade-in-arms who had always kept in his mind the comradely relations with President Kim Il Sung and leader Kim Jong Il and made all efforts to develop the friendly and cooperative relations between the parties, governments and peoples of the two countries and extended firm support and encouragement to Korea’s reunification and the cause of justice with invariable revolutionary principle and obligation. He was an indomitable revolutionary fighter who defended the banner of socialism in the Western Hemisphere at a time when the red flags of socialism were lowered in different counties at the end of the 1980s and early in the 1990s and the U.S. imperialists escalated their moves to isolate and stifle Cuba. During those days of hardship, the two countries stood firm in the same trench for socialism under the leadership of the great leaders and Fidel Castro Ruz, and the friendly and cooperative relations between the two parties, two governments and two peoples grew stronger. Though he passed away, the precious feats he performed in developing the DPRK-Cuba friendship and the cause of socialism will be kept in the hearts of the two peoples and the progressives of the world forever. The army and people of the DPRK will as ever invariably hold fast to the banner of socialism and get firmly united with the fraternal Cuban people and make all efforts to develop the friendly and cooperative relations between the two countries. Ra Myong Song Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Asia, Capitalism & Bourgeois Liberalism, Capitalist Restoration and Counterrevolution, Class Struggle, Communist Party of Cuba, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, East Asian & South Asian Liberation, Fidel Castro, Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Juche, Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-il, Latin America, Latin American Liberation, Marxism-Leninism, National Liberation, Socialist Revolution, U.S. Imperialism, Workers' Party of Korea Statement of the Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist) on the death of Fidel Castro The Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist) deeply regrets the death of Fidel Castro and expresses its solidarity with the government and the Cuban people in these difficult and painful moments. Fidel Castro will always be remembered as a leader who dedicated his life to the revolution that transformed the economic and social structures of Cuba, in constant struggle against the aggression of US imperialism. The revolution that triumphed in 1959 aroused the enthusiasm of the masses in Latin America and worldwide. The Sierra Maestra fighters made the dream of liberation craved by Cubans and Latin American workers a reality. Since that memorable date when the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista was defeated, Cuba began a titanic struggle for national independence, economic sovereignty and liberation from the yoke exerted on the country by the United States. Literacy campaigns, nationalization of enterprises and plantations owned by US capital and the extraordinary development of education and public health brought Cuba from underdevelopment and turned the island into an example for the peoples of Latin America and the other continents. Beyond the political and ideological discrepancies, our party has always shown its solidarity with the Cuban people, denouncing the US economic blockade, the terrorist attacks of emigrants and hostile actions advocated by the Popular Party. Fidel Castro will always be remembered as the man, the leader and revolutionary who, with sacrifice and effort of all the Cuban people for his country, regained dignity and national sovereignty. His death is a great loss for the Cuban revolution, but the workers, peasants and intellectuals, all the people of Cuba will continue forward, continuing and improving its legacy. The red flags of the Communists around the world are inclined with respect to honor his memory. The Cuban land will house a man who completed the work begun by Martí. Madrid, November 26, 2016. Executive Committee PCE (ml) Courtesy: Alfonso Casal Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Armed Struggle, Class Struggle, Communist Party of Cuba, Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist), Cuba, Fidel Castro, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Latin America, Latin American Liberation, Life in Socialist Countries, Marxism-Leninism, National Liberation, Socialist Revolution, U.S. Imperialism Statement by the Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) on the death of Fidel Castro We, the Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan), convey condolences to the courageous workers and toilers of Cuba. Fidel Castro, the leader of the Cuban Revolution, did not kneel down to the criminal bullying of the U.S. imperialists, the world biggest terrorists. For five decades, Fidel Castro resisted the monster, U.S. imperialism, and became a source of inspiration for the struggle of the people of Latin America against colonialism and despotism. The Cuban Revolution, under the leadership of Fidel Castro, has been a thorn in the side of the U.S. imperialism. The joy expressed by the U.S. imperialists and their lackeys on the death of Fidel stems from their inhuman and exploitative nature of these criminals. One must learn from the Cuban Revolution and its strength and weakness, learn from temporary setback of other revolutions, and rely on Marxism-Leninism to prepare for future socialist revolutions. Long Live Revolution! Death to Imperialism and its Lackeys! Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Armed Struggle, Class Struggle, Communist Party of Cuba, Cuba, Fidel Castro, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Latin America, Latin American Liberation, Life in Socialist Countries, Marxism-Leninism, National Liberation, Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan), Socialist Revolution, U.S. Imperialism PCMLE: Fidel Castro Ruz: Comandante of the Cuban Revolution Has Died, We Honor His Memory! Communiqué of the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador, PCMLE On the night of November 25, Fidel Castro Ruz, Comandante of the Cuban Revolution, has died and the Cuban people, the peoples of Latin America and the world mourn his death. Fidel, throughout his life, was an outstanding revolutionary leader, and along with his comrades such as Che Guevara, Camilo Cienfuegos and others, was at the head of the heroic process of the Cuban revolution, which confronted the aggressive designs of US imperialism, defeated the armed incursions, the plots and conspiracies that the world power financed and directed together with the reactionary circles, in an attempt to break the will of the Cuban people and their leaders. With Fidel at its head, the courageous Cuban people, with arms in hand, were able to overthrow the infamous, criminal and pro-Yankee dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista, who had handed over the Caribbean island’s resources, sovereignty and independence to the Yankees. This same people, based on their unity, promoting the struggle, has been advancing in their revolutionary process that achieved important and well-known social achievements in various fields such as education, health, social security and, despite the criminal imperialist blockade, managed to rise up and maintain those achievements, which earned them the recognition and solidarity of the peoples of the world. For the peoples of Latin America, the victories achieved by the Cuban revolution have undoubtedly been an example that has influenced their anti-imperialist struggles and the struggle for social revolution. Cuba has been the example of how a small country, besieged by the major world power that has blocked it since the beginning of the revolution, was able to stand up and maintain its independence with dignity. The Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador, its members and leaders, pay homage to the memory of Fidel Castro, Comandante of the Cuban Revolution; We express our heartfelt condolences to the people of Cuba and their leaders and we believe that all of Fidel’s courageous legacy in his revolutionary actions will be maintained and developed for the advance of their social achievements and social justice. Political Bureau of the Central Committee Posted in Anti-Imperialism, Armed Struggle, Che Guevara, Class Struggle, Communist Party of Cuba, Cuba, Fidel Castro, ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle), Imperialism & Colonialism, Internationalism, Latin America, Latin American Liberation, Life in Socialist Countries, Marxism-Leninism, Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador (PCMLE), National Liberation, Socialist Revolution, U.S. Imperialism

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511930

__label__cc

Free Essay Sample «Hexavalent Chromium Pollution in Developing Countries and the Challenges of Remediation» Informative essay Hexavalent Chromium Pollution in Developing Countries and the Challenges of Remediation Even though hexavalent chromium is a strictly chromium element in the oxidation state of +6, it is widely used to refer to all chemical compounds that contain such type of chromium. Since its discovery, the substance has had a wide range of industrial applications across the world because of the significant competitive advantage it has over its alternatives. Such benefits as corrosion resistance, hardness, process maturity, and coefficient of friction have made it a material of choice in many industries, including making coats of motorcycle parts and tool blades. Even though it was declared a carcinogen in 1988, its use has continued, especially in developing countries, such as India, Morocco, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, where it is a crucial material for industries. In the aforementioned developing countries, exposure to this chemical has resulted in serious public health problems comparable to malaria and other major public health crises. In particular, exposure to hexavalent chromium has increased the cases of lung cancer in areas where its industrial use is prevalent (Parker, 2013). Apart from lung cancer, prolonged exposure to this element damages vital organs of the body, involving liver and kidney. In addition, it can alter the structure of DNA, thus leading to a number of genetic disorders. The recent research has also found a link between asthmaticbronchitis and hexavalent chromium (Wooddell, 2008). Across the world, over 5.5 million people are at risk of hexavalent chromium exposure (Wooddell, 2008). The most common sources of this pollution are sites for chemical manufacturing, tanneries, industrial estates, dye industries, petrochemical plants, e-waste recycling, ore processing, wood preservation, ore mining, vehicle manufacturing, cement processing, and industrial dumpsites. From these sources, hexavalent chromium is released into the environment either as dust in the air or as a contaminant in underground water. The fact that hexavalent chromium easily spreads through groundwater, air and aquatic systems from the point of its source makes it one of the most dangerous contaminants. From the environment, the chemical reaches human beings through inhalation of dusty air with the chemical, contact with contaminated water or soil, direct ingestion of water that is contaminated with the chemical, and ingestion of food that has been exposed to hexavalent (Mills-Kipp et al., 2012). There are a number of methods often applied to remove or reduce the level of hexavalent chromium in contaminated soils. The main method involves the use of a combination of chemical, biological and physical techniques. These methods include adsorption, precipitation, ion exchange, electro-analysis, reverse osmosis, and rreduction (Daim et al., 2014). In many developing countries application of these methods in remediating contaminated sources has proved to be problematic. The major cause of this is the high cost of their putting into practice that have made them out of reach for numerous states because most of the countries affected are also relatively poor (Dhal et al., 2013). Bangladesh and Pakistan, for instance, are still poor developing countries with multiple other challenges that prevent their governments from making the effective investments in industrial safety. Apart from the high cost, there are other disadvantages that come with the use of these methods. Among them are high energy requirements and reagent consumption, incomplete removal of the metal and contamination of ground water as a result of secondary waste disposal, to list a few (Dhal et al., 2013). In conclusion, even though the need to for developing countries to industrialize is indisputable, the goal should not be achieved at the expense of the health of citizens. In the case of hexavalent chromium pollution discussed in the paper, wealthy countries would best assist developing countries in tackling this problem through investing in research in low-cost techniques for remediation of contaminated sources. Despite of budgetary constraints, the developing countries should also invest more in safe disposal of industrial waste. Related informative essays Martin Luther King’s Lifestyle

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511931

__label__wiki

ZA-2 POL11 Money, Gender and Political Citizenship: Economic Voting Restrictions in the Nordic Countries Before and After Universal Suffrage Van Wijkplaats 4, 005 Networks: Economic History , Politics, Citizenship, and Nations , Women and Gender Chair: Bengt Sandin Organizer: Fia Sundevall Discussants: - Minna Harjula : The Poor Excluded from Voting: Political and Social Citizenship in Finland, 1906–1970 Although universal suffrage was implemented in Finland in national elections (1906) and in local elections (1917/1919), poor relief recipients were, among others, excluded from voting rights. Until the 1940s, regular poor relief was an obstacle for voting. Even after that, many receivers of poor relief were excluded because they were ... (Show more) Although universal suffrage was implemented in Finland in national elections (1906) and in local elections (1917/1919), poor relief recipients were, among others, excluded from voting rights. Until the 1940s, regular poor relief was an obstacle for voting. Even after that, many receivers of poor relief were excluded because they were under the guardianship of the local board of public welfare. Furthermore, voting practices were exclusive, as poor relief institutions were not accepted as polling stations until the late 1960s. The connection between poverty and the right to vote was totally abolished only in 1970. The exclusion of poor relief receivers from voting rights indicates the interconnection between political and social citizenship. Until the national old age pension (1937, 1956) and health insurance (1963) were enacted in Finland, sickness and old age were the most common causes of the need for poor relief. My paper analyses the linkages of political and social citizenship and discusses how the processes relate to welfare state development in Finland. The expanding of the right to vote carried a multidimensional redefinition of the borders of citizenship. (Show less) Ragnheiður Kristjánsdóttir : Suffrage, Gender and Class. Women’s Suffrage and the Construction and Constraints of a Lawful Citizen in Iceland In Iceland, as elsewhere in Europe, women’s suffrage “challenged the gendered meaning of political citizenship” (Ida Blom, 2012). Linking together feminist theories of intersectionality, women´s agencies, and citizenship, this paper examines how socio-cultural categories like class, age, nationality, race/ethnicity, (dis)ability or health and marital status, affected women’s capacities to ... (Show more) In Iceland, as elsewhere in Europe, women’s suffrage “challenged the gendered meaning of political citizenship” (Ida Blom, 2012). Linking together feminist theories of intersectionality, women´s agencies, and citizenship, this paper examines how socio-cultural categories like class, age, nationality, race/ethnicity, (dis)ability or health and marital status, affected women’s capacities to participate in politics, at the polling station as lawful voters, and as respectable candidates for parliamentary or municipal elections. On the 19th of June 1915, when Icelandic women gained the right to vote and eligibility for parliament, the new women voters were faced with two intersecting categories which prevented them in fulfilling their full potential as citizens on equal standing to men. On one hand, women´s suffrage was severely limited by age, as the age limit set for women was 40, while it was 25 for (most) men. It should be noted though that in 1915, the suffrage was not only granted to Icelandic women for the first time, but also to male workers or farmhands, but the age limit for the disenfranchised men was 40 as well, so gender as well as economic and social position, served to severely diminish the numbers of new voters. The second and longer lasting intersectional hindrance, was socio-economic class. Economic status or poverty, thus continued to be a stumbling block, since receiving poor relief, resulted in the loss of the suffrage until 1934, but it was often the unfortunate result of sickness or disability, old age, or widowhood. (Show less) Eirinn Larsen : “Secondary to the Economic Man”: Suffrage, Capital and Gender during the Long Nineteenth Century During the breakthrough of modern democracy, economic respectability and competence were important requirements for the right to vote and stand for election. This made suffrage for long secondary to the economic man, to paraphrase T.H. Marshall (1950: 20), and male honor a vital part of the nineteenth century political man. ... (Show more) During the breakthrough of modern democracy, economic respectability and competence were important requirements for the right to vote and stand for election. This made suffrage for long secondary to the economic man, to paraphrase T.H. Marshall (1950: 20), and male honor a vital part of the nineteenth century political man. Yet, as suffrage was extended to new and growing groups of taxpaying middle-class men, the vote was to depend even further on a man’s capacity to earn and control his capital. In Norway, the introduction of universal male suffrage in 1898 was followed by new suspensions rules to ensure that enfranchised men acted in harmony with key masculine requirements of economic autonomy and respectability vis-à-vis the state. Even during and after universal female suffrage passed in 1913, the suspension rules remained in place, enabling the authorities to separate the worthy citizens from the unworthy ones until economic self-reliance in 1919 was removed as condition for the suffrage in Norway – and regardless of gender. My paper analyzes the relationship between suffrage, capital and gender in Norway further using honor as an analytical perspective. The key argument is that older and newer forms of male honor and respectability, associated with material wealth and landownership but also wage-earning, money-making and capital control informed what it meant to be a Norwegian political citizen during as well as after universal suffrage was introduced. A major reason for removing the suspension rules in 1919 also was the unintended consequences they had had for the many, poor women in need of public assistance to live and raise children. Thus, this paper sees masculine notions of honor both as a condition and a sanction for political participation in Norway during the long nineteenth century. This rests on an assumption that honor was an important norm in economic life in general, not least visible in the Norwegian law on bankruptcy of 1863. (Show less) Fia Sundevall : “Money is the Name of Citizenship Rights”: Economic Restrictions on Universal Suffrage, Sweden 1921– 1945 The entangled history of money and suffrage is well-known. At the turn of the 20th century, property ownership, high income levels, and tax payments, constituted key criteria for political citizenship in many nations across Europe and elsewhere. The introduction of universal suffrage weakened this link, but did not do away ... (Show more) The entangled history of money and suffrage is well-known. At the turn of the 20th century, property ownership, high income levels, and tax payments, constituted key criteria for political citizenship in many nations across Europe and elsewhere. The introduction of universal suffrage weakened this link, but did not do away with it. In several countries, various voting restrictions related to voter’s financial situation remained for decades. This paper looks at the case of Sweden, where universal suffrage was introduced in 1921. Three types of economic restrictions however remained. Citizens who were declared bankrupt, or taken in for long-time institutional care by poor relief authorities, were disenfranchised from elections on all political levels until 1945. For local elections, this was also the case for people with unpaid tax liabilities. By empirically examining how such restrictions were legitimized, practiced, challenged and later repealed, this paper displays how political, social and economic citizenship rights were intertwined and conflicted during the early development of the Swedish welfare state. (Show less)

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511932

__label__wiki

EuroAsia EU status Project of Common Interest (PCI) Connecting Europe Facility Inclusion of the EuroAsia Interconnector in the TYNDP EuroAsia Interconnector Double Labelling – Electricity Highways 2050 EU status 2019 News stories EuroAsia Interconnector Home At Glance The big picture EuroAsia Strategic alliance EuroAsia Strategic alliance Strategic alliance agreement with Elia Grid EuroAsia Interconnector Project Director George Killas (centre) with Chris Peeters, CEO of Elia Group (right) and Markus Berger, Chief Officer Infrastructure of Elia Group. The strategic alliance has been inked with Elia Grid International (EGI), a subsidiary of Elia Group – the Belgian–German Transmission System Operator (TSO) – and formalises a close cooperation for the development and implementation of the EuroAsia Interconnector. The Elia Group is organised around two electricity transmission system operators (TSOs): Elia in Belgium and 50Hertz, one of the four German transmission system operators, which is active in the north and east of Germany. With more than 2,100 employees and a transmission grid comprising some 18,400 km of high-voltage connections serving 30 million end users, the Elia Group is one of Europe’s top five System Operators. In addition to its activities as a transmission system operator in Belgium and Germany, the Elia Group offers a range of consultancy and engineering services to third parties all over the world through its subsidiary Elia Grid International (EGI). As a wholly owned subsidiary, EGI combines the best of both European electricity transmission system operators and embodies the international ambitions of the Elia Group by offering consultancy and engineering services on the international energy market. The Elia Group is a driving force behind the development of the European electricity market and the integration of energy generated from renewable sources and operates under the legal entity Elia System Operator, a listed company on the Brussels Euronext Stock Exchange. The Elia Group is an experienced partner for developing electricity interconnectors and projects at sea and has, amongst others, established a joint venture with its British counterpart for the development, installation and exploitation of the 1,000MW subsea Nemo Link interconnector between the UK and Belgium, which will be operational by 2019. The European Commission, with the support of the Cyprus Government and in agreement of the Greek Government, has appointed EuroAsia Interconnector Limited as the owner Project Promoter of EuroAsia Interconnector. The Cyprus and Greece energy regulatory authorities (CERA and RAE) announced on October 10, 2017, that the EuroAsia Interconnector meets the guidelines for trans-European Energy infrastructure, as well as the guideline for cost benefit analysis of ENTSO-E grid development projects. On Friday, November 3, 2017, the Official Gazette of the Republic of Cyprus published the agreement between the two national regulatory authorities for the Cross-Border Cost Allocation between Cyprus and Crete-Attica, Greece for the Project of Common Interest (PCI) of the European Union, 3.10.2 Interconnection between Kofinou (CY) and Korakia, Crete (EL), and 3.10.3 Internal line between Korakia, Crete and Attica region (EL), with the official EU Project Promoter being the company EuroAsia Interconnector Ltd. 4th PCI List EuroAsia Interconnector Project Director George Killas (left) with Didier Wiot, Chief Officer Solutions & Services at Elia Group. The Nemo link Interconnector Nemo Link® is constructing an electrical interconnector between the UK and Belgium known as the Nemo Link® interconnector with the objective to operate it afterwards during 25 years. The Nemo Link® interconnector will consist of subsea and underground cables connected to a converter station in each country, which will allow electricity to flow in either direction between the two countries. Nemo Link® will build the converter station on an 8 hectare site, formerly occupied by the Richborough Power Station, which now forms part of the Richborough Energy Park proposals. A similar converter station will be built in the industry zone Herdersbrug in Bruges. What is Nemo Link®? Nemo Link® is the project to lay high voltage electricity cables under the sea, improving the link between UK and European electricity generation with consumers in the UK and across the continent. It is a joint project between National Grid Interconnector Limited, a subsidiary company of the UK’s National Grid Plc, and the Belgian Elia group. The project will give both countries improved reliability and access to electricity and sustainable generation. Nemo Link® will consist of subsea and underground cables connected to a converter station and an electricity substation in each country, which will allow electricity to flow in either direction between the two countries. The site for the converter station and electricity substation in the UK is an 8 hectare site, formerly occupied by the Richborough Power Station, which now forms part of the Richborough Energy Park proposals. A similar converter station and substation will be built in the industry zone Herdersbrug in Bruges, Belgium. Tenders received for the construction of the converter stations of the EuroAsia Interconnector Electricity interconnection targets © 2019 EuroAsia interconnector. All rights reserved Site map | Legal Notes | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511935

__label__cc

Home Articles The Sweet Sax of John Alexander The Sweet Sax of John Alexander By – Bil Jones Late one evening quite a few moons ago I entered the door of the world famous Double Door Inn in Charlotte quite by chance. Greeted by the sound of twin saxophones soulfully harmonizing, I worked my way through the crowded room to witness the full effect of this groovin’ band and the horn section leading them. As the mass of bodies parted and my field of view became unobstructed, I realized there was but a lone sax player on the well worn stage before me. Masterfully playing both the alto and tenor saxes at same time was Gaston County musician, John Alexander. Woodwind artist John Alexander is a native of Gastonia who garnered his music education at Erskine College in Due West, South Carolina, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Music. John then joined up with Uncle Sam for tours of duty with the 282nd Army Band at Fort Jackson, SC, and the 8th Army Band in Seoul, South Korea. His next stop was the University of Miami where he was ultimately awarded a Master of Music degree in Jazz Pedagogy. John has put his education and military service to good use in the many classes and clinics for aspiring musicians he hosts regularly in our area to this day. As a composer and arranger John has recorded two CD’s of his own original music – the 2001 release “You Need ‘Dis” and “Many Hands” which was released in 2011. John has lent these skills to the Charlotte Jazz Orchestra, of which he is a member, and has appeared as a guest artist on albums of other artist too numerous to mention. In addition to his composing and arranging talents, he is music director for ‘gtownsound’, which produced the DVD“Reunion 2011, A Rhythm & Blues Revival” featuring Gastonia bands from the 60’s and 70’s including The Counts, of which John is an original member. John has performed with Ira Sullivan, Louis Bellson, Curtis Fuller, Gap Mangione, Matt “Guitar” Murphy, Jack Jones, Woody Herman, Eddis Higgins, Astrud Gilberto, The Spinners, The Four Tops, K.C. and the Sunshine Band, and Lou Rawls, Natalie Cole, among others. He has appeared at the Mammoth Jazz Festival, the North Carolina Jazz Showcase, Jazz Charlotte, the Charlotte Symphony and as season opener for the Gastonia Community Concerts Association. Highlights of John’s career include performing abroad in Okinawa, Japan in 1999 as a member of the Ron Brendle Quartet and as a member of a cultural delegation representing Gastonia at the annual spring festival in our sister city of Gotha, Germany in 2000. Considered by those locally in the know to be one of the hardest working men in jazz, John continues to hone his craft and his chops weekly. He currently performs Thursdays from 8 – 11 pm at Blue Restaurant and Bar in Charlotte with Big Octave, every third Sunday from 4 – 6 pm at Delta’s in Charlotte with the Charlotte Jazz Orchestra and the occasional Saturday at Delta’s with Big Octave. North Carolina seems to produce more than our fair share of notable sax players- John Coltrane, Lou Donaldson and Tina Brooks among them. John Alexander’s soulful sax is a musical treasure right here in our own back yard. For more information about John Alexander and his music please visit www.cdbaby.com/Artist/JohnAlexander www.gtownsound.com www.jajazz.net Bil Jones Gaston Alive! Gaston Alive! magazine Gaston County Music Previous articleCreekwood Farm & Riding Academy Next articleGaston Alive – May 2013 Cooking with the Glenns-Frosty Summer Drinks The Lights Of Christmastown Ten Steps To A Spectacular Christmas Tree!

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511938

__label__cc

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q-R | S | T | U | V | W | X-Y-Z Russia and the Republics Australia, New Zealand, and Antarctica Agriculture » Human Geography » The Future of Agricultural Land Preservation Government responses to the urbanization of agricultural land have recognized the need to develop programs to support agricultural viability in conjunction with agricultural land preservation policies. However, policies to protect agricultural land must account for the uncertainty of the agricultural economy. If farming becomes too unprofitable an occupation, it will not be economically viable for governments or private landowners to preserve farmland in anticipation of changes in the market. Similarly, if high quality farmland is not preserved, farmers will be forced to farm marginal lands that will be less sustainable and harm the resource base and economy in the long term. Clearly, agricultural land preservation programs must coexist with programs supporting the agricultural economy to ensure the sustainability of the land resource, the long term viability of the industry and the food supply. Farming is not just a lifestyle, it is an economic activity, and if it cannot be undertaken in a way that allows farmers an adequate life, then how much farmland has been saved from bricks and mortar matters little. No single farmland preservation strategy has proven entirely effective and it is unlikely that a perfect strategy exists. Similarly, there is no existing set of universal characteristics that can guarantee farmland preservation and a viable agricultural industry. A strategy that works in one jurisdiction may fail in another. The success or failure of a strategy depends on a number of political, social, and environmental values and circumstances: land productivity, income levels of area residents, level of planning experience, skills and leadership of government officials, public attitudes toward land use control, land ethics, and the need, perceived or real, to preserve farmland. Nevertheless, for a farmland preservation strategy to succeed, certain characteristics should exist. The presence of these characteristics may also be used to measure the effectiveness of farmland preservation policies and programs. A comprehensive list of criteria, which may be used to evaluate the effectiveness of a proposed, or existing agricultural land preservation program includes: does the program identify high quality agricultural lands to be protected? Does the program prevent or limit landuse conflicts? Does the program provide certainty that significant agricultural lands will remain available for agricultural use? Does the program provide an integrated approach to agricultural land use planning and meet the objectives of economic and environmental sustainability? Can the program be implemented using existing resources? Can the program be implemented readily? Will it provide immediate results? Is the program supported by farmers, municipalities, and the public? Does it address the concerns of these groups? Is the program affordable? Will it negatively affect the agriculture and food industry in the long term? Is the program compatible with other land use planning and financial programs? These criteria are useful measures of policy effectiveness. While some argue that policies and programs to preserve agriculture should focus on land use planning rather than exclusively on other initiatives, such as tax incentives, others argue that preservation initiatives do not guarantee viable agriculture if they focus too much on physical land use planning. In contrast to the criteria presented above, a purely economic view argues that farmland preservation strategies will not be effective unless they influence the rural land market so that farmers are not outbid by households seeking rural nonfarm lifestyles. In other words, preservation strategies must reduce or eliminate the impermanence syndrome and the speculative value of land; otherwise, farmers will sell their land and/or cease farming. In this context, preservation strategies must incorporate social and economic considerations and work in cooperation with farmers, families, and professional associations. While many areas appear to account for various social, environmental, and economic issues by using two or more strategies to preserve farmland, these are rarely coordinated into a larger framework. Legislation and policy influencing agriculture and land use are developed and enforced by various government departments and agencies. Land use planning for agriculture and the economic health of the agri food industry are generally regarded as separate issues, yet they are very much connected. If farming cannot remain a viable industry, then farmers will choose other occupations, thereby freeing up land for consumption by other uses. In the meantime, if there is no intervention to protect the agricultural land base, then farmers may choose to make a quick profit by selling their land when development pressures escalate. Agriculture is an important industry in most nations, and the most basic resource – land – should be a national concern. While the forces behind agricultural land conversion are often found at a broader scale than that at which land use planning is normally carried out, it seems clear that all levels of government should play a role in slowing or preventing agricultural land conversion, and preserving the agricultural land base.While municipalities are primarily left with the often voluntary responsibility of protecting farmland through local land use planning (usually under provincial land use law or policy), most upper level governments, take charge of agricultural research and financial support programs. Further, strategies to preserve farmland need to coordinate preservation policy with the development of a viable and environmentally sustainable agricultural industry. These strategies should be part of an integrated effort within and among government departments and jurisdictions, because issues affecting agriculture and landuse occur at various scales, often transcending political boundaries. Additionally, land use strategies which integrate conservation techniques involve farming and local populations, and combine landuse planning with other forms of social and economic development to hold more promise for achieving farmland preservation, and social and economic goals. In response to growing concerns about the loss of farmland to nonagricultural land uses, many jurisdictions have adopted a variety of approaches to preserve farmland. Policy and legislative tools are used to combat the loss of farmland in different ways with varying degrees of success. Most areas use land use planning controls to influence the use and allocation of agricultural land, and tax or other incentives to encourage farmers to keep their land in agricultural use. This combination of techniques attempts to protect land for agricultural use while keeping farming profitable for farmers. While farmland conversion has generally been slower than it would have been in the absence of farmland preservation strategies, it has not been eliminated. The future of farmland preservation depends on the coordinated efforts of all levels of government and the integration of economic, social, and environmental issues into a comprehensive land use program designed to preserve farmland and the agricultural industry. Approaches for Preserving Agricultural Land Agricultural Land Preservation commercial agriculture Agricultural Revolution E-mail: geographynm@gmail.com

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511940

__label__wiki

How the Pentagon is Preparing for a Tank War With Russia Posted by aurelius77 on May 20, 2016 Don’t forget the new Russian Armata tank can penetrate over 1 meter of steel. Russia is also not getting rid of their old tank units, but turning them into remotely controlled vehicles. Meanwhile, America sends their old ones back to the scrap heap. Russia is now on par with America in terms of military capability and technology. Reactive armor and cross-domain fire capabilities are just some of the items on the Army’s must-have list. When Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster briefs, it’s like Gen. Patton giving a TED talk — a domineering physical presence with bristling intellectual intensity. These days, the charismatic commander of the U.S. Army’s Training and Doctrine Command is knee-deep in a project called The Russia New Generation Warfare study, an analysis of how Russia is re-inventing land warfare in the mud of Eastern Ukraine. Speaking recently at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., McMaster said that the two-year-old conflict had revealed that the Russians have superior artillery firepower, better combat vehicles, and have learned sophisticated use of UAVs for tactical effect. Should U.S. forces find themselves in a land war with Russia, he said, they would be in for a rude, cold awakening. “We spend a long time talking about winning long-range missile duels,” said McMaster. But long-range missiles only get you through the front door. The question then becomes what will you do when you get there. “Look at the enemy countermeasures,” he said, noting Russia’s use of nominally semi-professional forces who are capable of “dispersion, concealment, intermingling with civilian populations…the ability to disrupt our network strike capability, precision navigation and timing capabilities.” All of that means “you’re probably going to have a close fight… Increasingly, close combat overmatch is an area we’ve neglected, because we’ve taken it for granted.” So how do you restore overmatch? The recipe that’s emerging from the battlefield of Ukraine, says McMaster, is more artillery and better artillery, a mix of old and new. Cross-Domain Fires “We’re out-ranged by a lot of these systems and they employ improved conventional munitions, which we are going away from. There will be a 40- to 60-percent reduction in lethality in the systems that we have,” he said. “Remember that we already have fewer artillery systems. Now those fewer artillery systems will be less effective relative to the enemy. So we need to do something on that now.” Karber, the president of the Potomac Foundation, went on a fact-finding mission to Ukraine last year, and returned with the conclusion that the United States had long overemphasized precision artillery on the battlefield at the expense of mass fires. Since the 1980s, he said last October, at an Association for the United States Army event, the U.S. has given up its qualitative edge, mostly by getting rid of cluster munitions. Munitions have advanced incredibly since then. One of the most terrifying weapons that the Russians are using on the battlefield are thermobaric warheads, weapons that are composed almost entirely of fuel and burn longer and with more intensity than other types of munitions. “In a 3-minute period…a Russian fire strike wiped out two mechanized battalions [with] a combination of top-attack munitions and thermobaric warheads,” said Karber. “If you have not experienced or seen the effects of thermobaric warheads, start taking a hard look. They might soon be coming to a theater near you.” Karber also noted that Russian forces made heavy and integrated use of electronic warfare. It’s used to identify fire sources and command posts and to shut down voice and data communications. In the northern section, he said, “every single tactical radio [the Ukrainian forces] had was taken out by heavy Russian sector-wide EW.” Other EW efforts had taken down Ukrainian quadcopters. Another system was being used to mess with the electrical fuses on Ukrainian artillery shells, ”so when they hit, they’re duds,” he said. Karber also said the pro-Russian troops in Donbas were using an overlapping mobile radar as well as a new man-portable air defense that’s “integrated into their network and can’t be spoofed by [infrared] decoys” or flares. Combat Vehicles and Defenses The problems aren’t just with rockets and shells, McMaster said. Even American combat vehicles have lost their edge. “The Bradley [Fighting Vehicle] is great,” he said, but “what we see now is that our enemies have caught up to us. They’ve invested in combat vehicles. They’ve invested in advanced protective systems and active protective systems. We’ve got to get back ahead on combat vehicle development.” If the war in Eastern Ukraine were a real-world test, the Russian T-90 tank passed with flying colors. The tank had seen action in Dagestan and Syria, but has been particularly decisive in Ukraine. The Ukrainians, Karber said, “have not been able to record one single kill on a T-90. They have the new French optics on them. The Russians actually designed them to take advantage of low light, foggy, winter conditions.” Anti-Drone Defenses No Foolproof Technological Solution “What’s necessary is political accommodation, is what needs to happen, if we don’t conduct operations and plan campaigns in a way that gets to the political accommodation,” he said. “The most important activity will be to broker political ceasefires and understandings.” Sometimes that happens at the end of a tank gun. Full article: How the Pentagon is Preparing for a Tank War With Russia (Defense One) This entry was posted in Axis Powers, Europe, Military, Military Technology, National Security & Terrorism, Politics, Soviet Union, Ukraine, USA and tagged advanced warfare, Bradly Fighting Vehicle, Dagestan, Donbas, General Patton, How the Pentagon is Preparing for a Tank War With Russia, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, National Security & Terrorism, russia, russian tanks, Russian thermobaric munitions, Russian thermobaric weapons, Russian Troops, T-90, TED, The Russia New Generation Warfare study, U.S. Army, UAVs, ukraine, United States. Bookmark the permalink. Russia ready to use Hyperloop technology — transport minister Pentagon: ‘Revanchist’ Russia seeking path of aggression

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511941

__label__cc

Carvaka school On March 28, 2016 February 3, 2017 By Global PhilosophyIn Epistemology, Ethics, India, Metaphysics The Carvaka tradition offers an example of a pleasure-oriented this-worldly philosophy of life, based on a strictly empiricist epistemology and materialist metaphysics. Claiming that sense-perception constitutes the only reliable means of knowing, Carvaka thinkers reject the possibility of drawing inferences about what cannot be perceived, and some reject the validity of inferential reasoning altogether. They therefore argue that there is no afterlife, and that the mind is a product of matter. Consequently, they also deny the utility of priests and rituals, and question the caste system. They are represented as amoral hedonists by their opponents, but this portrait may not be entirely accurate. Secondary Sources – Online Secondary Sources – Books and Articles There are no virtually no first-hand Carvaka writings, and Carvaka philosophy is largely known through the texts of other schools. As these texts are mainly written by opponents, they may not be painting the most favorable possible portrait of this tradition. A good selection of such texts is provided in the chapter on Carvaka philosophy in A Source Book in Indian Philosophy, ed. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan & Charles A. Moore (Princeton University Press, 1967): pp. 227-249. Major sources are: Krisna Misra, Prabodhacandrodaya (Rise of the Moon of Intellect), c. 1000 CE, Act II https://archive.org/stream/prabdhachandr00krsnrich/prabdhachandr00krsnrich_djvu.txt Madhavacharya, Sarva-darsana-sangraha (Compendium of all Knowledge), 14th century, Chapter 1: The Charvaka System http://www.gutenberg.org/files/34125/34125-h/34125-h.htm Secondary Sources – Online: http://www.iep.utm.edu/indmat/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charvaka http://www.humanistictexts.org/carvaka.htm Secondary Sources – Books and Articles: Ramakrishna Bhattacarya, “Materialism in India: A Synoptic View” (2011) http://www.carvaka4india.com/2011/08/materialism-in-india-synoptic-view.html An overview of the history and major tenets of the Carvaka school, by a leading expert. Further explications of Carvaka and other materialist texts by the same author are given online at: http://www.carvaka4india.com/2012/08/lokayata-darsana-and-comparative-study.html http://www.carvaka4india.com/2012/08/carvaka-lokayata-some-common.html There is also a monograph on the subject by Ramakrishna Bhattacarya, Studies on the Carvaka/Lokayata (London: Anthem Press, 2011). John M. Koller, “Skepticism in Early Indian Thought,” Philosophy East and West, 27/2 (1977), 155-164. Includes discussion of Carvaka epistemology. Pradeep P. Gokhale, Lokayata/Carvaka: A Philosophical Inquiry (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2015). Philosophical investigation of the variety of Carvaka thought, based on a close and erudite engagement with the scattered textual sources. Covers Carvaka epistemology, metaphysics and values. Ancient Greek positions on happiness & the good life: Epictetus, Epicurus, Aristotle Ancient Greek materialism: Democritus, Lucretius Carvakahappinesshedonismmaterialism No-self (anatta) in The Questions of King Milinda One thought on “Carvaka school” Pingback: Cārvāka Critique of Inference – Global Philosophy

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511943

__label__wiki

Las Vegas attack is deadliest shooting in modern US history October 2, 2017 | by Associated Press Police officers stand at the scene of a shooting near the Mandalay Bay resort and casino on the Las Vegas Strip, Sunday, Oct. 1, 2017, in Las Vegas. Multiple victims were being transported to hospitals after a shooting late Sunday at a music festival on the Las Vegas Strip. (AP Photo/John Locher) At least 50 people were killed and more than 200 wounded when a gunman opened fire on an outdoor music festival on the Las Vegas Strip in the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history. Authorities have identified the suspected gunman in the Sunday night shooting as Stephen Paddock. Clark County Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said officers confronted Paddock on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino across the street from the concert. Paddock is dead. Previously, the deadliest mass shooting had been an attack at an Orlando, Florida, nightclub that killed 49. Before that, the deadliest shooting in the U.S. was the 2007 attack at Virginia Tech, in which a student killed 32 people before killing himself. Here’s a look at some of the nation’s deadliest rampages since 2012: – Oct. 1, 2017: A gunman identified by authorities as Stephen Paddock opened fire on an outdoor music festival on the Las Vegas Strip from the 32nd floor of casino, killing at least 50 people and wounding more than 200. He died at the scene after officers went into the hotel room he was using. – June 12, 2016: Gunman Omar Mateen opened fire at an Orlando, Florida, nightclub, killing 49 people. Mateen was later killed in a shootout with police. — Feb. 25, 2016: Cedric Ford, 38, killed three people and wounded 14 others at a lawnmower factory where he worked in the central Kansas community of Hesston. The local police chief killed him during a shootout with 200 to 300 workers still in the building, authorities said. — Feb. 20, 2016: Jason Dalton, 45, is accused of randomly shooting and killing six people and severely wounding two others during a series of attacks over several hours in the Kalamazoo, Michigan, area. Authorities say he paused between shootings to make money as an Uber driver. He faces murder and attempted murder charges. — Dec. 2, 2015: Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and Tashfeen Malik, 27, opened fire at a social services center in San Bernardino, California, killing 14 people and wounding more than 20. They fled the scene but died hours later in a shootout with police. — Oct. 1, 2015: A shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, left 10 people dead and seven wounded. Shooter Christopher Harper-Mercer, 26, exchanged gunfire with police, then killed himself. — June 17, 2015: Dylann Roof, 21, shot and killed nine African-American church members during a Bible study group inside the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Police contend the attack was racially motivated. Roof has been sentenced to death in the shootings. — May 23, 2014: A community college student, Elliot Rodger, 22, killed six people and wounded 13 in shooting and stabbing attacks in the area near the University of California, Santa Barbara, campus. Authorities said he apparently shot himself to death after a gunbattle with deputies. — Sept. 16, 2013: Aaron Alexis, a mentally disturbed civilian contractor, shot 12 people to death at the Washington Navy Yard before he was killed in a police shootout. — July 26, 2013: Pedro Vargas, 42, went on a shooting rampage at his Hialeah, Florida, apartment building, gunning down six people before officers fatally shot him. — Dec. 14, 2012: In Newtown, Connecticut, an armed 20-year-old man entered Sandy Hook Elementary School and used a semi-automatic rifle to kill 26 people, including 20 first graders and six adult school staff members. He then killed himself. — Sept. 27, 2012: In Minnesota’s deadliest workplace rampage, Andrew Engeldinger, who had just been fired, pulled a gun and fatally shot six people, including the company’s founder. He also wounded two others at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis before taking his own life. — Aug. 5, 2012: In Oak Creek, Wisconsin, 40-year-old gunman Wade Michael Page killed six worshippers at a Sikh Temple before killing himself. — July 20, 2012: James Holmes, 27, fatally shot 12 people and injured 70 in an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole. — April 2, 2012: Seven people were killed and three were wounded when a 43-year-old former student opened fire at Oikos University in Oakland, California. One Goh was charged with seven counts of murder and three counts of attempted murder, but psychiatric evaluations concluded he suffered from long-term paranoid schizophrenia and was unfit to stand trial.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511944

__label__wiki

Archive for the ‘John Robert Colombo reviews a new biography of Gurdjieff by Paul Beekman Taylor’ Category John Robert Colombo reviews a new biography of Gurdjieff written by Paul Beekman Taylor Here are the particulars: This book is called “G.I. Gurdjieff: A New Life” and the title is a pun. What we have here is a brand-new biography of Mr. G., a man who, by word and by deed, offered his disciples and his followers “a new life” or at least a new way of living. Neat title! The author is Paul Beekman Taylor who as a youngster “knew Gurdjieff.” Born in London in 1930, he recalls the early years that he and his mother spent at the Priory at Fontainebleau-Avon. Thereafter he became a scholar of Old Norse and Old English; he is now a Professor Emeritus of the University of Geneva. Books that he has researched and written include the very useful and detailed volume titled “Gurdjieff’s America” (2004). I think more highly of that scholarly book, which seems to have been reissued with new written material (but without the photographs in the original Lighthouse Editions publication) as “Gurdjieff’s Invention of America” (2007), than I do of the less focused volume issued the same year called “The Philosophy of G.I. Gurdjieff.” My reviews of these two books are archived on this blog. Eureka Edition, the publisher, gave this book a respectable and solid format, with a sturdy if somber, maroon-coloured card cover. The volume measures 6.5″ x 9″, the pagination is viii+247+iii, and there is or was a print-run of 250 copies dated August 2008. (ISBN / EAN: 978-90-72395-57-3) Included are a chronology, a bibliography, and an index, plus 18 black-and-white photographs, mainly unfamiliar ones – 19 if we count the full-page one which shows Mr. G. with his arms around Martin Benson and Rita Romilly, a photograph that is familiar and has been unaccountably reproduced twice in these pages. Eureka Editions is the name of a specialty publishing house located in Utrecht, The Netherlands, It has in print close to fifty new or reprint titles devoted to the Fourth Way. Their authors include Bob Hunter, Maurice Nicoll, Beryl Pogson, and Solange Claustres. Check the company’s website for further particulars. The knowledge of the life of Gurdjieff that most of us have is derived from P.D. Ouspensky’s “In Search of the Miraculous” (itself a marvellous work!), augmented by the contributions of the “two Jameses” – James Webb in “The Harmonious Circle” and James Moore in “Gurdjieff: The Anatomy of a Myth.” Although the latter book appeared in 1991, it has yet to be superseded, even by the present publication which benefits from the inclusion of fresh information from the archives of the former Soviet Union unavailable to Moore two decades earlier. Taylor’s book offers the knowledgeable reader a harvest of new details. The reader who is unfamiliar with the literature of the Work will not find it appealing. But the more knowledgeable reader will find it quite engrossing, for it takes all the previous literature as its province and adds new information and evaluation. It is indispensable for students concerned with the evolution of the Work and the life of its founder. There is something else. In the words of the blurb on the book’s back cover, “This biography stands apart from other biographical writings about Gurdjieff by emphasizing his relations with the many children for whom he played a fatherly role in the Caucasus, Fontainebleau, and New York City.” As in previous books, Taylor identifies with Gurdjieff’s immediate family. Indeed, the book is dedicated to three women, two of them Gurdjieff’s daughters. One of these is the author’s half-sister Eve, nicknamed Petey, who was born in 1928. This book is very much the biography of a man along with the history of a movement. It will appeal to “completists” who have to know everything about these intertwined subjects. At the same time, the spirit of the book is revisionist in nature, in the sense that it tries to test every statement against the record. I am reminded of the adage that goes like this: “Superstition is superstition. But the study of superstition is a science.” Rather than simply summarize the contents of the book – familiar ground all of it – this review will focus on what Taylor’s book has to offer the specialist reader – new ground or at least nearly interesting ground. In a sense I have had to hop, skip, and jump around, cherishing this morsel, ignoring that one. The text is dense with detail but written with great clarity of expression. Taylor is generous in the Acknowledgements section, expressing his “incalculable debt” to Michael Benham of Melbourne, Australia, and Gert-Jan Blom of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, who supplied biographical information that is only now appearing in print. In fact, he refers to the present work as “a triadic collaboration.” In his short Foreword, Gert-Jan Blom hazards a guess that this book may be “the most accurate biography available at this time.” He is quite right. Taylor is an historian of ideas by training, so his Introduction is subtitled “Gurdjieff and the Historian.” I smiled when I read those four words and I am sure most readers will do the same. One can only guess at the difficulties the historian faces in dealing with Gurdjieff, but there is no need to worry because the author alludes to those difficulties: “The best a biographer can do with the stories of his early life is to distinguish the possible from the improbable.” He does make distinctions, though he writes vaguely about probing further “by means of a critical hermeneutics.” The first chapter begins with a discussion of names – the multiple forms of Gurdjieff’s family and given names. “One wonders why so many biographers cannot get the name of their subject into one accepted form.” He opts for Georgii Ivanovich Gurdjieff – G.I. Gurdjieff in short. Then there is that “bone of contention,” the year he was born. It is known that he was born in Alexandropol, renamed Leninakan, today’s Armenian city of Gumri. A website, accessible through Google, informs me that Gumri is “one of the oldest cities in the world.” Information suggests Gurdjieff was born about 1866. “Though extant documentary evidence has his birth year as 1877, I continue to suppose that the man I knew in 1948 and 1949 was in his eighties, rather than in his early seventies.” Thus Taylor agrees with Moore (1866) and not with Webb (1874). As for his day of birth, the man himself celebrated New Year’s Day, whether Jan. 1 (Orthodox style) or Jan 13 (Gregorian style).Some evidence favours a less symbolic date: December 28. Gurdjieff had no children with his wife or partner Julia Osipovna Ostrovska, but Taylor argues that by other women he had four sons and two daughters and Taylor names them. He also devotes some sentences to the suggestion that the young Joseph Dzhugashvili (later known as Stalin) was “his one-time school mate” and well known to the Gurdjieff family in the late 1890s. “It is difficult to extract any certainty out of the apparent contradictory accounts. We can posit the probability that Gurdjieff and Stalin were aware of each other sometime or another before the turn of the century.” It is also possible that he was personally acquainted with the young Maxim Gorky. The twenty-one years from 1892 to 1913 correspond to Gurdjieff’s “wandering years” or years of quest, and Taylor spends almost as many pages as years trying to follow, to reconstruct his journeys, trying to balance accounts in the literature with those in oral and other traditions. “Gurdjieff measured out life events in cyclical pulsations of time rather than in a linear chronological flow of measured segments. His written recollections are quite purposely not fitted into a continuous flow of a total life experience.” Everyone knows about the Seekers of Truth, whom he met accidentally near the pyramids in Egypt in 1893 or 1895. There were three seekers: Gurdjieff himself, Prince Lubovedsky, and Professor Skridlov. (The two men’s names bear symbolic meanings: “carriers of love” and “to hide, conceal” respectively.) As to the identity of the Seekers, “he is consistently a single quester, which makes sense considering that his quest is ultimately to discover himself.” Taylor writes, “Gurdjieff paused for over two years in separate stays in a Muslim Dervish monastery somewhere in Central Asia.” There is no evidence that he ever passed as a Muslim. He claimed he visited Tibet, but evidence is lacking that he appeared as a Buddhist. Gurdjieff seems to have covered his tracks. It is a red herring to confuse him with Agwan Dordjieff or Ushe Nazunoff, secret agents who were conspirators in what is known as the Great Game. Taylor surmises that Gurdjieff’s “wandering years” were punctuated in 1900-01 with a period spent in St. Petersburg where he was associated with the development of experimental therapies, applying Tibetan and Mongolian medical practices, partly to deal with common drug and alcohol dependencies. Here he would have met the designer Nicholas Roerich and Agwan Dordjieff. “It is easy to imagine Gurdjieff working with these persons, all of whom he knew personally at one time or another.” A.R. Orage is the source of the suggestion that, in 1901-02, Gurdjieff “served the thirteenth Dalai Lama as collector of monastic dues, a service that gave him access to every monastery in Tibet.” Suffice it to say that there is no evidence for this suggestion. Also conjectural is Gurdjieff’s visit to St. Petersburg in 1909 where he is said to have established a quasi-Masonic lodge! It is known that he established himself in Moscow where his mission to the West began. In a sense he “enters history” here. Gurdjieff’s Russian years, spent in Moscow and St. Petersburg, extended from 1912 to 1917, whereupon he left the country never to return. He seems to had gathered his first pupils by 1915, and among them were the sculptors Dmitri Sergeivich Mercourov and Vladimir Pohl. It was Pohl who introduced his friend P.D. Ouspensky to Gurdjieff. In turn, Ouspensky brought into the circle the psychiatrist Leonid Stjernvall and perhaps the mathematician A.A. Zaharoff. It was the mathematician who introduced the musician Thomas de Hartmann and his wife Olga to the work. An exotic touch is that Gurdjieff may have moved in imperial circles and may have met not only Tsar Nicholas II but also the notorious monk Rasputin who may have been cured of his drug dependency by the aforementioned Tibetan medicines. Well documented are the years 1917, 1918, and 1919, which take Gurdjieff from Moscow to Constantinople. There are references to “the memoirs of Elizaveta de Stjernvall” and there is a passing reference to “Jeanne de Salzmann’s unpublished memoirs” which presumably describe this restless period. There follows a mosaic of details of life in Sochi and Essentuki where they presented themselves as The Communal House of the International Philosophico-Worker Union of Essentuki, a name that name would appeal to the White Army. Another name used was “International Alliance of Ideological Workers,” which was designed to appeal to the Red Army. The entire group – followers, emigrés, family members, all fleeing conditions in Russia – numbered some eighty-five persons. It was while at Essentuki, with its concentration on communal work, that Ouspensky began to distance himself. “Curiously, though Ouspensky moved away from Gurdjieff several times since arriving in the South, he kept coming back, even without Gurdjieff’s invitation.” The group’s long trek across the Caucasus from August to October 1918 is described in great detail. It begins to sound like the long, character-testing marches of Mohammed, the Mormons, the Mounties, and Mao’s Long March. Character-building, indeed! “Gurdjieff, well past mid-life in the second half of 1918, had undertaken an extraordinary risk, but taking risks was the principal way of developing a higher being. What seems remarkable to one viewing this adventure from a distance is that Gurdjieff knew exactly what he was doing and what materials he need to do it.” Further: “Every step taken was an exercise in what he called ‘intentional suffering,’ doing what one does neither necessarily want to do, nor understand punctually the purpose of the doing.” In Tbilisi in 1919, the rag-tag group was augmented by Alexander de Salzmann and his pregnant wife Jeanne, a student of the eurhythmics work of Emile Jaques-Dalcroze, as well as Valdemar Hinzenberg and his wife Olga Ivanovna Lazovich with their infant daughter Svetlana. They were joined by Elizaveta (Lili) Galumnian Chaverdian, a dancer, and they entertained Carl Bechhofer Roberts and Frank Pinder. Many flowers that came to blossom at Fontainebleau-Avon were planted in the rough terrain of the Caucasus. In the fall, “The Institute for the Harmonious Development of Man” was founded – or refounded, as it seems it was originally established in Russia in 1912. The group spent from July 1920 to August 1921 in Constantinople, ostensibly as refugees from Russia. They became people of interest to John Godolphin Bennett who initially confused Gurdjieff with Agwan Dordjieff. Ouspensky, living in Constantinople, “confided to Gurdjieff that he was compiling his Petersburg and Essentuki notes into a volume tentatively entitled ‘Fragments of an Unknown Teaching,’ and Gurdjieff nodded assent.” Ouspensky’s lectures attracted Tchesslav Tchechovitch, not to mention Alphons Paquet and Boris Mouravieff. It was the latter who asked Gurdjieff where he had found his ideas. Gurdjieff replied, “I stole them.” Established in Essentuki, the Movements were performed in public in Constantinople where performances were reviewed by dance critics familiar with Sufi movements in the press. To at least one commentator in February 1921 and to “other Sufi experts,” “Gurdjieff’s sacred dances were both projections of planetary movements and demonstrations of universal laws, whereas the Dervish dances played out a cosmic drama experiences [sic] by the human soul descending from the Absolute down to the material world.” The group was in Constantinople for just over a year. Ouspensky left for London, and Gurdjieff and his group for Germany. The interlude in Germany, where the Salzmanns and the Hartmanns had friends and spoke the language, lasted from August 1921 to July 1922. It was punctuated by Gurdjieff’s three visits to London where he addressed groups assembled by Ouspensky which included Kenneth Walker and Maurice Nicoll. England proved insular and unattainable but ideal for Ouspensky. Gurdjieff resolved to re-establish his Institute in France. Paris and soon Fontainebleau-Avon proved to be promising after difficult times in the Caucasus, Constantinople, and London. Paris was swarming with Russian emigrés as well as expatriate Americans fleeing isolationism and prohibition. The Salzmanns meet (accidentally on purpose perhaps) Jessmin Howarth, a Dalcroze instructor and ballet director at the Paris Opera, so the Movements begin again at the Dalcroze studio on Rue Vaugirard. They are joined by the editor A.R. Orage, who edits “The New Age,” and the psychiatrist James Carruthers Young. On October 1, 1922, Gurdjieff took possession of the Priory at Fontainebleau-Avon where he was joined by a great number of pupils and acquaintances from the Continent. Orage arrived, followed by Katherine Mansfield, known as Katia at the Priory. Taylor lists the names of some two dozen people who arrived from England, and the roll-call is a familiar one: Pinder, Nicoll and his wife, Young and his wife, the Metz brothers, Merston, Lady Rothermere, Jessmin Howarth, etc. “In all, there seems to have been some fifty to sixty persons residing at the Prieuré at one time or another in the year following its purchase.” It seems there were no French people in attendance. Memoirs of the exciting and exhausting life at the Priory are numerous, so Taylor is able to focus on events on a seasonal basis. He notes Gurdjieff’s ability to “step on corns” to shock people into self-observation and to act as a jack-of-all-trades. He is under surveillance as the French authorities learn that “he was a Mason who practiced hypnotism”! Celebrities came into his orb and left it. “The American poet Ezra Pound, whom Orage had promoted in London, was in Paris on his way to a new life in Italy when he met and talked with Gurdjieff. They enjoyed each other’s company, and Pound volunteered to judge a cooking contest between Gurdjieff and the Romanian sculptor Constantin Brancusi, awarding the crown to Gurdjieff.” Then the Americans arrived, an illustrious roster of famous names: Djuna Barnes, Peggy Guggenheim, Sinclair Lewis, and perhaps Gertrude Stein. The “Georgian toast tradition” was introduced as “toasts to idiots” with twenty-one levels of idiocy. Interestingly Taylor notes, “Gurdjieff refused to discuss the toasts except at the table.” Much information is supplied about the demonstration of the Movements at the ten performances at the Theatre of the Champs Elyseés in late December 1923. Taylor has devoted an entire book to Gurdjieff’s nine visits to the United States, and while he has unearthed additional information for his new book, largely from newspaper coverage of demonstrations of the Movements, here the details will be glossed over in the interest of saving time. Taylor is able to synthesize the published accounts of the group’s movements and activities, even proving on that trip that there never was a demonstration in Philadelphia. Gurdjieff did say, “All must get to Philadelphia,” but Taylor suggests that in Gurdjieff’s mind the city in question is located “not in eastern Pennsylvania, but east of Ephesus in Asia Minor.” Gurdjieff regarded the United States in an odd way: “America is the backdoor to Asia.” His first visit for the entourage of two dozen people (all of whom are named) was a long one which extended from January 2 to June 15, 1924. The result of the first American journey was the installation of Orage as Gurdjieff’s point man in the United States. Upon returning to the Priory on 15 June 1924, he faced “Mrs. Serious Trouble.” The immediate problem was that of the outstanding debt on the Priory, principally the sum of $2,000 owed on the mortgage. Americans, including Stanley Nott and Jean Toomer, begin to arrive, but they did not bring a flow of capital. The suggestion is made that Gurdjieff was giving some thoughts to closing the Priory when “the accident” occurred. The Citroën he was driving ran into a tree at a cross road near Chailly-en-Bière, north of Barbizon, between Paris and Fontainebleau-Avon. The accident took place on Saturday afternoon, 5 July 1924. Or did it? There is evidence it occurred the next afternoon. Various and varied accounts of what happened and its consequences are duly credited and discredited. Except that there were no eye-witnesses to the event, there is an old Russian proverb that could be recalled: “Nobody lies like an eye-witness.” Apparently the sole witness – the victim himself – told Jane Heap and the author’s mother Edith Taylor, “I sick man, truth very weak, now institute die for everybody.” No longer did Gurdjieff plan to summer at the Priory and spend autumn or winter in the Untied States. Indeed, plans were put in motion in August to liquidate the priory. A new direction was signalled when, five or six weeks following the accident, Gurdjieff told Edith Taylor, “I wish write book. Surprised? No? Some time in life every man must write book, but such book already I begin, and if you very much wish we can even English read.” Taylor is quite good at discussing the evolution of the text of “Beelzebub’s Tales” which Gurdjieff dictated and also drafted in pencil. It is usually said that tranches were dictated to his secretary Lili Galumnian in Armenian, which she translated into Russian, and Hartmann with the assistance of Bernard Metz translated these into English. Gurdjieff also scribbled notes in Russian at the Café Henri IV in Fontainebleau and at the Café de la Paix in Paris. Taylor says there is no evidence that Gurdjieff ever composed anything in Armenian, but solely in Russian, which Olga de Hartmann, the author himself, and Orage translated into English. In late 1925, Orage was entrusted with the task editing of the bulky manuscript and with the ordeal of contacting possible publishers and raising the sums required for this. All of this is worthy of a George Steiner, the polyglot scholar who regularly lectures in four languages! The sums of money raised by Orage and Toomer in New York towards the publication of the manuscript and the work of the Institute, as well as the misunderstandings around them, must have caused Taylor to burn the midnight oil. He also offers detailed accounts of motor trips to Orleans and Vichy, then to Geneva, Contreville, Nevers, and Rouen. In the midst of all this coming and going, Orage was editing “Beelzebub,” the “first series,” and Gurdjieff was working on the “second series,” that is, “Meetings with Remarkable Men.” Rumoured to be in the works but sight unseen was the “third series.” Orage proposed that the three volumes be published at the same time. As a Canada-watcher, I was surprised to read that early in 1926, “Orage was off in Quebec with Jessie Dwight, Sherman Manchester and Daly King, ostensibly to scout the possibilities for a group in Montreal.” Years would pass before the city would acquire a group. The original initiative took place as Orage was about to marry Jessie, to Gurdjieff’s consternation. Gurdjieff called her a “squirming idiot,” and her husband his “super idiot.” As well, Gurdjieff came to the conclusion that “Beelzebub” would have to be revised and rewritten in order to reflect “the peculiar form of my mentation” which would be otherwise lost to the average reader. He felt the loss of his voice in Orage’s version. Taylor reminds us, “It is easy to lose sight of the person of Gurdjieff behind a banal chronology of the dates, events, and movements that fill a biography.” Yet nothing about this book is “banal,” though at the same time there is nothing about it that is “miraculous,” except the biographer’s need to mediate the truth of the various memoirs of participants and the reconstructions of various historians. Taylor is unique in that he is both a participant and an historian. In an interesting aside, he tries to account for his subject’s uniqueness as a human being. “One can presume that he possessed certain virtues: mechanical inventiveness, artistic creativity, powers of persuasion, medical and psychological skills, but these fail to characterize the humanity of the man.” He continues, “One can wonder how he attracted so many people of diverse bloods and backgrounds. That he possessed hypnotic powers is obvious, that he used them for the good of others is apparent.” The reader wonders where this is heading. Here is the heart of the matter: “One aspect of Gurdjieff’s character that is not recorded sufficiently, however, was his paternal comportment. Gurdjieff was father to all those children who ‘knew him in the sky.’ There were always at least a dozen about him at the Prieuré, and he enjoyed their company, just as they felt comfortable in this. There was a ‘purity’ of communication between him and the children.” I have cut the paragraph short in the interest of economy, but it is apparent that the author identifies with these children. The Great Depression brought an end to transatlantic extravagance, and a sign of the times is that Lady Rothermere explained that she would no longer contribute to the support of the Institute. “Instead she was supporting Krishnamurti and T.S. Eliot’s ‘Criterion.’” Fund-raising would have to be done in America, hence Gurdjieff’s second visit on 23 Jan. 1929. It was difficult going and Orage said that he wanted to resume his literary career. The Hartmanns were pressured into leaving the Priory. The turning point seemed to be “after Gurdjieff told Olga her husband was a pederast.” Americans did not flock to the Priory that summer but one woman who did was Mildred Gillars, who in later years became one of the broadcasters on Radio Berlin who was dubbed “Axis Sally” and subsequently convicted of treason. It is not known what effect her visit had on her, as she was a woman of many parts and no fixed resolve. Gurdjieff’s third American visit took place in February 1929, where he was greeted on the gangway by Louise Welch and Dorothy Wolfe. While in New York, Gurdjieff gave thought to restructuring the groups there in the absence of Orage. The visit did not entice many Americans to visit the Priory in the summer of 1930. The fourth visit extended from 11 Nov. 1930 to 13 March 1931. Taylor gives hotel locations and even the text of the classified advertisement that appeared in the “New York Times” on 12 Nov. 1930. “Lost. Portfolio Brown marked G. Gurdjieff containing typewritten manuscript left in taxi Tuesday midnight. Reward offered for return to 204 West 59th Street.” Taylor writes, “One can assume that the manuscript was a draft of the third series.” That may be true but one wonders if the placing of the classified ad had some other undisclosed purpose. It is on this trip that Gurdjieff staged his confrontation with Orage. What was the meaning of it? It was “a fascinating episode in the lives of two close friends and a mystery as to why they parted ways. I say ‘would appear’ because exactly what happened in the complex play between the two during those months, particularly during the first two weeks of January, could not be understood by those who did not know both men personally, and a puzzlement to even those who were close to both.” Taylor calls the reversal “an axial turn in both their fortunes … an epiphany.” The author is at his best here, reconciling detailed accounts, but I will leave the matter with Taylor’s statement: “It is difficult from this distance to comprehend the extraordinary ‘power’ Gurdjieff exercised over those who came in contact with him personally. That he was held in awe by persons of various artistic and scientific persuasions is well documented. It is easy enough for current spectators to assume he was a charlatan with malefic hypnotic powers.” Indeed, he quotes the literary critic Frank Kermode who wrote that “some gurus are wrong and others are dangerous: Gurdjieff is both wrong and dangerous.” Taylor finds no evidence for such a view among the dozen men and women who had first-hand knowledge of the events that ensued. He concludes, “Gurdjieff did not insist that his pupils should devote their lives to following him …. Gurdjieff made it a practice to send those people who have reached a certain stage in the work back into the world.” Yet his followers seemed to bounce back like India-rubber balls. Taylor devotes ten closely reasoned pages to the breach in their relationship. He calls Gurdjieff’s version of the split a “fable” that eschews “fact” and describes it as a “morality play, or parable,” “post-modernist fiction.” In fact, he goes to some length to interpret Gurdjieff’s redaction of events of history as presented in the “third series” by contextualizing episodes, whether real or imagined, “into seven and three year periods, representing the Laws of Seven and Three that are the creative and maintaining forces of the cosmos.” I find I am uncertain what to make of Taylor’s interpretation of Gurdjieff’s revision of the historical record (so much seems to be ad hoc), but I find it ingenious. As Gurdjieff told Ouspensky in St. Petersburg, “There is nothing that shows up a man better than his attitude towards the work and the teacher after he has left it.” Apparently the traveller and artist Nikolai Roerich, who attended Gurdjieff’s meetings in 1930-31, had been a member of his “1909 lodge” in Moscow and that he was associated with Claude Bragdon, the architect (once described as a minor version of Frank Lloyd Wright) and co-translator of Ouspensky’s “Tertium Organum.” The chapter titled “20 March 1931 – 4 June 1935: End of the Institute” has a cast of wholly new characters. There is Toomer’s colony at Portage, Wisconsin, Toomer’s bride Margery Latimer, Zona Gale, Katherine Klenert (sister of Georgia O’Keeffe), and others. It coincides with the semi-print production of one thousand copies of the 638-page mimeographed version of “Beelzebub’s Tales” sold to group members at $10 a copy. The fifth visit took place in 1931-32, and once in New York he was interviewed by Rom Landau in “God Is My Adventure.” Tall tales are told, some of them from Child’s restaurant on 57th Street, where Gurdjieff met with his followers and others. The priory in its dilapidated state was vacated and seized for debt (owing was the sum of $17,000) in May of 1933, and Gurdjieff shifted his headquarters to Paris where he was joined by many Russian expatriates and he met with his pupils. Eventually he moved into an apartment on the second floor of Rue des Colonels Renard not far from the Arch of Triumph. Taylor checked shipping records for a phantom “sixth visit” to the United States in 1932 but finds no evidence for such a transatlantic crossing. Orage refused to edit the text of “The Herald of Coming Good,” so the task was undertaken by Payson Loomis, who had willingly worked on “Beelzebub,” in the first half of 1933. As Taylor notes, this booklet was the only work of his to appear in print during his lifetime. It was issued at the time when Gurdjieff’s fortunes were the lowest: his American prospects were, like his British prospects, nil. Yet he sailed for New York for the sixth time, on 20 April 1934, and remained in the United States longer than ever before. There is much to-ing and fro-ing, with Gurdjieff travelling to Chicago and then to Taliesin East, invited by Olgivanna and Frank Lloyd Wright. He had hoped to establish a group at Taos, but Mabel Dodge Luhan was inhospitable. He toyed with the idea of replacing Toomer as a fundraiser with Olgivanna, which seemed a senseless notion. After one of their dinners, with architectural apprentices present, Wright and Gurdjieff sparred: “Well, Mr. Gurdjieff, this is very interesting. I think I’ll send some young people to you in Paris. Then they can come back to me and I’ll finish them off.” Gurdjieff replied furiously: “You finish! You are idiot …. No, you begin, I finish!” Not as a devoted spouse but gracious as a host, Olgivanna sided with Gurdjieff. Before he left for France, Gurdjieff broke off relations with Toomer who said, in despair, “I have reached the limit of my possibilities.” He became a fan of American movies, explaining, as Fritz Peters recalled, “The hopes, dreams and desires of Americans in general … were very accurately portrayed in films. In fact, he said that only in the movies was the prevalent attitude towards sex, for example, revealed for what it really was.” The visit ended, in a sense, with the airplane crash on 6 May 1935 that took the life of Bronson M. Cutting, a wealthy U.S. Senator who was reputed to be interested in committing funds to the revival of the Institute. There is no new information about this subject and the next chapter is appropriately called “4 June 1935 – 1 September 1939: Marking Time.” Gurdjieff’s visit to Germany is well documented by Taylor who has access to his subject’s various passports and visas. It seems unlikely he visited Persia or Leningrad, as had been conjectured. There is information about Soviet government agents and bureaucrats, including Cheka officers – exploited some years ago by a Russian-language TV special produced in Moscow – but what passes for information is principally conjecture, speculation, hearsay, and rumour, the kind of “factoid” beloved of conspiratorialists who are now called “truthers.” Taylor concludes, “It is probable that Gurdjieff did not go there at all.” The record is spotty for 1935. “What he was doing in Belgium during the weeks between 8 September and 4 October is still unexplained.” Back in Paris, his four-year association with the members of The Rope is described, as well as some of his quasi-medical practices that involve injections and the transfer of electrical impulses. With the ladies he conversed about many subjects, including language. He despised English: “I can pronounce 400 consonants for your 36 … America worst nation for sound-producing.” In 1936, he moved into Apartment 6, Rue des Colonels Renard, a lovely flat maintained to this day in his memory. In 1938, through Jeanne de Salzmann, he met Vera and René Daumal the poet, Henriette and Henri Tracol, Philippe Lavastine who was married to Salzmann’s daughter Natalie, journalist René Zuber and writer Luc Dietrich, the advent of the belated interest of the French in the Work. The seventh American visit, which commenced on 8 March 1939 and concluded on 19 May 1939, is covered in some detail, including the purchase by Louise and Walter March of Spring Farm in Bloomingburg, N.Y. Various other Work locations are described, including Toomer’s Mill House, Mechanicsville, Pennsylvania. In an uncharacteristic linguistic flair, Taylor writes, “Mother World War II, following Grandmother Russian Revolution, showed her face to Gurdjieff.” The subtitle of this next section is “The Occupation of Paris.” Ouspensky and his family members moved to the United States. Gurdjieff, having just returned from that country, now gave some thoughts to returning there. Ouspensky’s pupils who remained in England joined groups led by Maurice Nicoll, Kenneth Walker, or J.G. Bennett, and not Jean Heap’s. In Paris, Gurdjieff’s pupils, either dead or dispersed by the vicissitudes of war and occupation, left him high and dry. The descriptions of the comings and goings on two continents of these disciples recalls the celebrated paragraph in “Brideshead Revisited” in which Evelyn Waugh details the movements of families following the surprising decision made by Lord Marchmain, after decades of life abroad, to return to his family seat. Conditions during the Occupation are interesting in themselves but somewhat peripheral to the biography. Indeed, Madame de Salzmann, from her hometown, Geneva, and on visits to Paris, directed students his way and kept the Movements going at the Salle Pleyel. “Most of the French were artists and writers who, for one reason or another, were exempt from military service or forced labor in Germany. The sole survivor from the Prieuré days was Tchesslav Tchechovitch, who had been with Gurdjieff in Constantinople twenty years earlier.” Transcriptions of Gurdjieff’s talks to these groups “revealed a softened style of teaching resembling his Petersburg and Moscow manner During World War I.” Indeed, he survived the Occupation in some style. Taylor examines suggestions that he dealt on the black market and hoarded food, but concludes: “It is easier to suppose that Gurdjieff maneuvered among the Germans in the same manner he had managed with Bolshevik and White Russian administrations a quarter of a century earlier.” Following the liberation, American friends and students sought him out. Former students who had now established their own groups reappeared – Stavely, Heap, Nyland, etc. – as did Pentland, Bennett, the Wolfes, Anderson, Caruso, the Herters, etc. In charge was Madame de Salzmann. The biography proper ends with the chapter incongruously titled “16 December 1948 – 29 October 1949: Infinity and Finity Conjoined, Eighth and Final Visit to America.” English groups helped Gurdjieff with current expenses and American groups helped him to liquidate his debts. In New York, he revived the Movements with Alfred Etievant, and Jessmin Howarth did the same at Franklin Farms. It is a period of grand reunions. “Many were surprised and pleased by Gurdjieff’s demeanor. He seemed to be on a peace mission to mend broken bridges to former pupils of Orage, Toomer and Ouspensky.” As Taylor notes, he paid particular attention to the youngsters brought to him by their parents. “On the whole, the children were in awe of Gurdjieff, and he treated them as ‘candidates for initiation.’” With the toasts, a child was an “unformed idiot” or “aspirant for ordinary idiot.” I had long been curious as to why French students identified themselves as “adepts.” Taylor writes, “Gurdjieff had Pentland send out a circular letter under Gurdjieff’s Paris address to all his ‘adepts’ announcing the forthcoming publication” of “Beelzebub.” The sum of $25,000 was subscribed to Harcourt Brace to issue the book. Lord Pentland handled the negotiations. Apparently the publisher requested no subsidy for Ouspensky’s “In Search of the Miraculous.” Interesting details about the work being done in Paris upon his return in February 1949 appears here, punctuated with automobile journeys around France. But he was not well, suffering abdominal edema associated with cancer of the pancreas. “On 27 October, thanks to Dr. William Welch’s intervention, he was admitted to the American Hospital of Paris.” He died two days later. “If he was eighty-three years of age, he died at the same age as his father thirty-one years earlier.” A short chapter titled “Postscript: Gurdjieff and Meta-history” follows, in which Taylor notes, “Shortly before he died, as I was about to return to New York, he told me that I owed him stories, and I have been spinning stories about him for the past several years, but have not yet acquitted my debt.” He discusses the nature of “objective facts shaped into subjective designs.” He has certainly dispatched that obligation. “In my writings I have struggled to expose what I feel is not quite the truth in the process of elaborating what is, for the moment, what appears to be the truth.” This section is sobering in that limitations of previous memorists and biographers, including the “two Jameses,” are discussed. “Were I to state my own general assessment of Gurdjieff’s career, I would say that he possessed and exercised an exceptional genius for influencing other people to work for their own ‘perfection of being.’ If there was a flaw in his method, it was an implicit conception of self as a model for emulation, whereas the man, in my opinion, could not be emulated. Perhaps he judged the intellectual, moral and physical possibilities of others too highly.” It seems apparent to me at least that those men and women – those adepts – who knew the man personally were in no position whatever to separate the man from the message, so to speak: the movement, the system, the “special doctrine,” the Fourth Way, or the Work as it is now known. Much was gained, but at the same time much was contained. Following such sober assessments as these there is the arresting chapter called “Excursus: Gurdjieff and Women.” It is three pages in length. Taylor neatly summarizes its argument in one sentence: “That man is superior to women is apodictic in his writings.” Feminists will find the instances of male chauvinism that appear here to be alarming. Taylor himself finds them disarming. He is to be congratulated for presenting them in print. In the immediate aftermath of this line-by-line reading of Taylor’s biography, perhaps some stray thoughts of the reviewer are in order. This undertaking was neither an ordeal nor a romp, but an instructive experience. The author has created a giant, Byzantine-like mosaic that consists of colourful bits and pieces of stone selected for size and shape. The overall pattern makes greater sense viewed close up than it does viewed from a distance. Taylor himself is ideally suited and situated to follow this life of Gurdjieff with a composite biography of “the women of the Work.” If he excludes the women of “the Rope,” who have already been well described by William Patrick Patterson, he could concentrate on the Madames – Ostrowska, Ouspensky, Saltzman, Hartmann, Hinzenberg – and fill a need, especially in light of his “Excursus.” After I turned the final page – number 247 – of my copy of this book – which is itself mechanically numbered 185 – a short passage from a long poem came into my head, form where I am not sure. It expresses the sense I have of what hovers over the panorama of the amazing characters and personalities who have been described and analysed in these pages with all their actions and reactions projected over a period of a century. The passage comes from the philosophical poem “The Prelude” (1805) in which William Wordsworth wrote evocatively about the sense of the yet greater forms that lurk within the great natural forms around us: ” … o’er my thoughts / There hung a darkness, call it solitude / Or blank desertion. No familiar shapes / Remained, no pleasant images of trees, / Of sea or sky, no colours of green fields; / But huge and mighty forms, that do not live / Like living men, moved slowly through the mind / By day, and were a trouble to my dreams.” John Robert Colombo lives in Toronto and is a specialist in Canadiana. His most recent publications include “The Big Book of Canadian Hauntings” (an anthology of accounts of psychical experiences) and “Indifferences” (a selection of his own aphorisms). His website is colombo-plus.ca Posted in John Robert Colombo reviews a new biography of Gurdjieff by Paul Beekman Taylor, THE JOHN ROBERT COLOMBO PAGE

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511948

__label__wiki

Hang The Bankers Hang The Bankers is your #1 source of the news that matters. Another Kevin Spacey accuser dies as actor releases creepy Christmas video OPCW lied about chemical weapons report on Syria Prince Andrew met with pedophile procurer Ghislaine Maxwell after investigation into Jeffrey Epstein was reopened War on Terror: over 801,000 people killed, $6.4 trillion of taxpayer money wasted It’s time for Prince Andrew to be arrested and taxpayer funding of the royal family to stop British royal family ‘threatened’ ABC News for report on Epstein World more outraged over Notre Dame fire than the Amazon burning Russia is dumping US dollars and hoarding gold Switzerland chooses gold over paper wealth backed by US dollar Amazon makes $5.6 billion in US profits last year but paid nothing in federal income taxes Iran bans use of US dollar in trade as petrodollar becomes increasingly irrelevant Bitcoin is now bigger than Bayer, Goldman Sachs & Nike How Puerto Rico can rebuild and become a powerhouse economy China claims gold reserves at end of 2016 a massive 12,100 tonnes New York Times propaganda: Hillary’s white pantsuit displays ‘empowerment’ but Tulsi’s says ‘fringe cult leader’ Tulsi Gabbard calls out ‘queen of warmongers’ Hillary Clinton Election meddling: Google blocks Tulsi Gabbard’s campaign ads Bernie Sanders pays his staff less than his proposed minimum wage Nigel Farage has called on the EU to investigate George Soros for political meddling Phoney Trump-Russia dossier was funded by Clinton camp and DNC Hillary Clinton still clueless as to how she lost the election How to delete your social media accounts Facebook admits it is deleting accounts at the direction of the US and Israeli government Plаnnеd obsolescence: Apple admits to purposely slowing down your iPhone Why Google engineer James Damore was fired Scientists successfully edit the first human embryo in US using CRISPR China builds world’s largest floating solar plant Farmers awarded $218m in Syngenta GMO corn lawsuit Psychedelic pioneer and spiritual leader Ram Dass dies aged 88 The sugar industry paid scientists to demonize fats in food CrossFit ditches Facebook and Instagram, citing privacy concerns Bayer ordered to pay $2 billion in Monsanto Roundup cancer case Monsanto to pay $289m as jury rules Roundup weedkiller caused man’s cancer New study confirms link between energy drinks and heart damage 8 ways to instantly increase your confidence Jeffrey Epstein: close friend of royal family and global elite, arrested for trafficking underage girls ShareTweetShareSharePrintSend Billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was arrested for allegedly sex trafficking dozens of minors in New York and Florida between 2002 and 2005, and will appear in court in New York on Monday, according to three law enforcement sources. Saturday’s arrest by the FBI-NYPD Crimes Against Children Task Force comes about 12 years after the 66-year-old financier essentially got a slap on the wrist for allegedly molesting dozens of underage girls in Florida. For more than a decade, Epstein’s alleged abuse of minors has been the subject of lawsuits brought by victims, investigations by local and federal authorities, and exposés in the press. But despite the attention cast on his alleged sex crimes, the hedge-funder has managed to avoid any meaningful jail time, let alone federal charges. The new indictment—which, according to two sources, will be unsealed Monday in Manhattan federal court—will reportedly allege that Epstein sexually exploited dozens of underage girls in a now-familiar scheme: paying them cash for “massages” and then molesting or sexually abusing them in his Upper East Side mansion or his palatial residence in Palm Beach. Epstein will be charged with one count of sex trafficking of minors and one count of conspiracy to engage in sex trafficking of minors—which could put him away for a maximum of 45 years. The case is being handled by the Public Corruption Unit of the Southern District of New York, with assistance from the district’s human-trafficking officials and the FBI. Several of the billionaire’s employees and associates allegedly recruited the girls for Epstein’s abuse, and some victims eventually became recruiters themselves, according to law enforcement. The girls were as young as 14, and Epstein knew they were underage, according to details of the arrest and indictment shared by two officials. Epstein’s attorney Martin Weinberg declined to comment when reached by The Daily Beast on Saturday night. The SDNY also declined to comment. “It’s been a long time coming—it’s been too long coming,” said attorney David Boies, who represents Epstein accusers Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Sarah Ransome. “It is an important step towards getting justice for the many victims of Mr. Epstein’s sex trafficking enterprise. Virginia Roberts (now Giuffre) says was recruited by Epstein’s then girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, when she was 15 and working at Mar-a-Lago, and became his ‘sex slave’. “We hope that prosecutors will not stop with Mr. Epstein because there were many other people who participated with him and made the sex trafficking possible,” he told The Daily Beast. In an era where #MeToo has toppled powerful men, Epstein’s name was largely absent from the national conversation, until the Miami Herald published a three-part series on how his wealth, power and influence shielded him from federal prosecution. For years, The Daily Beast has reported on Epstein’s alleged abuse, and his easy jail sentence and soft treatment by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which ultimately scrapped a 53-page indictment against Epstein. An earlier version of Epstein’s plea deal included a 10-year federal sentence—before his star-studded lawyers threatened to go to trial in a case prosecutors feared was unwinnable, in part because Epstein’s team dredged up dirt on the victims, including social media posts indicating drug use. Meanwhile, the financier flitted among his homes in Palm Beach, New York City, and the Virgin Islands, as well as his secluded Zorro Ranch in Stanley, New Mexico, transporting young women on his private jet to facilitate the sexual abuse that’s gone unchecked by authorities, his alleged victims say. In an announcement planned for Monday the FBI is expected to provide a number for other victims to contact the SDNY. As early as 2003, Vicky Ward’s Vanity Fair profile cracked into Epstein’s enigmatic facade and, as Ward noted, revealed “he was definitely not what he claimed to be.” Back then, allegations of sexual abuse leveled by one accuser, Maria Farmer, and her family were excised from Ward’s piece after Epstein pressured the magazine. Epstein’s bust comes mere months after a federal judge ruled his 2007 non-prosecution agreement—secretly inked under former U.S. Attorney and current Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta—violated federal law by keeping Epstein’s victims in the dark. Under the sweetheart deal, Epstein dodged federal charges that might have sent him to prison for life. He instead pleaded guilty to minor state charges in Palm Beach, and served 13 months in a private wing of a county jail, mostly on work release. The alleged victims, who sued the government for violating the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, asked the court to rescind Epstein’s non-prosecution agreement and called for the feds to hold him criminally liable. The NPA also granted immunity to Epstein’s co-conspirators, identified in the document as “including but not limited to Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff, or Nadia Marcinkova.” But in June, prosecutors for the government advised the judge to uphold the plea deal, saying that voiding it would “cause unintended harm to many of” the victims and jeopardize monetary settlements that more than a dozen of them received. “If today’s report is true, it only proves that Epstein should have been charged by federal prosecutors 12 years ago in Florida. With his money, Epstein was able to buy more than a decade of delay in facing justice—but fortunately he wasn’t able to postpone justice forever,” said attorney Paul Cassell, who represents multiple victims of Epstein in their lawsuit against the federal government. “While New York prosecutors are apparently seeking to hold Epstein accountable, the fight will continue to force federal prosecutors in Florida to do the same thing,” Cassell added in a statement. “While Epstein was at the head of the international sex trafficking organization, that conspiracy could not have functioned without many others playing their part. Jane Doe 1 and 2 will continue to fight for all of Epstein’s co-conspirators to be held accountable in New York, Florida, and anywhere else they committed crimes.” Flight records from Epstein’s Lolita Express show Bill Clinton on board. Epstein reportedly supplied valuable intel to federal investigators in exchange for his lenient plea deal; it’s been speculated this information may have been related to Bear Stearns executives’ alleged crimes in the lead-up to the 2008 financial crisis. According to one Page Six report, Epstein lost $57 million in Bear Stearns’ collapse and was a victim identified as “Major Investor No. 1” in the indictment of hedge-fund managers Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tanin. (A federal jury acquitted Cioffi and Tanin of securities fraud charges.) But in March 2019, FOX Business reported that Epstein “did not provide any meaningful cooperation to obtain his relatively light sentence in the hedge fund case or likely any case tied to the financial crisis.” Jack Goldberger, one of Epstein’s attorneys in the Palm Beach sex crimes case, told FOX of the Bear Stearns’ prosecution, “Mr. Epstein was never spoken to by any of the authorities on this subject. He was a very large investor. No more, no less.” One former federal prosecutor on the Bear Stearns case agreed. “Bottom line, I have no knowledge of Epstein cooperating in any way in the Bear Stearns case. There was no reason to use him,” the ex-prosecutor told FOX. Epstein’s Victims Once a math teacher at the elite Dalton School, Jeffrey Epstein left for Bear Stearns before starting his own firm, J. Epstein & Co., which supposedly only managed the fortunes of billionaires. Les Wexner, chairman of Limited Brands, is his only known client. (In April 2019, a new accuser came forward with claims that Epstein and his alleged madame, Ghislaine Maxwell, assaulted her at Wexner’s Ohio residence in the 1990s. Epstein, Maxwell and Wexner have not commented on these allegations.) Epstein’s financial career has always been shrouded in mystery. Over the years, Epstein billed himself as a renowned philanthropist and pledged $30 million for Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics. He’s palled around with a host of famous faces including Donald Trump and Bill Clinton; the latter traveled with Epstein to Africa to address issues like economic development and AIDS. Epstein, pictured with girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell and Mr Trump and his future wife Melania Knauss at Mar-a-Lago. In a 2002 profile in New York, one fellow Wall Streeter described Epstein as a “mysterious, Gatsbyesque figure” who “likes people to think that he is very rich” and “cultivates this air of aloofness.” Another prominent investor added: “He once told me he had 300 people working for him, and I’ve also heard that he manages Rockefeller money. But one never knows. It’s like looking at the Wizard of Oz—there may be less there than meets the eye.” Vanity Fair’s 2003 take on Epstein compared him to the self-made Jay Gatsby, too. “The trading desks don’t seem to know him. It’s unusual for animals that big not to leave any footprints in the snow,” one insider told the magazine. During his high-flying finance years, Epstein also allegedly harbored a dark secret: his widespread abuse of underage girls. In 2005, Palm Beach police launched an investigation into Epstein after a 14-year-old girl told police an older man named “Jeff” had molested her at his residence, a two-story pink mansion on a dead-end street. Authorities would discover a disturbing teen sex ring, where victims were allegedly paid to recruit other young girls to provide “massages” inside Epstein’s lair. The victims would be led to Epstein’s bedroom, and Epstein would enter and order them to remove their clothing, police said. The financier would then assault them—sometimes forcing them into intercourse with him or a young woman he described as his “sex slave”—and pay them $200 to $1,000 per visit, according to court documents. Police say Epstein’s massages were booked with the help of his personal assistants, including Sarah Kellen, who kept a rolodex of underage girls. But as The Daily Beast previously reported, the state attorney’s office in Palm Beach declined to pursue serious charges against Epstein (filing only a single felony count of soliciting prostitution), claiming the girls weren’t credible. The local police chief, Michael Reiter, accused prosecutors of giving Epstein special treatment and in 2006 referred the case to the FBI. By May 2007, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami drafted a 53-page indictment against Epstein, alongside an 82-page prosecution memorandum. That summer, however, Epstein’s lawyers worked to unravel the case, claiming Epstein wasn’t guilty of any federal crimes. Epstein and the feds drew up a non-prosecution agreement in September 2007. Without informing any of the victims, the two sides decided that Epstein would plead guilty to a pair of state charges (solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors for prostitution) and waive his right to contest damages, if the victims decided to sue him over the abuse. He also agreed to pay for the girls’ attorney’s fees. Indeed, the NPA stated that “the United States, in consultation with and subject to the good faith approval of Epstein’s counsel, shall select an attorney representative for [the victims], who shall be paid for by Epstein.” The NPA also granted immunity to any “potential co-conspirator” of Epstein’s and ensured the deal would “not be made part of any public record.” Epstein could have faced multiple federal charges, the NPA noted, including: sex trafficking of children or by force, fraud or coercion, 18 U.S.C. 1591; the use of a facility or means of interstate commerce to entice minors into prostitution, 18 U.S.C. 2422(b); and traveling for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct with minors, 18 U.S.C. 2423(b). The document states Epstein might have committed those crimes from around 2001 to September 2007. Other women claim that Epstein’s alleged abuse spanned many years and many locations, according to civil court filings. Prince Andrew with Ghislaine Maxwell. In an April 2019 affidavit, a woman named Maria Farmer said she met Epstein and Maxwell sometime in 1995, at one of Farmer’s art shows in New York. In 1996, Epstein offered her a job to help him acquire art. But according to Farmer, she instead ended up manning the door at Epstein’s Upper East Side mansion and keeping records of his visitors. Some of those visitors, Farmer claimed, were underage girls in school uniforms who would be led to an upstairs bedroom for what Maxwell called interviews for “modeling” positions. Farmer witnessed Epstein’s lawyer and friend, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, head upstairs where the girls were present, the affidavit stated. Dershowitz has denied Farmer’s accusations. “Maria Farmer stopped working for Epstein before I ever met Epstein,” Dershowitz told The Daily Beast. “It’s a totally perjured affidavit. It’s all totally made up. For her lawyers to submit these obviously perjured affidavits raises serious questions about their role in this case.” In the summer of 1996, Epstein allegedly arranged for Farmer to work on a special art project at Leslie Wexner’s mansion in New Albany, Ohio. Farmer and her two younger brothers stayed at the property at the time. Farmer claims Maxwell and Epstein sexually assaulted her at the Ohio property, and Wexner’s security team refused to let her leave. She said she tried calling the sheriff’s office but didn’t get a response. Her father had to drive from Kentucky to help her. Once she returned to New York, Farmer visited the NYPD’s sixth precinct to report the Ohio assault, but officers there told her to contact the FBI. Farmer called the feds, but they didn’t appear to take any action, the affidavit states. Meanwhile, Farmer claims Epstein and Maxwell preyed on her 15-year-old sister, molesting her at Epstein’s ranch in New Mexico. Epstein also held her sibling’s hand at a New York movie theater, where he “was rubbing her in a sexual manner without my knowledge,” Farmer added. “I was terrified of Maxwell and Epstein and I moved a number of times to try to hide from them,” Farmer stated of the powerful pair’s alleged threats against her and their alleged efforts to sabotage her reputation in the art world. Another accuser, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, has long claimed that Epstein and Maxwell abused minor girls across the country and abroad, and that Epstein loaned his victims out to his famous friends, including Dershowitz and Prince Andrew. Prince Andrew taking a walk with pedophile friend Jeffrey Epstein. Giuffre filed a declaration in 2015 as part of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act suit and detailed Epstein’s alleged sex ring. She said she met Epstein in 1999 after Maxwell approached her during her summer job at Mar-a-Lago. She was 15 years old. Dershowitz and Prince Andrew vehemently denied Giuffre’s claims, and Buckingham Place quickly released a statement: “It is emphatically denied that HRH The Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts. The allegations made are false and without any foundation.” “The story is totally made up,” Dershowitz told the BBC after Giuffre’s court filing made international headlines. He added, “My only feeling is if she’s lied about me, which I know to an absolute certainty she has, she should not be believed about anyone else.” Maxwell allegedly offered Giuffre professional training in massages. But when Giuffre arrived at Epstein’s Palm Beach home, she was allegedly forced into sexual activity with the billionaire and would become trapped in his web. She said that when she began “working” for Epstein, he flew her to New York on his private jet and molested her at his Manhattan mansion. “I was trained to be ‘everything a man wanted me to be,’” Giuffre said in the declaration. “It wasn’t just sexual training—they wanted me to be able to cater to all the needs of the men they were going to send me to.” Maxwell and Epstein allegedly ordered Giuffre to pay attention to what the men wanted, so she could report back to them. Giuffre said she traveled with Epstein from 1999 through the summer of 2002, to his homes in New York, New Mexico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Paris, France. Prince Andrew enjoying the royal high life at tax payer expense. “I had sex with him often in these places and also with the various people he demanded that I have sex with,” Giuffre stated. “Epstein paid me for many of these sexual encounters. In fact, my only purpose for Epstein, Maxwell and their friends was to be used for sex.” Giuffre added that “Epstein had sex with underage girls on a daily basis” and that his interest in minor girls was “obvious” to those in his orbit. His code word for this abuse was “massage,” and Maxwell would often have sex with the victims, too, Giuffre claimed. Maxwell denied Giuffre’s claims as early as 2011, after Giuffre gave an interview to the Daily Mail, releasing a statement that claimed “the allegations made against me are abhorrent and entirely untrue and I ask that they stop.” In 2015, Maxwell called Giuffre’s allegations “obvious lies,” and Giuffre filed a defamation suit against the socialite. The Miami Herald and other news outlets have asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to unseal all pleadings in that case, which was settled in 2017. Paul Cassell, one of Giuffre’s lawyers, told the court that if the records are made public, they “will show that Epstein and Maxwell were trafficking girls to the benefit of his friends, including Mr. Dershowitz.” Last week, the court ordered the release of sealed documents in the case. Epstein allegedly forced Giuffre to have sex with Prince Andrew at least three times, including during an orgy. (The court filing includes a photo of “Andy” putting his arm around Giuffre’s partially bare waist, while Maxwell smiles in the background.) Prince Andrew with Virginia Roberts and Ghislaine Maxwell in the background. Giuffre said she was also forced to have sex with another Epstein confidant, Jean Luc Brunel, who runs the MC2 modeling agency. Brunel supplied Epstein with girls as young as 12, luring aspiring models from poor countries or poor backgrounds to the United States, Giuffre alleged. “Jeffrey Epstein has told me that he has slept with over 1,000 of Brunel’s girls, and everything that I have seen confirms this claim,” Giuffre stated. (Brunel, in a previous statement, denied being involved“in the actions Mr. Jeffrey Epstein is being accused of” and said “I have exercised with the utmost ethical standard for almost 40 years.”) Giuffre said she finally escaped Epstein’s abuse after he sent her to Thailand to learn Thai massage and to recruit another young girl for his alleged sex ring. Instead, Giuffre met her future husband and relocated to Australia. Years later, in 2011, two FBI agents from Florida visited Giuffre to discuss Epstein. In another declaration, Giuffre said the investigators “seemed like they were being blocked from doing what they wanted to do—which I thought was to arrest Epstein and his powerful friends for all their illegal sexual crimes.” In 2014, Giuffre tried to contact the FBI again for an update on the Epstein investigation. “I have never been able to figure out who was (and still is) stopping a prosecution,” Giuffre stated in the declaration. “Because nothing is being done,” Giuffre added, “it makes me think that Epstein was right when he told me he had so many people in his pocket. Maybe those people are still helping him escape being prosecuted for what he did against me. “The justice system doesn’t seem to respond to the victims in this case. It seems to favor those who have the most money and power and influence.” Prince Andrew is only the tip of the pedophile iceberg Bill Clinton flew at least 26 times on ‘rape plane’ with mass pedophile friend Accused pedophile Prince Andrew avoids facing trial British Royal pedophile protected for ‘national security’ reasons Prince Andrew: latest royal pedophile exposed Secrecy laws passed to hide pedophile ring connection to Royal Family Jean-Claude Van Damme calls out Rothschild and Rockefeller on live TV David Icke’s most powerful interview Copyright © 2020 Hang The Bankers.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511951

__label__wiki

Tag: Jake Elmer It’s a big day in Allan, Sask. . . . No playoffs for Wheaties. . . . Blazers, Rockets all even in third. . . . Giants clinch conference flag This is going to be a great day in Allan, Sask. That’s because the folks there are in the middle of their winter festival, and they will be taking time to rename the local arena in honour of the late Logan Schatz, who was the captain of the SJHL’s Humboldt Broncos. The Allan and District Communiplex is to be renamed the Logan Schatz Memorial Arena. . . . Allan is located about 60 km southeast of Saskatoon. . . . Schatz, a native of Allan, was finishing up his fourth season with the Broncos when he was killed in the April 6 bus crash. . . . The dedication ceremony also will involved the unveiling of signage inside and outside the arena. Angie Rolheiser of northeastnow.com writes that the “signs were made by Humboldt Collegiate Institute industrial arts teacher Brian Hinz, who also taught Logan while he attended HCI.” . . . It is only fitting that there will be a hockey game in the Logan Schatz Memorial Arena tonight, with the Allan Senior Flames meeting the Kinistino Tigers in Game 2 of a Wheatland Hockey League playoff series. . . . Rolheiser’s story is right here. There is an interesting conundrum in Kamloops where the Blazers ran out of goaltenders and had one on their bench Friday night whose WHL rights belong to the Everett Silvertips. This all started on March 6 when Kamloops starter Dylan Ferguson, 20, was injured during a 5-0 loss to the visiting Vancouver Giants. The Blazers immediately brought in Rayce Ramsay, who turned 18 on Jan. 3, from the SJHL’s Humboldt Broncos to back up Dylan Garand. In Ferguson’s absence Garand, a 16-year-old freshman from Victoria, made his fifth straight start last night as the Blazers lost, 5-4 in OT, to the visiting Prince George Cougars. Ramsay was on the bench for the first four of those starts, but he couldn’t make it five because he had to return to Humboldt as the Broncos started a playoff series in Estevan against the Bruins last night. Ramsay made 29 saves as the Broncos opened with a 4-1 victory. In the end, the Blazers were able to add G Danton Belluk to their roster as an emergency backup, getting him, with the WHL’s approval, on loan from the Silvertips. Under emergency conditions, Belluk will only be able to play should Garand be injured. Belluk, 17, is from Lorette, Man. A 10th-round pick of the Silvertips in the 2016 bantam draft, he spent this season with the midget AAA Eastman Selects. Last season, he got into two games with the Silvertips. Two WHL veteran forwards signed three-year entry-level NHL contracts on Friday. Trey Fix-Wolansky, the captain of the Edmonton Oil Kings, signed with the Columbus Blue Jackets, who selected him in the seventh round of the NHL’s 2018 draft. Fix-Wolansky, 19, has 101 points, including 37 goals, in 63 games. He has single-season career highs in goals, assists and points. . . . From Edmonton, he has 244 points, including 151 assists, in 204 career regular-season WHL games over three seasons, all with the Oil Kings. . . . He wasn’t selected in the WHL bantam draft. . . . Jake Elmer, an undrafted free agent, signed with the New York Rangers. He has 38 goals and 41 assists in 67 games. Elmer, who turned 20 on Dec. 31, is from Calgary. The Regina Pats selected him in the sixth round of the WHL’s 2013 bantam draft. . . . They dealt him to the Kootenay Ice and he later was moved to the Hurricanes. Last season, he finished with 18 goals and 19 assists in 70 games with Lethbridge. . . . In 203 career regular-season games, he has 63 goals and 69 assists. If you have attended a WHL game or a show at the Sandman Centre in Kamloops, you may have seen Freda and/or Howard Brown. Both of them have been heavily involved with the volunteers and security at the arena; Freda also looked after the media and scouts in the press box for a number of years. . . . Freda now is dealing with kidney disease — she started dialysis earlier this month — and is hoping that a transplant is in her future. Howard has proven to be a match, and he now is going through the testing process to see if he can be the donor. . . . With Thursday having been World Kidney Day, they told their story to CFJC-TV in Kamloops, and it’s all right here. There is a story here, as well as video. The Trinity Western Spartans won their second straight BCIHL championship on Friday night, beating the Vancouver Island Mariners, 9-1, in Aldergrove, B.C., to sweep the best-of-three series. . . . The Spartans are the first team to successfully defend its BCIHL championship since the Castlegar, B.C.-based Selkirk College Saints won in 2014-15 and 2015-16. . . . TWU finished the regular season at 18-5-0, then went 4-0 in the playoffs. Over the past two seasons, the Spartans’ combined record is 47-8-1. . . . TWU has applied for admission to Canada West in time for the 2020-21 season. A decision is expected later this year. A big milestone tomorrow: Head Equipment Manager Darren Granger will work his 2,000th NHL game. “Take a look at our roster. There were seven kids that weren’t even born when he started, and another four or five that were still in diapers,” Dana Bryson said. Congrats, Grange! — Jon Rosen (@lakingsinsider) March 15, 2019 Darren Granger started in the hockey business as the assistant equipment manager with the Brandon Wheat Kings. That was about 25 years ago. He now has been in the NHL since 1992, first with the Vancouver Canucks as their assistant equipment manager. Since 2006, he has been the head equipment manager for the Los Angeles Kings. . . . Curtis Zupke of the Los Angeles Times has more on Granger right here. The Brandon Wheat Kings had their playoff hopes come to an end as they were beaten, 5-4, by the host Regina Pats. . . . Regina (19-45-3) had lost its previous seven games. . . . Brandon (30-29-8) has lost five in a row. The Wheat Kings are four points away from a playoff spot but have only one game remaining. . . . The same teams will play again tonight, this time in Brandon. . . . Regina is 4-2-1 in the season series; Brandon is 3-4-0. . . . The Pats won this one with three goals in the span of 1:31 in the third period. . . . Regina D Liam Schioler (5) tied the score, 3-3, at 9:13 of the third period. . . . D Brett Clayton (5) broke the tie at 9:47. . . . F Sergei Alkhimov (13) upped Regina’s lead to 5-3 at 10:44. . . . F Luka Burzan (40) got the Wheaties to within a goal at 11:40 but they weren’t able to get even. . . . Brandon F Ben McCartney shot wide on a penalty shot at 15:43 of the third period. . . . F Cole Reinhardt (22) and Burzan had given Brandon a 2-0 first-period lead. . . . F Cole Dubinsky (5), on a PP, and Alkhimov got Regina even in the second period, and Brandon D Braydyn Chizen (2) gave his guys a 3-2 lead at 1:12 of the third. . . . G Dean McNabb stopped 34 shots for Regina. . . . The Wheat Kings got 39 stops from G Jiri Patera. 10-1/2yrs ago we enrolled a 10y/o Jamaican born, MB prairie raised kid in minor hockey. Today he plays his final reg. season home game in @TheWHL w/ @blazerhockey Where did time go? So incredibly proud of you Jermaine, the man & person you’ve become #J-train🚂 #blazernation #32 pic.twitter.com/3ECkYLbMQC — Stan Loewen (@stashu19) March 16, 2019 F Vladislav Mikhalchuk scored in OT to give the Prince George Cougars a 5-4 victory over the Blazers in Kamloops. . . . Prince George (19-40-8) has won two in a row. . . . Kamloops (27-32-8) has points in five straight (4-0-1). It is tied with the Kelowna Rockets for third place in the B.C. Division. If they are tied after tonight’s games, they will meet in a sudden-death play-in game in Kamloops on Tuesday night. . . . They Blazers and Cougars will play again tonight, this time in Prince George. . . . Kamloops is 6-0-2 in the season series; Prince George is 2-5-1. . . . The Cougars erased a 2-1 deficit with three goals in the first half of the third period. Mikhalchuk tied the game at 1:11; F Josh Curtis (13) gave the Cougars the lead at 6:51; and F Mike MacLean came out of the penalty to score his fifth goal of the season on a breakaway at 9:50. . . . F Kyrell Sopotyk (13) got Kamloops to within a goal, on a PP, at 13:39, and F Connor Zary (23) tied it from a scramble at 19:04 with G Dylan Garand on the bench for the extra attacker. . . . The Blazers held possession for most of the OT, but got a bit too fancy in the offensive zone and gave up a 2-on-1 with Mikhalchuk and Curtis going the other way. Mikhalchuk ended it with his 24th goal of the season. . . . D Rhett Rhinehart (5) scored Prince George’s first goal, with F Kobe Mohr (8) and F Ryley Appelt (5) giving Kamloops a 2-1 lead. . . . Mikhalchuk finished with two goals and two assists, while Curtis added two assists to his goal. . . . Zary also had three points, as he, too, had two helpers. . . . The Cougars got 26 saves from G Taylor Gauthier. . . . Garand stopped 24 shots for Kamloops. . . . The Blazers scratched D Joonas Sillanpää, their Finnish freshman, for a third straight game. The #Saskatoon #Blades celebrate their winning goal coming from overage right-winger Max Gerlach. #WHL. pic.twitter.com/y8EMHUfMdz — Darren Steinke (@StanksSports) March 16, 2019 F Max Gerlach broke a 2-2 tie in the third period to give the Saskatoon Blades a 3-2 victory over the visiting Prince Albert Raiders. . . . Saskatoon (45-14-8) has won eight in a row, and 14 of 15. It also has won nine in a row on home ice. The Blades will finish second in the East Division. They open a first-round series against the Moose Jaw Warriors on March 22 in Saskatoon. . . . Prince Albert (53-10-4) had won its previous three games. The Raiders will finish atop the Eastern Conference and meet the Red Deer Rebels, the second wild-card team, in the first round. . . . Season series: Prince Albert, 5-2-0; Saskatoon, 2-4-1. . . . These two teams will play tonight in Prince Albert. . . . F Parker Kelly (35) gave the Raiders a 1-0 lead at 1:21 of the first period. . . . The Blades went ahead 2-1 on goals from D Brandon Schuldhaus (8), at 5:44, and F Ryan Hughes (30), on a PP, at 0:37 of the second period. . . . F Noah Gregor (41) got the visitors into a 2-2 tie, on a PP, at 4:49 of the third period. . . . Gerlach won it with his 41st goal, on a PP, at 7:17. . . . G Nolan Maier stopped 28 shots for the Blades. . . . Prince Albert G Ian Scott, who stopped 29 shots, went into the game riding three straight shutouts. His shutout streak ended at a franchise-record 185:44 when Schuldhaus scored. The Raiders’ previous record (128:32) had been set by G Craig Hordal in 1995-96. . . . Saskatoon D Dawson Davidson played in his 300th regular-season game. . . . The Raiders’ scratches included F Dante Hannoun. F Jake Leschyshyn scored three times to help the Lethbridge Hurricanes to a 4-3 victory over the host Red Deer Rebels. . . . Lethbridge (39-18-10) has won seven in a row. It is tied with the Edmonton Oil Kings for top spot in the Central Division. The Oil Kings will go home-and-home with the Calgary Hitmen this afternoon and Sunday afternoon. The Hurricanes will meet the Tigers in Medicine Hat tonight. . . . Red Deer (33-28-6) has lost three straight. Despite the loss, the Rebels clinched the Eastern Conference’s second wild-card spot when the Brandon Wheat Kings lost. Red Deer will meet the conference-champion Prince Albert Raiders in the first round. . . . Lethbridge won the season series, 4-1-1; Red Deer was 2-3-1. . . . F Dylan Cozens (34) and Leschyshyn, on a PP, gave the Hurricanes a 2-0 lead with goals 30 seconds apart in the first period. . . . The Rebels tied it on two goals from F Reese Johnson, at 9:13 of the first period and 5:18 of the second. . . . Leschyshyn put the Hurricanes back out front at 12:58. . . . Johnson completed his third hat trick of the season by scoring his 27th goal at 13:41. . . . Leschyshyn’s 40th goal, at 4:15 of the third period, stood up as the winner. He’s got three career hat tricks; this was his first with Lethbridge, which acquired him from the Regina Pats this season. . . . G Carl Tetachuk earned the victory with 27 saves, two fewer than Red Deer’s Ethan Anders. The Moose Jaw Warriors set a franchise record for most road victories in a season with a 6-1 victory over the Broncos in Swift Currrent. . . . Moose Jaw (39-20-8) has won two in a row. It will finish third in the East Division and meet the Saskatoon Blades in a first-round playoff series. . . . The Warriors won 24 road games this season, one more than last season’s team. . . . Swift Current (11-50-6) will travel to Moose Jaw tonight. . . . Season series: Moose Jaw, 4-0-1; Swift Current, 1-3-1. . . . The Warriors got two goals and two assists from F Justin Almeida, who now has 108 points, including 76 assists. Almeida, who has had 12 career games with at least four points, leads the WHL in assists and is third in points, four points behind Portland Winterhawks F Joachim Blichfeld and two behind teammate Tristin Langan, who had one assist. . . . The Warriors also got goals from F Carson Denomie (7), F Keenan Taphorn (15), F Daniil Stepanov (8) and D Josh Brook (16). . . . Almeida and Stepanov each scored while shorthanded. . . . F Brayden Tracey was among Moose Jaw’s scratches. After being open for 690 Kootenay Ice games, Shivers concession stand will end its run when the team leaves for Winnipeg after Sunday’s game. “Thank you Kootenay Ice and hockey fans,” reads the sign. “Shivers opened on Sept 12, 2001. Since opening we have served you for 690 Kootenay Ice hockey games.” It is signed: “Ramona and Staff.” F Ryan Jevne scored once and added two assists to lead the Medicine Hat Tigers to a 5-2 victory over the Kootenay Ice in Cranbrook. . . . Medicine Hat (35-26-6) has won three in a row. With the victory, it clinched the Eastern Conference’s first wild-card spot. The Tigers will play the Central Division champion, either the Edmonton Oil Kings or Lethbridge Hurricanes, in the first round. . . . Kootenay (12-45-10) has lost six in a row. . . . The Tigers won the season series, 5-1-0; the Ice was 1-4-1. . . . F Tyler Preziuso (21), Jevne (31) and F Ryan Chyzowski (27), on a PP, gave the Tigers a 3-0 lead in the first period. . . . D Linus Nassen (7) made it 4-0 at 12:58 of the second. . . . D Marco Creta (4) and F Holden Kodak (2) scored for the Ice in the third period, before F Brett Kemp (32) got an empty-netter for Medicine Hat. . . . Ice G Jesse Makaj stopped 51 shots, 22 more than the Tigers’ Mads Sogaard. . . . Kootenay F Austin Schellenberg left in the first period with an undisclosed injury and didn’t return. . . . The Ice brought in D Anson McMaster, 16, for the final two games of the season. A second-round pick in the 2017 bantam draft, he had been with the AJHL’s Okotoks Oilers. . . . The Ice has one home game remaining, Sunday afternoon against the Red Deer Rebels, and its stay in Cranbrook will be over. The franchise is relocating to Winnipeg. It was a sad moment arriving at Western financial place in Cranbrook today. The Tigers and the Ice meet for the final time Friday night in the iconic building, the home of the ice for over 20 years. Very sad indeed. pic.twitter.com/59tPVCv0L6 — Bob Ridley (@BobRidley_CHAT) March 15, 2019 The Victoria Royals got 35 saves from G Griffen Outhouse and two shootout goals to beat the visiting Everett Silvertips, 3-2. . . . Victoria (34-29-4) had lost its previous four games. It will finish second in the B.C. Division and meet with the Kamloops Blazers or Kelowna Rockets in the first round. . . . Everett (46-16-5) has lost three in a row (0-4-1). It will finish atop the U.S. Division, and will see the Tri-City Americans in the first round. . . . Victoria is 2-1-0 in the season series; Everett is 1-1-1. . . . These two teams will meet again tonight in Everett. . . . Last night, F Connor Dewar (36) gave Everett a 1-0 lead at 1:15 of the first period, only to have Victoria F Brandon Cutler tie it 17 seconds later. . . . Everett went ahead 2-1 as F Martin Fasko-Rudas (12) scored at 8:59 of the second period. . . . Cutler tied it with his 14th goal of the season, just 57 seconds later. . . . Victoria got shootout goals from D Ralph Jarratt and F Igor Martynov, with F Bryce Kindopp the only Everett shooter to score. . . . G Dustin Wolf stopped 28 shots for the Silvertips. . . . F Lucas Cullen, 19, who spent his season with the BCHL’s West Kelowna Warriors, made his Everett debut. . . . The Royals scratched D Mitchell Prowse, D Jameson Murray, D Matt Smith, F Tyus Gent, F Kody McDonald, D Jake Kustra and F Kaid Oliver. . . . They had 16 skaters dressed, including two APs — D Kaden Reinders and D Noah Lamb. @hawkeyblog Chiefs fans rent another fanboni pic.twitter.com/J10C89Wgjc — SpokaneChiefsFanPage (@gochiefsgoblog) March 16, 2019 F Jake McGrew enjoyed his third career hat trick to lead the Spokane Chiefs to a 5-3 victory over the Tri-City Americans in Kennewick, Wash. . . . Spokane (39-21-7) has won two in a row. It is third in the U.S. Division, one point behind the Portland Winterhawks. The Chiefs have one game remaining. The Winterhawks will play the Seattle Thunderbirds tonight and again Sunday. . . . Portland and Spokane will be first-round opponents. . . . Tri-City (34-27-6) has lost four straight (0-2-2). It will be the Western Conference’s first wild-card team and will meet the Everett Silvertips in the first round. . . . Season series: Tri-City, 6-4-1; Spokane, 5-5-1. . . . The Chiefs and Americans will play again tonight, this time in Spokane. . . . McGrew, on a PP, and D Roman Kalinichenko (2) gave the Chiefs an early 2-0 lead. . . . F Parker AuCoin, who scored 21 goals last season, got his 42nd of this season for the Americans at 13:34 of the opening period. He also had two assists in this one. . . . McGrew added his second goal at 19:15. . . . Chiefs F Luke Toporowski gave his guys a 3-2 lead at 13:18 of the second period. . . . Tri-City F Krystof Hrabik (21) tied it, on a PP, at 2:35 of the third. . . . Spokane D Filip Kral (10) broke the tie at 18:12, and McGrew completed his hat trick by scoring his 30th goal into an empty net at 19:03. . . . The Chiefs got 25 saves from G Reece Klassen, while Tri-City’s Talyn Boyko blocked 39 shots. . . . The Chiefs scratched F Jaret Anderson-Dolan, F Riley Woods, D Ty Smith and F Eli Zummack. F Bear Hughes, who played this season with the junior B Spokane Braves, made his WHL debut. D Dylan Plouffe scored a late PP goal to give the Vancouver Giants a 2-1 victory over the Kelowna Rockets in Langley, B.C. . . . Vancouver (48-15-4) has won three in a row. With the victory, the Giants clinched first place in the Western Conference and will meet the Seattle Thunderbirds in the first round. . . . Kelowna (27-32-8) has lost four in a row (0-2-2). It is tied for third with the Kamloops Blazers in the B.C. Division. Each team has one game remaining — the Rockets will entertain the Giants tonight, while the Blazers are playing the Cougars in Prince George. . . . Should the Blazers and Rockets end up tied for third place, a sudden-death play-in game will be held in Kamloops on Tuesday night. . . . Vancouver is 7-0-1 in the season series with Kelowna, which is 1-7-0. . . . D Alex Kannok Leipert (5) gave Vancouver a 1-0 lead at 3:36 of the second period. . . . Kelowna F Kyle Crosby (7) tied it at 11:01. . . . Plouffe won it with his eighth goal of the season, at 16:50 of the third period. . . . The Giants got 17 stops from G Trent Miner. . . . Kelowna G Roman Basran stopped 29 shots. . . . Vancouver was 1-1 on the PP; Kelowna was 0-1. . . . The Rockets continue to play without D Lassi Thomson (concussion). Babcock, before taking questions: "I had six friends, one of my teammates from England here this week. They saw two Marlie losses, two Leaf losses. Partway through the game tonight I sent security to get them and get them out of the building." #Leafs — Terry Koshan (@koshtorontosun) March 16, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on March 15, 2019 Tags Angie Rolheiser, Columbus Blue Jackets, Curtis Zupke, Danton Belluk, Darren Granger, Dylan Ferguson, Dylan Garand, Dylan Plouffe, Edmonton Oil Kings, Griffen Outhouse, Jake Elmer, Jake Leschyshyn, Jake McGrew, Justin Almeida, Kamloops Blazers, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Logan Schatz, Max Gerlach, Medicine Hat Tigers, Moose Jaw Warriors, New York Rangers, Prince George Cougars, Rayce Ramsay, Reece Johnson, Regina Pats, Ryan Jevne, Saskatoon Blades, Sergei Alkhimov, Spokane Chiefs, Trey Fix-Wolansky, Trinity Western Spartans, Vancouver Giants, Victoria Royals, Vladislav MikhalchukLeave a comment on It’s a big day in Allan, Sask. . . . No playoffs for Wheaties. . . . Blazers, Rockets all even in third. . . . Giants clinch conference flag Red Deer captain gets NHL deal. . . . Focht scores hat trick for third time in five games. . . . Byram goal sets franchise record for Giants This week’s cover: The Humboldt bus crash tragedy, one year later. This is the story of Logan Boulet, whose legacy is having a lasting effect across Canada. Watch the full documentary now on @watch_SITV https://t.co/pJrhKKQsZT pic.twitter.com/5Q4hmH4DUN — Sports Illustrated (@SInow) March 6, 2019 The QMJHL’s Rouyn-Noranda Huskies beat the host Shawinigan Cataractes 8-3 on Wednesday night, running their winning streak to 25 games. That ties the CHL record that was set by the QMJHL’s 1973-74 Sorel Éperviers and equalled by the 1983-84 Kitchener Rangers. The 1995-96 Hull Olympiques and the 2012-13 London Knights won 24 in a row. . . . The WHL record (22) is held by the 1967-68 Estevan Bruins. F Reese Johnson, the captain of the Red Deer Rebels, has signed a three-year entry-level contract with the NHL’s Chicago Blackhawks. . . . This season, the 20-year-old Saskatoon native has 22 goals and 23 assists in 62 games. He has single-season career highs in assists and points. . . . In 182 career regular-season games, he has 50 goals and 42 assists. . . . Johnson wasn’t selected in either the WHL bantam draft or the NHL draft. The MJHL’s Neepawa Natives are in need of a general manager and head coach following the decision by Dustin Howden not to ask for a new contract. . . . Howden, 33, is from Deloraine, a community south of Brandon. He told Chris Jaster of the Brandon Sun: “I just feel it’s time for someone else to take the program to the next step.” . . . Howden has been with the Natives since 2014-15 when he was an assistant coach. He took over as head coach prior to 2016-17, and added the GM’s duties in time for this season. . . . This season, the Natives finished 9-43-8, which left them last in the 11-team league. BREAKING! Alex Kilba makes it OFFICIAL! 📝 Puts pen to paper for one-day contract!! WATCH: 🎥 pic.twitter.com/Aaz7TCXlTB — Kamloops Blazers (@blazerhockey) March 6, 2019 F Jake Elmer ran his goal-scoring streak to 13 games as he helped the Lethbridge Hurricanes to a 4-1 victory over the visiting Brandon Wheat Kings. . . . Lethbridge (36-18-10) has won four in a row, and now has clinched a playoff spot. It also has moved into a tie with the Edmonton Oil Kings atop the Central Division. Edmonton holds a game in hand. . . . Brandon (30-25-8) is 1-2-1 on a six-game trek through the Central Division. The Wheat Kings are tied with the Red Deer Rebels for the Eastern Conference’s second wild-card spot. . . . Lethbridge won the season series, 3-1-0. . . . Elmer opened the scoring at 5:36 of the second period, while shorthanded. He’s got 37 goals this season, and leads the WHL with six shorthanded snipes. . . . The longest goal-scoring streak in WHL history occurred from Nov. 6 through Dec. 15, 1984, as F Cliff Ronning of the New Westminster Bruins struck 27 times over 18 games. . . . The Hurricanes’ record (16 games) belongs to F Jason Ruff (Jan. 16 through Feb. 27, 1991). Ruff had 20 goals over that stretch. . . . F Jake Leschyshyn, who has 37 goals, gave his guys a 3-0 lead when he scored at 7:35 and 19:44, the latter on a PP. . . . F Zack Stringer’s first WHL goal, at 10:16 of the third period, made it 4-0. Stringer’s first goal came in his fourth game. He also had an assist, and now has three points. A 15-year-old from Lethbridge, Stringer, the eighth-overall selection in the 2018 bantam draft, had 14 goals and 27 assists in 30 games with the midget AAA Hurricanes this season. . . . F Luka Burzan (38) scored Brandon’s goal, at 11:09 of the third period. . . . G Carl Tetachuk stopped 27 shots to earn the victory. . . . F Scott Mahovlich was back in Lethbridge’s lineup after having left the club on Feb. 13 to deal with a “family emergency.” He missed 10 games. The Calgary Hitmen struck for four goals in the first period — three of them by F Carson Focht — and then needed OT to beat the host Medicine Hat Tigers, 6-5. . . . Calgary (36-22-6) has points in seven straight games (6-0-1). It is third in the Central Division, four points behind the Edmonton Oil Kings and Lethbridge Hurricanes. Three of Calgary’s last four games are against the Oil Kings. . . . Medicine Hat (32-25-6) holds down the Eastern Conference’s first wild-card spot, two points ahead of the Red Deer Rebels and Brandon Wheat Kings. . . . Calgary won the season series, 5-1-0. . . . Focht gave his guys a 2-0 lead with goals at 2:52, on the PP, and 3:53 of the first period. . . . F Ryan Chyzowski (23) got the Tigers on the scoreboard at 11:44. . . . F James Malm, on a PP, increased Calgary’s lead to 3-1 at 15:46 and Focht completed his third career hat trick — all three in the past five games — at 19:59. He’s got 26 goals, 10 of them in those past five games. . . . The Tigers followed with the next four goals to take a 5-4 lead. . . . F Ryan Jevne, who last played on Feb. 16, scored at 1:37 of the second period, and FCorson Hopwo made it 4-3 at 10:01. . . . The Tigers pulled even on D Trevor Longo’s fifth goal, at 7:58 of the third period, and went ahead at 11:07 when Jevne got his 28th goal, on a PP. . . . Malm forced OT with his 33rd goal at 16:18. . . . Calgary won it at 3:41 of OT when D Vladislav Yeryomenko notched his sixth goal of the season. . . . The Hitmen were 3-4 on the PP; the Tigers were 1-4. . . . Focht also had an assist for the fourth four-point game of his career. . . . Malm added an assist to his two goals. . . . Jevne added an assist to his two goals, while Longo had two helpers. . . . G Jack McNaughton stopped 37 shots for the Hitmen. . . . The Tigers also had F Brett Kemp back in their lineup. He had been out since Feb. 22. We got ourselves a New Leader in Goals by a Defenceman. Congratulations @BowenByram on your 25th Goal of the Season! #NHLDraft pic.twitter.com/Ge0JWfMEFD — xy – Vancouver Giants (@WHLGiants) March 7, 2019 G Trent Miner stopped 16 shots and D Bowen Byram set a single-season franchise record as the Vancouver Giants dumped the Blazers, 5-0, in Kamloops. . . . Vancouver (45-14-4) has points in seven straight games (6-0-1). It is tied with the Everett Silvertips atop the Western Conference, each with five games remaining. . . . Kamloops (23-32-7) has lost four in a row (0-3-1). With six games to play, it is fourth in the B.C. Division, seven points behind the Kelowna Rockets. Kamloops and Kelowna will go home-and-home on Friday and Saturday. . . . The Blazers also are seven points behind the Seattle Thunderbirds, who hold down the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot. . . . This was the third game in a row between these teams — the Giants won all three, one of them in OT. . . . Vancouver won the season series, 8-0-0; Kamloops was 0-5-3. . . . Miner posted his third shutout of the season. He is 23-4-2, 1.94, .926. . . . F Jadon Joseph scored twice for the Giants, opening the scoring 34 seconds into the second period and closing it with his 20th goal, on a PP, at 16:47 of the third. . . . In between, the Giants got goals from F Davis Koch (27), F Justin Sourdif (20) and Byram. . . . Byram’s goal was his 25th of the season and set a single-season franchise record for goals by a defenceman. The previous record was set by Kevin Connauton in 2009-10. . . . F Milos Roman had three assists. The Giants are about to lose Roman for a handful of games. Like Kootenay Ice D Martin Bodak, he will be returning to his native Slovakia to write a mandatory exam. . . . Kamloops G Dylan Ferguson left at 1:37 of the second period. He was slow getting up after some goal-mouth action at 1:20, and actually needed to lean on his stick in order to get to his feet. Seventeen seconds later, he left the game, unable to put any weight on one leg. . . . Ferguson stopped 10 of 11 shots in 21:37. Dylan Garand came on in relief and turned aside 17 of 21. . . . The Giants enjoyed a 32-16 edge in shots, including 14-2 in the second period when they began to take control. . . . Vancouver was 3-5 on the PP; Kamloops was 0-5. . . . Vancouver had F Krz Plummer in their lineup. Plummer, who turns 17 on Feb. 13, was a third-round pick in the 2017 bantam draft. This was his fifth WHL game, four of them this season. GOOOOOOOOALLLLL!!@SourdifJustin pots his 20th! He becomes the third Giant to ever reach 20 goals in his 16-year-old season! The others were Gilbert Brule and Evander Kane! 3-0 the Giants lead mid-way through the third period! David Quenneville led WHL defenceman last year in goals (26). Connor Hobbs led in 2016-17 (31). Jake Bean led in 2015-16 (24). https://t.co/BOfr4rZpVN — Steve Ewen (@SteveEwen) March 7, 2019 The Tri-City Americans scored the game’s last three goals and beat the Victoria Royals, 6- 3, in Kennewick, Wash. . . . Tri-City (34-25-4) had lost five in a row (0-4-1). The Americans, who are in possession of the Western Conference’s first wild-card spot, have clinched a playoff spot. . . . Victoria (33-26-4) had points in each of its past four games (3-0-1). It is headed to a second-place finish in the B.C. Division. . . . F Phillip Schultz (19) put Victoria ahead 55 seconds into the game. . . . F Paycen Bjorklund (5) tied it at 4:12. . . . Victoria went ahead again just 27 seconds later as F Carson Miller (14) scored. . . . The Americans tied it at 17:10 when D Dom Schmiemann (3) scored. . . . F Riley Sawchuk, who finished with two goals and an assist, put the Americans out front at 4:00 of the second period. . . . Victoria pulled even at 16:51 on F D-Jay Jerome’s 22nd goal. . . . Tri-City F Sasha Mutala (19) broke the tie at 18:08, and Sawchuk added insurance with his 20th goal, on a PP, at 13:54 of the third period. . . . Tri-City D Mitchell Brown (4) added the empty-netter at 18:58. . . . G Beck Warm stopped 20 shots for Tri-City, six fewer than Victoria’s Brock Gould. . . . D Ralph Jarratt, D Scott Walford and F Kody McDonald were among Victoria’s scratches. #thefarside pic.twitter.com/Fw06iGWUqT — The Far Side (@TheFarSide_ish) March 6, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on March 6, 2019 March 6, 2019 Tags Bowen Byram, Calgary Hitmen, Carson Focht, Chicago Blackhawks, Dustin Howden, Jadon Joseph, Jake Elmer, Jake Leschyshyn, James Malm, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Medicine Hat Tigers, Neepawa Natives, Red Deer Rebels, Reese Johnson, Riley Sawchuk, Ryan Jevne, Trent Miner, Tri-City Americans, Vancouver GiantsLeave a comment on Red Deer captain gets NHL deal. . . . Focht scores hat trick for third time in five games. . . . Byram goal sets franchise record for Giants Cancer claims Clark at 56. . . . Don’t take Cents’ record just yet. . . . More WHL teams clinch playoff spots Saturday night off in Saskatoon, what to do? We are here to see @GBHKY take on @HuskiesMHKY #RDR pic.twitter.com/H6pE8dbaur — Red Deer Rebels (@Rebelshockey) March 3, 2019 Donn Clark, who was inducted into the Prince Albert Raiders’ Wall of Honour on Friday night, died in Saskatoon on Saturday. He was two days shy of his 57th birthday. From Kelvington, Sask., he was one of three brothers to play in the WHL — he, Wendel and Kerry all played for the Saskatoon Blades. Wendel represented his older brother in Prince Albert on Friday. Donn got into one game with the Great Falls Americans in 1979-80, then played nine games with the Blades in 1980-81. He played all of 1981-82 with Saskatoon. In 1982-83 he played in three games with the Blades, one with the Nanaimo Islanders and 31 with the Raiders. He began his WHL coaching career as an assistant with the Tacoma Rockets (1991-93). He was the head coach of the Raiders on two occasions (1993-95, 2000-02), and also ran the Blades’ bench (1995-98). Clark, who had been battling cancer, worked as the Raiders’ general manager and director of hockey operations (2001-08). We are saddened to learn one of our beloved alumni Donn Clark has passed away. Our condolences are with the Clark family today and always. We’ll miss you, Donny. — x – Saskatoon Blades (@BladesHockey) March 3, 2019 Saddened to hear the news of Donn Clark passing away today. He was a good, honest man who I always enjoyed being around during our time together in the WHL. My condolences to his family. — Brent Parker (@BrentRParker) March 3, 2019 Most wins (68-game schedule): 1. Prince Albert Raiders, 2018-19, 50 2. Calgary Centennials, 1971-72, 49 3. Saskatoon Blades, 1972-73, 46 #WHLStats pic.twitter.com/uUixgKmRxL — The WHL (@TheWHL) March 2, 2019 The WHL is crediting the Prince Albert Raiders with the record for most victories (50) in a 68-game schedule. That would break the record of 49 that had been held by the 1971-72 Calgary Centennials. Allow me to suggest, however, that this is comparing apples to oranges, and that the Raiders haven’t broken the Centennials’ record . . . at least, not yet. This isn’t meant to taking anything away from the accomplishments of this season’s Raiders, not in the least. But the Centennials didn’t have the opportunity to play overtime or go to a shootout in order to decide games back in their day. They finished that season at 49-16-3, with the ‘3’ being ties. This season, the Raiders are 50-9-4, with the ‘4’ representing overtime and shootout losses. The victory total includes three OT victories and one in a shootout. That means they have won 46 games in regulation. I would suggest, then, that if you are going to compare the victory totals of these two teams, the Centennials record of 49 victories still stands. Perhaps it’s time to start a new section of the record book. Better yet, split it into BLP and ALP — Before Loser Points and After Loser Points — because this is what happens when you start deciding regular-season games in OT and skill competitions, and making some games worth more than others by awarding loser points. So . . . it says here that if you played for the 1971-72 Calgary Centennials, you still hold the record for most victories in a 68-game WHL regular season. Unless, that is, the Raiders win four of their remaining five games in regulation time. Their next three games are against the Swift Current Broncos (10-45-6), who have the WHL’s poorest record. To date, the Raiders are 4-0-1 against the Broncos and have a 24-15 edge in goals. Feel free to click on the DONATE button over there on the right. Thank you, in advance. SATURDAY HIGHLIGHTS: F Jake Elmer ran his goal-scoring streak to 12 games as the Lethbridge Hurricanes skated to a 4-1 victory over the Pats in Regina. . . . Lethbridge (35-18-10) has won three in a row. It went 4-1-0 on a five-game road trip that ended with this one. The Hurricanes are second in the Central Division, two points behind the Edmonton Oil Kings. . . . Regina (18-42-3) has lost four straight. . . . Lethbridge went 3-0-1 in the season series; Regina was 1-3-0. . . . The Hurricanes jumped into a 3-0 lead on second-period goals from F Nick Henry (26), at 3:30; F Jordy Bellerive (29), at 4:23; and F Dylan Cozens (32), at 12:51. . . . F Austin Pratt (24) scored Regina’s goal, on a PP, at 14:23. . . . Elmer kept his streak alive with his 36th goal of the season at 14:55. . . . Elmer, who began his career with the Pats before being moved to the Kootenay Ice and then Lethbridge, has 73 points in 63 games. He went into this season with 25 goals and 28 assists in 136 games. . . . Elmer has 16 goals in his scoring streak. The WHL record is 18 games. F Cliff Ronning of the New Westminster Bruins scored 27 goals in those 18 games, from Nov. 6 through Dec. 15, 1984. . . . Henry next is scheduled to play on Wednesday when the Brandon Wheat Kings visit Lethbridge. . . . G Carl Tetachuk stopped 38 shots for the Hurricanes, four more than Regina’s Max Paddock. . . . F Sebastian Streu was back in Regina’s lineup after missing three games. Tristin Langan (@tlangan6) had 2-1-3pts in a 4-2 win over Prince Albert and was the Warrior of the Game. Langan is the 4th Warrior in the last four years to reach 100 points pic.twitter.com/AovInMinpo — Moose Jaw Warriors (@MJWARRIORS) March 3, 2019 F Tristin Langan scored twice and added an assist to reach the 100-point plateau as the host Moose Jaw Warriors beat the Prince Albert Raiders, 4-2. . . . Moose Jaw (35-18-8) has lost its previous two games. It is likely to finish third in the East Division and meet the Saskatoon Blades in the first round. . . . Prince Albert (50-9-4) had points in each of its previous five games (4-0-1). It leads the overall standings by 12 points over the Everett Silvertips and needs one point to wrap up first place. . . . F Justin Almeida (26) gave Moose Jaw the lead at 18:23 of the first period. . . . The Raiders tied it 44 seconds later when F Dante Hannoun (28) scored. . . . After a scoreless second period, Langan opened the third with two goals, giving him 47. He scored at 5:41 and 11:58, the second goal giving him 100 points. He is the second WHLer to get there this season, behind Portland Winterhawks F Joachim Blichfeld. . . . Langan’s second goal was his 10th game-winner of the season. . . . F Brayden Tracey (32) stretched Moose Jaw’s lead to 4-1, at 13:36, before F Justin Nachbaur (17) scored for the visitors, at 19:50. . . . Almeida also had two assists, and now has 93 points. . . . Langan is tied for the WHL lead in GWG, with Tracey and F Bryce Kindopp of the Everett Silvertips. . . . G Brodan Salmond stopped 27 shots for the Warriors. . . . The Raiders won the season series, 4-2-0; the Warriors were 2-3-1. . . . The Raiders continue to play without D Max Martin, while F Parker Kelly sat out as he completed a three-game suspension. Your #OilKings WIN!!! Final score: 7-1 over the Brandon Wheat Kings! #allhail We are going to the playoffs!!! pic.twitter.com/aBqHa1kknG — Edmonton Oil Kings (@EdmOilKings) March 3, 2019 The Edmonton Oil Kings scored seven straight goals en route to a 7-1 victory over the visiting Brandon Wheat Kings. . . . Edmonton (37-18-8) has won six in a row and leads the Central Division by two points over the Lethbridge Hurricanes. With the victory, the Oil Kings clinched a playoff spot for the first time since 2015-16. . . . Brandon (29-24-8) has lost three straight (0-2-1). It is two points behind the Red Deer Rebels, who hold down the Eastern Conference’s second wild-card spot. . . . The Wheat Kings are 0-2-1 on a six-game road swing into the Central Division. They are out of their home arena because the Tim Hortons Brier — the Canadian men’s curling championship — is being played there. . . . Edmonton was 3-1-0 in the season series; Brandon was 1-2-1. . . . The Oil Kings took a 2-0 first-period lead — on goals from F Andrew Fyten (39), at 6:09, and F Andrei Pavlenko (9), at 19:32 — and never looked back. . . . F Carter Souch (10), F David Kope (14) and D Wyatt McLeod (4) added second-period goals for Edmonton, with F Vince Loschiavo (31) and F Quinn Benjafield (13) making it 7-0 in the third period. . . . F Caiden Daley (8) scored for Brandon at 7:56 of the third. . . . D Parker Gavlas had three assists, while Souch added two assists to his goal. . . . Edmonton F Trey Fix-Wolansky had two assists, giving him 63 this season. That ties the franchise record that was set by F Dylan Wruck in 2012-13. . . . Edmonton outshot Brandon, 45-29. . . . G Dylan Myskiw earned the victory with 28 saves. F Ryan Chyzowski scored in OT to give the Medicine Hat Tigers a 3-2 victory over the visiting Swift Current Broncos. . . . Medicine Hat (32-25-5) has lost its previous seven games. It holds the Eastern Conference’s first wild-card spot, one point ahead of the Red Deer Rebels. The Tigers are fourth in the Central Division, five points behind the Calgary Hitmen. . . . Swift Current (10-45-6) has lost 14 straight (0-11-3). . . . The Tigers won the season series, 4-0-0; the Broncos were 0-3-1. . . . F Ethan Regnier (10) gave the Broncos a 1-0 lead at 13:24 of the first period. . . . The Tigers got even at 14:20 as F Nick McCarry (3) scored. . . . The Broncos went back in front at 3:41 of the second period on F Tanner Nagel’s 13th goal. . . . Swift Current nursed that lead until 19:01 of the third period when Medicine Hat D Linus Nassen (6) scored to force OT. . . . Chyzowski won it with his 22nd goal at 1:07 of the extra period. . . . Medicine Hat had a 49-23 edge in shots. . . . The Broncos got 46 saves from G Riley Lamb. . . . G Mads Søgaard blocked 21 shots to earn the victory. . . . Medicine Hat again was without F Ryan Jevne, F Elijah Brown and F Brett Kemp. The Hall of Fame banner honouring Jarret Stoll hangs from the Western Financial Place rafters in Cranbrook and will remain there even after the Kootenay Ice moves to Winnipeg at season’s end. F James Malm scored three times to lead the Calgary Hitmen to a 5-2 victory over the Kootenay Ice in Cranbrook, B.C. . . . Calgary (34-22-6) has points in five straight (4-0-1) and is third in the Central Division, six points behind the Lethbridge Hurricanes. . . . . Kootenay (12-40-10) has lost at least 40 times in regulation for the third time in four seasons, after not having done it even once in its first 17 seasons in Cranbrook. . . . These teams will play again today, this time in Calgary. . . . The Hitmen are 4-1-0 in the season series. . . . Malm opened the scoring at 8:33 of the first period. . . . Ice D Marco Creta (3) tied it at 9:54. . . . Malm put Calgary back out front at 10:33, only to have Ice F Brad Ginnell (16) equalize at 12:59. . . . Malm completed his second career hat trick, on a PP, at 3:14 of the second period. He’s got 31 goals this season. . . . F Josh Prokop (7) added insurance at 14:28 of the third period, and F Mark Kastelic (45) closed the scoring at 19:25. . . . Prior to the game, the Ice, which will leave Cranbrook for Winnipeg at season’s end, honoured former captain Jarret Stoll as the first inductee into its Hall of Fame. . . . The announced attendance was 2,738, the second-largest crowd of the team’s last season in Cranbrook. Only opening night (2,862) was larger. . . . The Ice has three home games remaining in its stay in Cranbrook. . . . Before the game, the Hitmen announced that they have returned F Orca Wiesblatt to the MJHL’s Portage Terriers. He has three assists in 12 games with the Hitmen this season. Not one to wear jerseys to events but gonna wear this game worn @blazerhockey Jarome Iginla beauty to tonight's game #prideofcollection #congratsiggy pic.twitter.com/ZFihvfvDIE — JS (@JS_Sports) March 2, 2019 The Vancouver Giants snapped a 2-2 tie with three goals in a span of 2:30 early in the second period en route to a 5-4 victory over the host Kamloops Blazers. . . . Vancouver (43-14-4) has points in five straight. It is two points behind the Everett Silvertips in the race to finish atop the Western Conference. . . . Kamloops (23-31-6) has lost two in a row and now is six points behind the third-place Kelowna Rockets in the B.C. Division and six points behind the Seattle Thunderbirds, who hold down the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot. This was a bad night for the Blazers, as Seattle and Kelowna both lost in OT so increased their breathing room with the loser points. . . . The Blazers and Giants will play today in Langley, B.C., then meet again Wednesday back in Kamloops. . . . The Giants are 6-0-0 in the season series; the Blazers are 0-4-2. . . . Kamloops lost D Jackson Caller on a play that led to the game’s first goal. A shot by Vancouver F Justin Sourdif struck Caller in the lower face area. As he crumpled to the ice, the puck went to F Jared Dmytriw. He slipped it to F Aidan Barfoot, who tucked it in for his fourth goal of the season. Caller skated off, leaving a trail of blood from the slot to the Kamloops bench. He didn’t return. . . . Caller lost one tooth. Two others were displaced, but a dentist pushed them back into their proper position. . . . F Brodi Stuart (17) tied it for Kamloops at 4:22, but D Bowen Byram (23) put the Giants back out front, on a PP, at 15:50. . . . The Blazers pulled even at 4:41 of the second period as F Jermaine Loewen scored when a shot by F Connor Zary hit him in the chin and bounced into the net. . . . The Giants then scored the three quick goals — by F Davis Koch (26), at 5:54; F Tristen Nielsen (12), at 7:23; and F Milos Roman (25), at 8:24. . . . Loewen (23) cut the Blazers’ deficit to two at 19:35 of the second period, and the home side got to within a goal at 5:08 of the third when F Ryley Appelt (2) scored. . . . But the Blazers weren’t able to beat Vancouver G Trent Miner again. He stopped 26 shots, including 14 in the third period. . . . Sourdif finished with three assists. . . . G Dylan Ferguson was beaten four times on 16 shots in 27:23 before giving way to Dylan Garand, who last played on Jan. 27. Garand gave up a goal on the second shot he faced, as he finished with 11 saves on 12 shots. F Jaydon Dureau’s OT goal gave the Portland Winterhawks a 2-1 victory over the Rockets in Kelowna. . . . Portland (38-18-6) is headed to a second-place finish in the U.S. Division and a first-round series with the Spokane Chiefs. . . . Kelowna (26-30-6) is third in the B.C. Division, six points ahead of the Kamloops Blazers, who have two games in hand. . . . The Winterhawks and Rockets will play again this afternoon in Kelowna. . . . Portland leads the season series 3-0-0; Kelowna is 0-2-1. . . . F Jake Gricius (23) opened the scoring for Portland, on a PP, at 1:06 of the first period. . . . Kelowna didn’t tie it until 14:55 of the third period when F Alex Swetlikoff (5) scored. . . . Dureau won it with his 12th goal, at 1:22 of OT. . . . G Shane Farkas blocked 28 shots for Portland, four more than Kelowna’s Roman Basran. When @terryryan20 joins your birthday Fanboni ride✌️🥳 #AmsNation pic.twitter.com/EbtkNQEEDT — X Tri-City Americans (@TCAmericans) March 3, 2019 F Jaret Anderson-Dolan scored in OT to give the Spokane Chiefs a 5-4 victory over the Tri- City Americans in Kennewick, Wash. . . . Spokane (35-19-7) has points in six straight (5-0-1). It is third in the U.S. Division, five points behind the Portland Winterhawks and seven ahead of the Americans. . . . Tri-City (33-24-4) has lost four in a row, but has clinched a playoff spot. . . . With two games left in the season series, Tri-City is 6-3-1; Spokane is 4-5-1. . . . The Chiefs grabbed a 2-0 first-period lead on goals from D Noah King (5), at 3:34, and F Adam Beckman (27), on a PP, at 6:00. . . . The Americans pulled even in the second period as F Nolan Yaremko (25) scored, on a PP, at 5:50, and F Krystof Hrabik (7) got one at 7:07. . . . Spokane went out front 4-2 in the third period on goals from D Nolan Reid (15), at 13:23, and F Michael King (3), just 10 seconds later. . . . Tri-City tied it was F Riley Sawchuk (18) scored, on a PP, at 18:43, and F Kyle Olson (21) counted with 1.1 seconds left on the clock. . . . Anderson-Dolan won it with his 14th goal of the season at 3:16 of OT. . . . The Chiefs got 30 saves from G Reece Klassen, while workhorse Beck Warm, who has started 56 of the Americans’ 61 games, stopped 31 shots. Don Cherry took a night off to watch the Royals play tonight. Seriously though Tarun has the best billet family💕 @FizerTarun @JoRowden2 @kaaleyholt @wfizer16 @noramndeau @victoriaroyals pic.twitter.com/Y44fHK2I70 — Charlotte Fizer (@charfiz) March 3, 2019 F Phillip Schultz broke a 2-2 tie with two early third-period goals as the Victoria Royals beat the visiting Prince George Cougars, 5-2. . . . Victoria (33-25-4) has points in four in a row (3-0-1) and has clinched second place in the B.C. Division. This is the eighth straight season in which the Royals have qualified for the playoffs. . . . Prince George (17-39-8) has lost five in a row (0-4-1). . . . Victoria won the season series, 8-1-0; Prince George was 1-6-2. . . . The Royals had beaten the Cougars, 4-3, on Friday. . . . Last night, a pair of first-period PP goals — from D Ralph Jarratt (6), at 7:42, and F Carson Miller (13), at 10:55 — staked the home boys to a 2-0 lead. . . . The Cougars tied it in the second period on goals from F Josh Maser (28), at 4:54, and D Jack Sander (2), at 9:03. . . . Schultz, who has 18 goals, broke the tie 14 seconds into the third period, then added some insurance at 5:49. . . . Victoria F Igor Martynov (10) got the empty-netter at 16:41. . . . Martynov and Miller had two assists each, with Schultz adding one. . . . G Brock Gould stopped 32 shots for the Royals, five more than the Cougars’ Taylor Gauthier. (PS: get loud tonight.)#LetsGoTips pic.twitter.com/DcN6Nk1mOu — x Everett Silvertips (@WHLsilvertips) March 3, 2019 F Bryce Kindopp scored with 0.4 showing on the clock in OT to give the host Everett Silvertips a 1-0 victory over the Seattle Thunderbirds. . . . Everett (44-14-4) has points in six straight (5-0-1). It leads the U.S. Division by 10 points over the Portland Winterhawks, and is atop the Western Conference by two points over the Vancouver Giants. . . . Seattle (25-28-8) has points in four in a row (2-0-2). It is in possession of the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot, six points ahead of the Kamloops Blazers. . . . With one game remaining, Everett is 7-1-1 in the season series; Seattle is 2-5-2. . . . Kindopp, who has 38 goals, now is tied for the WHL lead in game-winners. Kindopp and F Tristin Langan and F Brayden Tracey, both of the Moose Jaw Warriors, have 10 each. . . . Everett G Dustin Wolf stopped 32 shots in recording his seventh shutout of this season and the 11th of his career. . . . This season, Wolf is 39-13-3, 1.72, .935.His career numbers are 52-19-3, 1.85, .933. . . . Seattle got 40 saves from G Roddy Ross, who is 12-4-3, 2.71, .921. . . . Each team was 0-4 on the PP. . . . Seattle D Cade McNelly sat out Game 3 of a four-game suspension. In case you were wondering, the last TBIrds goaltender to have a shutout in Everett was Calvin Pickard. He made 29 saves on 11/14/09 in a 4-0 Seattle win. — TBird Tidbits (@TBirdTidbits) March 3, 2019 … watching @BC1 @GlobalBC this morning… seeing the @WHLKootenayICE being left off the @TheWHL scoreboard for #BC teams from last night is a true reflection of how this group has decimated this club! #UsedToBeOurIce — Jay Nelson♠️ (@Jay24Nelson) March 2, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on March 3, 2019 Tags Bryce Kindopp, Calgary Hitmen, Donn Clark, Dustin Wolf, Edmonton Oil Kings, Everett Silvertips, Jake Elmer, James Malm, Jaret Anderson-Dolan, Jaydon Dureau, Justin Sourdif, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Medicine Hat Tigers, Moose Jaw Warriors, Phillip Schultz, Portland Winterhawks, Prince Albert Raiders, Ryan Chyzowski, Saskatoon Blades, Spokane Chiefs, Trent Miner, Trey Fix-Wolansky, Tristin Langan, Vancouver Giants, Victoria RoyalsLeave a comment on Cancer claims Clark at 56. . . . Don’t take Cents’ record just yet. . . . More WHL teams clinch playoff spots Ammonia leak repaired in Ice’s home arena. . . . Elmer runs goal streak to 10 games in win. . . . Chiefs lock up playoff spot Western Financial Place, the home of the WHL’s Kootenay Ice, is expected to open its doors this morning after it was closed Wednesday morning when ammonia was detected in the room that houses its ice plant. Cranbrook Fire and Emergency Services arrived on scene after an automatic alarm went off at 9 a.m. Scott Driver, the acting director of CFES told Summit 107, a Cranbrook radio station: “The ammonia plant in the building is where the detection alarm went off. So we all responded according to our City’s Ammonia Alarm Plan and everything seems to be going as planned . . . we’re hopeful that the building will be up and running soon.” The building was evacuated and there weren’t any reports of injuries. Refrigeration technicians, who are based in Alberta, were called and arrived on Wednesday afternoon. According to the City, they “were able to safely resolve the ammonia leak early Wednesday evening.” You can bet there is a heightened awareness about this type of thing after three men were killed when an ammonia leak in Memorial Arena in Fernie, B.C., killed three men on Oct, 17. 2017. The Ice, which will relocate to Winnipeg once its regular season ends on March 17, is scheduled to play at home on Friday and Saturday nights, against the Swift Current Broncos and Calgary Hitmen, respectively. On Saturday night, the Ice is scheduled to honour former captain Jarret Stoll by making him the first inductee into its Hall of Fame. If you’re new here, yes, the organization is opening a hall of fame on its way out of Cranbrook. Connor Dewar and Dawson Butt are cleared for this weekend against Tri-Ciru according to @WHLsilvertips general manager Garry Davidson. Big return for the Tips’ forward group. #WHL — Josh Horton (@JoshHortonEDH) February 28, 2019 The Spokane Chiefs have signed F Reed Jacobson to a WHL contract. Jacobson, 16, was a sixth-round selection in the WHL’s 2017 bantam draft. From Swift Current, the 5-foot-9, 160-pounder plays for the Swift Current Legionnaires of the Saskatchewan Midget AAA Hockey League. This season, he put 26 goals and 29 assists in 44 regular-season games. . . . In 2017-18, he had 14 goals and 14 assists in 41 games as a freshman with the Legionnaires. The junior B Delisle Chiefs of the Prairie Junior Hockey League are having a pretty good season. They finished the regular season at 38-1-1, tying the league record for most victories in a 40-game season. The 2015-16 Saskatoon Quakers finished 38-2-0. . . . The Chiefs’ 77 points also broke the PJHL record for points in a season (76) that had been set by the 2015-16 Quakers. Together we stand #CGYvsSC #EndBullying pic.twitter.com/CsjoVQOUWV — Calgary Hitmen (@WHLHitmen) February 27, 2019 F Carson Focht scored four times and F Kaden Elder added three goals of his own as the host Calgary Hitmen dumped the Swift Current Broncos, 9-3. . . . Calgary (32-22-6) has points in three straight (2-0-1). It is third in the Central Division, six points behind the Lethbridge Hurricanes and three in front of the Medicine Hat Tigers and Red Deer Rebels. . . . Swift Currrent (10-44-5) has lost 12 in a row (0-10-2). . . . This game started at noon as it was Calgary’s third annual Telus Be Brave Anti-Bullying game. . . . The Broncos had taken part in the Edmonton’s Hockey Game on Tuesday, with the Oil Kings winning, 11-1. . . . On Wednesday, Focht made it 1-0 at 4:06 of the first period, and Broncos F Carter Chorney (13) tied it at 5:05. . . . The Hitmen then went ahead 3-1 on goals from Elder, at 6:59, and Focht, at 14:11. . . . D Connor Horning (7) got the Broncos back to within a goal at 17:50. . . . Calgary broke it open with four straight second-period goals, in a span of 6:57. . . . Focht scored 29 seconds into the period, with Elder counting at 2:46, F Luke Coleman (20) scoring at 3:47, and F James Malm (27), at 7:26. . . . Elder (27) and Focht (20) rounded out Calgary’s scoring with third-period PP goals. . . . F Matthew Culling (9) had the Broncos’ other goal. . . . Focht enjoyed the first four-goal game of his WHL career. He has 52 points, including 32 assists, in 60 games this season. . . . Elder, who was acquired from the Broncos on Sept. 27, for a third-round pick in the 2019 bantam draft, recorded his first hat trick. He has 56 points, 29 of them assists, in 61 games. . . . Calgary F Josh Prokop recorded four assists, giving him his first WHL four-point outing. He has 24 points, 18 of them assists, in 57 games. . . . The Hitmen also got three assists from D Vladislav Yeryomenko, while Malm added two assists to his goal. . . . Chorney had three points for the Broncos, as he also had two assists. . . . Calgary enjoyed a 32-14 edge in shots on goal. . . . The announced attendance was 15,084. . . . Calgary F Mark Kastelic completed his two-game suspension by sitting out this one. . . . The Hitmen list F Hunter Campbell and F Jake Kryski as being out indefinitely, with F Cael Zimmerman out week-to-week. #WHL LET/PA: @WHLHurricanes Jake Elmer becomes first player since A. Heponiemi and T. Ronning had concurrent 11-game goal streaks in Oct. / Nov. 2017 to hit double-digits of consecutive games with a goal. Equals game and wins it in overtime :20 in. Fastest since 11/20/16, Wong — Geoffrey Brandow (@GeoffreyBrandow) February 28, 2019 F Jake Elmer ran his goal-scoring streak to 10 games as he scored the last two goals to give the Lethbridge Hurricanes a 5-4 OT victory over the Raiders in Prince Albert. . . . Lethbridge (33-18-10) is second in the Central Division, two points behind the Edmonton Oil Kings. . . . Prince Albert (49-8-4) has points in four straight (3-0-1). It leads the overall standings by 14 points over the Everett Silvertips, who have eight games remaining. . . . Elmer, who also had an assist, tied the game 4-4 at 17:43 of the third period, then he won it 20 seconds into OT with his 34th goal of the season. . . . His 10-game goal streak is the longest in the WHL this season. The record? F Cliff Ronning of the New Westminster scored 27 goals in an 18-game run from Nov. 6 through Dec. 15, 1984. . . .Lethbridge opened a 2-0 lead on first-period goals from F Dylan Cozens, at 11:09, and F Logan Barlage (15), at 11:22. . . . The Raiders tied it on PP goals from F Cole Fonstad (28), at 15:03 of the first, and F Justin Nachbaur (16), at 3:37 of the second. . . . Cozens (30) put the visitors back in front at 4:48. . . . F Spencer Moe (8) got the Raiders even at 11:56, and D Kaiden Guhle (3) gave the home boys the lead at 10:45 of the third. . . . All that did was set the stage for Elmer’s heroics. . . . . The Raiders were 2-5 on the PP; the Hurricanes were 0-5. . . . Cozens added an assist to his two goals. . . . Fonstad also had three points as he added a pair of assists to his goal. . . . G Carl Tetachuk stopped 25 shots for the Hurricanes, two more than Ian Scott of the Raiders. . . . F Parker Kelly of the Raiders began serving a three-game suspension by missing this one. . . . F Evan Herman, who signed with the Raiders on Tuesday, made his WHL debut. #WHL RD/REG: A pair of goals for @Rebelshockey Ethan Sakowich who doubles goal total on the season paces the team to the "W". 3 goals in the last 3 games after registering 4 in first 194 career games. Team improves back to ,500 (3-3) in games that he scores. The Red Deer Rebels broke open a 1-1 game with three straight goals en route to a 5-2 victory over the Pats in Regina. . . . Red Deer (31-24-5) has won two straight after ending a five-game skid. It is tied with the Medicine Hat Tigers for the Eastern Conference’s two wild-card spots, two points ahead of the Brandon Wheat Kings. . . . Regina (18-40-3) has lost two in a row. It has lost 40 times in regulation time for the first time since 2004-05. . . . D Alex Alexeyev (10) gave the Rebels a 1-0 lead at 10:28 of the first period. . . . Regina tied it at 14:46 on a goal by F Cole Dubinsky (4). . . . Red Deer D Ethan Sakowich scored his third and fourth goals, at 19:18 of the first period and 0:55 of the second for a 3-1 lead, and F Brett Davis upped it to 4-1 at 6:03. . . . D Brady Pouteau (5) scored a PP goal for Regina at 16:45 of the third period. . . . Rebels F Brandon Hagel (37) got the empty-netter at 17:50. . . . G Ethan Anders stopped 32 shots to earn the victory over Max Paddock, who made 22 saves. #WHL TC/KAM: @blazerhockey Orrin Centazzo racks up both markers in squeaking out in the 1-goal win and matches career total goals coming into the season with 15. Fifth time registering 2 goals this campaign and 2nd against Tri-City. All 6 goals in 2019 have been on home ice. F Orrin Centazzo scored twice to help the Kamloops Blazers beat the visiting Tri-City Americans, 2-1. . . . Kamloops (23-29-6) had lost its previous two games (0-1-1). It is three points behind the Seattle Thunderbirds, who hold down the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot. The Thunderbirds are scheduled to play in Kamloops on Friday. . . . The Blazers also are fourth in the B.C. Division, five points behind the Kelowna Rockets. . . . Tri-City (33-23-3) has lost two in a row. It holds down the Western Conference’s first wild-card spot and is fourth in the U.S. Division, four points behind the Spokane Chiefs. . . . Centazzo, who has 15 goals, scored on a PP at 5:44 of the first period, then made it 2-0 at 2:55 of the second. . . . The Americans cut into the lead when F Sasha Mutala (17) scored, on a PP, at 15:48. . . . The Blazers got 25 saves from G Dylan Ferguson, who continued his fine play. He had to be good in this one, though, because Tri-City G Beck Warm, who has started 53 of his club’s 58 games, played as fine a game as these old eyes have seen in some time. A left toe save on Kamloops F Jermaine Loewen late in the second period was the kind that can provide a shooter with a month’s worth of nightmares. . . . Warm finished with 43 stops. . . . Warm leads WHL goaltenders in games played (55), minutes played (3,251) and saves (1,716). He is 31-21-2, 2.86, .917. . . . F Blake Stevenson, who turned 18 on Jan. 12, was back in Tri-City’s lineup after not playing since Jan. 8. A freshman from Calgary, he has eight goals and six assists in 32 games. Announced attendance: 3,407. 2,000 may be generous for the actual crowd tonight. #Kamloops #WHL — Kamloops This Week (@KTWonBLAZERS) February 28, 2019 It's go time! 2019 #WHLPlayoffs ticket packages go on sale Thursday morning. 🔗 | https://t.co/xf6NPrYswg#GoChiefsGo pic.twitter.com/4W51aQst9V — Spokane Chiefs (@spokanechiefs) February 28, 2019 F Jaret Anderson-Dolan scored twice and added three assists to lead the visiting Spokane Chiefs to a 7-1 victory over the Prince George Cougars. . . . Spokane (33-19-7) has points in four straight (3-0-1). The Chiefs clinched a playoff spot with the victory. They are third in the U.S. Division, four points ahead of the Tri-City Americans. . . . Prince George (17-37-8) has lost three in a row (0-2-1). This loss eliminated the Cougars from the playoff chase — they have six games remaining and are 13 points in arrears of the Seattle Thunderbirds, who hold the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot. . . . The Cougars also have lost a club record 12 straight home games. . . . The Chiefs had beaten the host Cougars, 4-3 in OT, on Tuesday night with Anderson-Dolan scoring the winner at 3:58 of extra time. . . . The Cougars are 1-7-2 since general manager Mark Lamb went behind the bench in place of fired head coach Richard Matvichuk. . . . Spokane took control of this one with four first-period goals, from F Luke Toporowski (18), at 0:18; D Bobby Russell (5), at 9:04; F Connor Gabruch (3), at 16:59; and D Nolan Reid (14), shorthanded, at 19:28. . . . F Josh Maser (26) scored, on a PP, for the Cougars just 24 seconds into the second period. . . . Spokane answered that with two PP goals from Anderson-Dolan, who has 12 goals this season, and one from F Luc Smith (27). . . . Anderson-Dolan, who missed a chunk of the early season with a broken wrist, has 31 points in 24 games. . . . Spokane was 2-6 on the PP; Prince George was 1-8. . . . Anderson-Dolan had his second career five-point game; this was the sixth time he has had at least four points in a game. . . . Smith added two assists to his goal, with D Ty Smith helping out with three assists. . . . G Bailey Brkin earned the victory with 27 saves. . . . The Cougars were able to dress only 16 skaters. F Ethan Browne and D Cole Moberg, both of whom are injured, were scratched, as was D Ryan Schoettler (flu). Correct. This is new this season, with the goal of creating a more intimate, exciting fan experience! https://t.co/j68VEkx01n The @AttackOHL head coach Alan Letang has a big zipper (stitches) above his right eye. Apparently got a puck/stick to the face during practice this week in a coaches v. players scrimmage. "The coaches went undefeated, so that's all that matters," he said. — Greg Cowan (@GregCowanST) February 28, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on February 27, 2019 Tags Beck Warm, Calgary Hitmen, Carson Focht, Delisle Chiefs, Ethan Anders, Jake Elmer, Jaret Anderson-Dolan, Josh Prokop, Kaden Elder, Kamloops Blazers, Kootenay Ice, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Luc Smith, Orrin Centazzo, Red Deer Rebels, Reed Jacobson, Spokane Chiefs, Ty SmithLeave a comment on Ammonia leak repaired in Ice’s home arena. . . . Elmer runs goal streak to 10 games in win. . . . Chiefs lock up playoff spot Five key days for Blazers’ playoff hopes. . . . Oil Kings romp to win in Hockey Hooky game. . . . Rebels snap losing skid in Moose Jaw Happy anniversary to the greatest Hockey movie ever!#FeelShame pic.twitter.com/nFinR0ICBz — Vintage Oilers (@VintageOilers) February 25, 2019 The Kamloops Blazers have 11 games remaining in their regular season, eight of them at home. They’ll play four games, three of them at home, over the next five days. When Sunday evening arrives, the Blazers may well know whether they’ll be in the playoffs. The Blazers (22-29-6) are five points behind the Seattle Thunderbirds (24-28-7), who hold down the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot. Kamloops also is fourth in the B.C. Division, seven points behind the Kelowna Rockets (26-29-5). The Blazers are at home to the Tri-City Americans (33-22-3) tonight, the Thunderbirds on Friday and the Vancouver Giants (41-14-4) on Saturday. On Sunday, the Blazers will meet the Giants in Langley, B.C., in a game that is to start at 4 p.m. This will be the third time in less than two weeks that the Blazers and Americans have met. On Feb. 15, the host Americans posted a 5-3 victory. The Blazers, playing at home, dumped the Americans, 3-1, on Feb. 18. Kamloops missed the playoffs last season and, in fact, has been on the outside looking in for three of the past five post-seasons. This the 20th season since the Blazers last appeared in a WHL final — they lost the 1999 championship series to the Calgary Hitmen in five games. Since then, the Blazers have missed the playoffs five times, been eliminated in the first round on 12 occasions, and been ousted in the second round once. One season, 2012-13, they lost to the Portland Winterhawks, in five games, in the Western Conference final. While the Blazers are playing four times in five days, the Thunderbirds will spend their weekend skating three times in fewer than 48 hours. After visiting Kamloops on Friday, they will scurry to home to meet the host Everett Silvertips on Saturday, then will entertain the Tri-City Americans on Sunday. As for Kelowna, the Rockets also will play three times in fewer than 48 hours on the weekend. They will meet the Giants in Langley, B.C., on Friday, then return home for a Saturday-Sunday doubleheader with the Winterhawks. It will be interesting to see if the water is clearer — or muddier — come Sunday evening. The Prince Albert Raiders have signed F Evan Herman to a WHL contract. Herman, 16, was a third-round selection in the 2017 bantam draft. From The Pas, Man., Herman is expected to make his WHL debut tonight against the visiting Lethbridge Hurricanes. . . . The 5-foot-9, 145-pound Herman is playing for the Winnipeg-based Rink Hockey Academy’s prep team, and has 13 goals and 13 assists in 30 games. He also has five goals and two assists in seven games with the MJHL’s OCN Blizzard, and three goals and an assist in three games with the Rink Academy’s 18U side. The Spokane Chiefs announced on Monday that general manager Scott Carter had been signed to a contract extension that runs through the 2021-22 season. On Tuesday, the Chiefs issued a correction. The extension actually is two years in length, running through the 2020-21 season. Carter is in his third season with the Chiefs after taking over from Tim Speltz on Sept. 8, 2016. Speltz, who had been the general manager for 26 years, now is the head amateur scout with the NHL’s Toronto Maple Leafs. Ray Wareham has decided to step aside as head coach of the Moose Jaw Generals of the Saskatchewan Midget AAA Hockey League. Wareham has been the Generals’ head coach for 17 seasons. . . . He will be staying on as the club’s general manager. . . . “I think I’m going to step down from coaching and, hopefully, just manage the team and get fresh faces in here and see what happens,” Wareham told Blaise Wozniak of discovermoosejaw.com. “I’ve got some other irons in the fire . . . it’s been a long time here. I’m looking forward to the new adventures ahead. My plan is to stay on as manager and to help the new guys that come in the next couple of years and then go from there.” . . . The Generals (17-24-3) missed the playoffs for a second straight season. TUESDAY HIGHLIGHTS: The Edmonton Oil Kings erased an early 1-0 deficit with 11 straight goals as they dumped the visiting Swift Current Broncos, 11-1. . . . Edmonton (34-18-8) has won four in a row and leads the Central Division by four points over the Lethbridge Hurricanes. The Oil Kings have won more games than in any single season since 2013-14; this is the fourth-highest victory total in the franchise’s modern history. The Oil Kings won at least 50 games in three straight seasons (2011-14). . . . The Oil Kings last hit double figures in goals on Feb. 17, 2014, when they beat the visiting Lethbridge Hurricanes, 12-0, behind a goal and four assists from F Reid Petryk. . . . Swift Current (10-42-5) has lost 11 in a row (0-9-2). . . . F Tanner Nagel (12) gave the Broncos the lead at 3:14 of the first period. . . . Edmonton F David Kope tied it, on a PP, at 6:20, and F Andrew Fyten put the home side ahead at 13:10. . . . F Jake Neighbours (9) upped the lead to 3-1 at 13:48, and it was all Oil Kings from there to the end. . . . Fyten, who was acquired from the Broncos on Dec. 13 for a conditional fifth-round pick in the 2020 bantam draft, had two goals and two assists, his first career four-point outing. . . . Fyten, 20, had eight goals and nine assists in 27 games with Swift Current; he has nine goals and 11 assists in 27 games with Edmonton. . . . Kope had two goals for Edmonton, giving him 13, with F Scott Atkinson also scoring twice, giving him 12. Singles came from F Vladimir Alistrov (11), F Josh Williams (13), who returned after sitting while ill, F Vince Loschiavo (29) and F Trey Fix-Wolansky (31). . . . D Conner McDonald had three assists. Alistrov and Fix-Wolansky added two assists each, with Kope adding one to his two goals. . . . Fix-Wolansky has 31 goals and 61 assists in 58 games. He has reached career highs in assists and points, and his one shy of the 32 goals he scored last season. In 199 career games, he has 235 points, including 87 goals. . . . McDonald now has a career-high 43 points, in 61 games; last season, he finished with 42 in 71. . . . Edmonton, which was 3-5 on the PP, held a 38-17 edge in shots. . . . This game started at 11 a.m., as it was the Oil Kings’ annual Hockey Hooky game. The announced attendance was 13,186. . . . The Broncos are back on the ice early today as they meet the host Calgary Hitmen in their third annual Be Brave Anti-Bullying game. Game time is noon MT. We are please to present a cheque for $2,500 to the Moose Jaw @CMHA_SK in memory of Ethan Williams #mjwarriors #thewhl #MJvsRD pic.twitter.com/cdFxYzfP8O — Moose Jaw Warriors (@MJWARRIORS) February 27, 2019 F Brandon Hagel scored two goals and added three assists to lead the Red Deer Rebels to a 7-3 victory over the Warriors in Moose Jaw. . . . Red Deer (30-24-5) had lost its previous five games, scoring 10 goals in the process. Red Deer and Brandon are tied for the Eastern Conference’s second wild-card spot, two points behind the Medicine Hat Tigers. . . . Moose Jaw (34-17-8) had won three in a row. It is a comfortable third in the East Division. . . . Hagel now has three games of at least five points in his WHL career — that’s two five-pointers and a six-pointer. . . . The Rebels jumped out to a 3-0 first-period leads on goals from F Reese Johnson (22), at 10:28; Hagel, at 11:50; and F Chris Douglas, at 12:28. . . . Moose Jaw cut into the lead as D Jett Woo (12) scored, on a PP, at 3:59 of the second period. . . . However, Red Deer scored the next three goals, all in the second period, by F Josh Tarzwell (8), at 6:58; Douglas (15), at 9:20; and D Alex Alexeyev (9), on a PP, at 13:29. . . . F Luke Ormsby (7) scored, shorthanded, for Moose Jaw at 14:32. . . . Hagel (36) added an empty-netter at 11:32 of the third period, before F Carson Denomie (5) scored for the Warriors at 16:09. . . . G Ethan Anders earned the victory with 28 saves. . . . This was the start of a four-game East Division swing for the Rebels. Almost 3 full pages of @NHL scouts in attendance tonight for SAS/LETH. pic.twitter.com/0xCgRFsBmh — Tyler Wawryk (@TylerWawryk) February 27, 2019 F Ryan Hughes scored two goals and added two assists to lead the host Saskatoon Blades to a 6-4 victory over the Lethbridge Hurricanes. . . . Saskatoon (39-14-8) has won two in a row and is second in the East Division 10 points ahead of the Moose Jaw Warriors. . . . Lethbridge (32-18-10) had won its previous three games. It is second in the East Division, four points behind the Edmonton Oil Kings and six ahead of the Calgary Hitmen. . . . This was the fourth time in his career that Hughes has scored at least four points in a game. He has nine goals and 14 assists in 18 games with the Blades, who acquired him from the Portland Winterhawks earlier in the season. He had 17 goals and 23 assists in 36 games with Portland. . . . F Nick Henry (24) gave Lethbridge a 1-0 lead, on a PP, at 2:20 of the first period. . . . The Blades took a 3-1 lead on goals from F Kyle Crnkovic (10), at 3:31; F Gary Haden (29), on a PP, at 1:14 of the second period; and F Chase Wouters (15), on another PP, at 12:19. . . . Lethbridge pulled into a 3-3 tie as F Jake Elmer (32) scored at 8:26 of the third period and F Logan Barlage (14) counted at 11:23. . . . Elmer has goals in nine straight games, the longest such streak in the WHL this season. He has 12 goals over that stretch. In a 10-game point streak, he has 12 goals and seven assists. . . . Elmer finished last season with 18 goals and 19 assists in 70 games; this season, he has 32 goals and 33 assists in 60 games. . . . Hughes broke the tie at 11:42, and F Kirby Dach (23) made it 5-3 at 13:52. . . . Lethbridge got back to within a goal when F Taylor Ross (31) scored at 16:03. . . . Hughes finished it when he scored his 26th goal, into an empty net, at 18:29. . . . Dach also had two assists. He now has 23 goals and 41 assists in 55 games. . . . There were a number of NHL scouts in the house, presumably to watch Dach go against Lethbridge F Dylan Cozens, both of whom are seen as early picks in the NHL’s 2019 draft. . . . Cozens, who had one assists, now has 28 goals and 44 assists in 60 games. . . . G Nolan Maier picked up the victory with 35 saves. He is 31-10-6, 2.77, .907 this season. . . . Darren Steinke was at the game and post this piece right here to his blog. The two big #NHL draft prospects battle each other in centre Kirby Dach of the #Saskatoon #Blades and Dylan Cozens of the #Lethbridge #Hurricanes. #WHL. pic.twitter.com/GvF0JhpHZ1 — Darren Steinke (@StanksSports) February 27, 2019 F Jaret Anderson-Dolan scored in OT to give the Spokane Chiefs a 4-3 victory over the Cougars in Prince George. . . . Spokane (32-19-7) has points in three straight games (2-0-1). It is third in the U.S. Division, nine points behind the Portland Winterhawks and two ahead of the Tri-City Americans. . . . Prince George (17-36-8) has lost two in a row (0-1-1). The Cougars are 13 points from a playoff spot with seven games remaining. . . . The visitors took a 1-0 lead when F Jake McGrew (24) scored at 8:27 of the first period. . . . After a scoreless second period, the Cougars went ahead 2-1 on goals from F Jackson Leppard (10), at 3:47, and D Rhett Rhinehart (4), on a PP, at 7:53. . . . The Chiefs then went ahead 3-2 on goals from D Egor Arbuzov (4), at 11:38, and D Filip Kral (7), at 16:36. . . . The Cougars forced OT when F Josh Maser (25) scored at 18:47. . . . Anderson-Dolan won it with his 10th goal of the season, at 3:58, snapping home a wrist shot from the left faceoff dot. . . . Spokane F Eli Zummack had one assist to run his point streak to 14 games. He has 20 points, including 17 assists, in that stretch. . . . The Chiefs got 25 saves from G Reece Klassen, while G Taylor Gauthier stopped 30 shots for the Cougars. . . . The Chiefs are without F Erik Atchison and F Ethan McIndoe, both of whom are out week-to-week. . . . The Cougars are without D Cole Moberg, who is listed as week-to-week. . . . The same teams will play again tonight in Prince George. Last spring I bought a soundboard that didn’t work, from a guy who’s rap group wrote a song about the Kootenay ICE – a hat trick of things that didn’t really work out Eat Arby’s https://t.co/6S1DOGQ0cq — Chad Balcom (@hawkeyblog) February 26, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on February 26, 2019 Tags Andrew Fyten, Brandon Hagel, Conner McDonald, Darren Steinke, Edmonton Oil Kings, Evan Herman, Jake Elmer, Jaret Anderson-Dolan, Kamloops Blazers, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Moose Jaw Generals, Prince Albert Raiders, Ray Wareham, Red Deer Rebels, Ryan Hughes, Saskatoon Blades, Spokane Chiefs, Trey Fix-WolanskyLeave a comment on Five key days for Blazers’ playoff hopes. . . . Oil Kings romp to win in Hockey Hooky game. . . . Rebels snap losing skid in Moose Jaw Wheat Kings beat Raiders in OT . . . Elmer glues loss on Broncos with hat trick . . . Blades run point streak to 12 games We’d like welcome @avolpatti85 as the newest Director to our #HGB team . Not only is he a blood recipient, he is also a fantastic role model. Did we mention he just joined @CanadasLifeline #stemcell registry? #GetSwabbed @Canucks @Capitals @BrownMensHockey @VernonVipers @GoBCHL pic.twitter.com/KX3jVmQFdg — Hockey Gives Blood (@hkygivesblood) February 15, 2019 F Tyler Coulter (Brandon, 2012-17) has signed a contract for the rest of this season with Kristianstad (Sweden, Division 1) after Tyringe (Sweden, Division 1) received monetary compensation from Kristianstad. In 20 games, he had a team-high 12 goals, along with 12 assists. . . . Coulter had a clause in his contract with Tyringe that allowed him to move to another Division 1 club if the new club was in the playoffs. With two games left in the regular season, Tyringe cannot make the playoffs. Kristianstad has qualified for the playoffs for promotion to Allsvenskan for 2019-20. #PrinceAlbert #Raiders head coach Marc Habscheid, centre, is presented with a jacket and the framed puck and gamesheet for hitting 500 career regular season wins. Puck and gamesheet were from the 500th win in Lethbridge. pic.twitter.com/Odo9lEgZAt There is an interesting scenario unfolding in Prince Albert where the Raiders are nearing the end of a glorious regular season. On Friday night, they dropped a 5-4 OT decision to the visiting Brandon Wheat Kings. The Raiders (46-7-3) lead the WHL’s overall standings by 14 points over the Everett Silvertips. Trevor Redden, writing for panow.com, points out that as rosy things are with the Raiders right now, the future is more than a little hazy. “As for what lies ahead beyond this season, we still don’t have any answers,” Redden writes. “When the subject of staffing for next season was brought up post-deadline with GM Curtis Hunt, he declined comment on his own status or that of the coaching staff, with all contracts set to expire at the end of this (season). “As for (head coach Marc) Habscheid, he wasn’t able to provide any further illumination when asked for an update this week on his status beyond this season. “ ‘No, nothing. Haven’t heard anything so I really don’t know what’s going on. That’s all I can say,’ Habscheid said.” The staff includes associate coach Jeff Truitt and assistant coach Dan Gendur. The Raiders, of course, are community-owned, as opposed to having private ownership, something that may, or not, be having an impact on the situation. Habscheid took over as the Raiders’ head coach on Nov. 1, 2014, replacing the fired Cory Clouston. At the time, the Raiders hired Habscheid to finish the 2014-15 season. On April 21, 2015, the Raiders announced that they had signed Habscheid to a four-year deal running through the end of this season. As for Hunt, he took over as general manager on June 8, 2015, after the Raiders and Bruno Campese chose to go their separate ways. Interestingly, the Raiders hired Hunt more than six weeks after signing Habscheid. That, of course, goes against the hockey adage about a GM wanting his own coach. And, as the standing show, Hunt and Habscheid appear to be making it work. Time will tell if they’ll be together again next season. FWIW: A (now former) OHL GM told me years ago that you need to be exceptionally dumb or burn someone pretty bad to get caught for recruitment violations. — Sunaya Sapurji (@sunayas) February 16, 2019 The OHL has fined the Niagara IceDogs a total of $250,000 and taken away 2019 and 2021 first-round draft choices after they were found to have “violated certain league player recruitment policies.” . . . In a Friday afternoon news release, the OHL said that it had the law firm of Lax O’Sullivan Lisus Gottleib LLP handle the investigation. “The league takes our commitment to our players and their player experience very seriously, which includes ensuring a fair and competitive on-ice experience among all teams,” David Branch, the OHL commissioner, said in a news release. “In order to maintain the integrity of this player experience and competitiveness within the league, it is critical that all clubs operate within the league recruitment guidelines. When a club ignores these guidelines, significant sanctions are required.” Later Friday, the IceDogs released this statement: “All current Niagara IceDogs players and hockey operations staff have no involvement in the sanctions assed today by the Ontario Hockey League. An appeal will be filed. Therefore, no comment will be made.” The Niagara IceDogs aren't talking about the $250k fine they have been assessed for recruiting violations. It wasn't long ago the team's owner said it would be a "catastrophe" if the IceDogs had to pay players min. wage.https://t.co/nSaHXKiMMI — Rick Westhead (@rwesthead) February 16, 2019 Defenceman @ZWytinck celebrates scoring the OT winner tonight for the #Brandon #WheatKings. #WHL. pic.twitter.com/44wPv09rog D Zach Wytinck’s OT goal gave the Brandon Wheat Kings a 5-4 victory over the Raiders in Prince Albert. . . . Brandon (25-22-7) has won two in a row and is six points from a wild-card playoff spot. . . . Prince Albert (46-7-3) has points in six straight (5-0-1) and has a 14-point lead atop the overall standings. . . . The teams will meet again tonight, this time in Brandon. . . . F Sean Montgomery (23) gave the home side a 1-0 lead at 10:35 of the first period. . . . Brandon took a 2-1 lead on goals from F Ben McCartney (17), at 13:46, and F Cole Reinhardt (17), at 3:27 of the second period. . . . F Parker Kelly got the Raiders into a tie at 14:10, and F Aliaksei Protas (10) provided them with a 3-2 lead at 2:48 of the third period. . . . F Caiden Daley (5) tied it at 8:43, but Kelly (29) put the Raiders back out front, on a PP, at 13:25. . . . The Wheat Kings scored the last two goals to win it. F Luka Burzan (32) tied it at 13:40, and Wytinck’s fourth goal of the season won it at 3:06 of OT. . . . Parker added an assist to his two goals. . . . G Jiri Patera stopped 28 shots for Brandon, five more than the Raiders’ Boston Bilous. . . . With G Ian Scott still sidelined, Bilous made his third straight start. . . . Montgomery was back in Prince Albert’s lineup after a one-game absence, but Scott and F Brett Leason remain sidelined. . . . Darren Steinke, the travellin’ blogger, was on hand and posted his story right here. Pats goalie Max Paddock since the Christmas break: 5-6-0-1 with a 2.40 goals against average and a .932 save percentage. Goals against average has dropped from 3.93 to 3.41 and his save percentage up to .898 from .880. #WHL — Phil Andrews (@Phil_Andrews_) February 16, 2019 G Max Paddock stopped 32 shots to lead the Regina Pats to a 4-0 victory over the visiting Edmonton Oil Kings. . . . Regina (16-37-3) won’t be in the playoffs this season. . . . Edmonton (31-18-8) leads the Central Division by two points over the Lethbridge Hurricanes. . . . The Oil Kings were playing their third game in fewer than 48 hours and they also have had a flu bug in their dressing room. The Oil Kings have had illness in their room of late. This time, F Trey Fix-Wolansky and F Quinn Benjafield joined F Zach Russell in being unable to play. . . . Paddock record his second shutout of the season. . . . The Oil Kings were blanked for the first time this season. . . . F Austin Pratt (21) gave Regina a 1-0 lead at 11:22 of the first period. . . . F Riley Krane (12) added insurance, on a PP, at 10:24 of the second period, and F Carter Massier (2) upped it to 3-0, while shorthanded, at 14:55. . . . Regina’s final goal came from F Garrett Wright (4) at 10:22 of the third period. . . . Edmonton won the season series, 3-1-0. The Oil Kings had been looking for the second sweep of the Pats in franchise history; the first was in 2010-11. The Lethbridge Hurricanes got three goals from F Jake Elmer en route to a 7-2 victory over the Broncos in Swift Current. . . . Lethbridge (29-16-10) has won two in a row. It is second in the Central Division, two points behind the Edmonton Oil Kings and one ahead of the Medicine Hat Tigers. . . . Swift Current (10-40-4) has lost seven in a row (0-6-1). The Broncos have lost 40 games in regulation-time for the first time since 2010-11 (26-44-2). That (44) is the most single-season losses for the Broncos since they moved back to Swift Current from Lethbridge for the 1986-87 season. . . . Elmer gave the Hurricanes a 2-0 lead with first-period goals at 1:47 and 4:41 of the first period. The second of those came while shorthanded. . . . Elmer completed his second career hat trick with a PP goal at 12:43 of the third period. That was the game’s final goal. . . . The Hurricanes got two goals from F Noah Boyko, who has seven, and singles from F Logan Barlage (12) and F Nick Henry (21). . . . F Carter Chorney (12) and D Connor Horning (6) replied for the Broncos, who were 0-8 on the PP. . . . The Hurricanes were 1-3 on the PP. . . . Lethbridge unleashed a season-high 56 shots at G Riley Lamb. . . . G Bryan Thomson stopped 26 shots for Lethbrige. G Carl Stankowski stopped 29 shots to help the host Calgary Hitmen to a 3-1 victory over the Medicine Hat Tigers. . . . Calgary (29-21-5) is tied with the Red Deer Rebels for the Eastern Conference’s two wild-card spots. They also are fourth in the Central Division, four points behind the Tigers. . . . Medicine Hat (31-20-5) has lost two in a row. They are third in the Central Division, one point behind the Lethbridge Hurricanes. . . . The same teams will play again tonight, this time in Medicine Hat. . . . F Mark Kastelic (39) gave Calgary a 1-0 lead, on a PP, at 1:40 of the second period. . . . D Egor Zamula (10) made it 2-0 at 7:41. . . . The Tigers got to within a goal at 19:13 as F Elijah Brown scored his 11th goal. . . . F Carson Focht (16) iced it for Calgary at 18:59 of the third period. . . . Medicine Hat got 27 saves from G Jordan Hollett. . . . The Tigers had D Linus Nassen back in their lineup. . . . The Hitmen had Zamula and D Dakota Krebs back from injuries, but remain without F Jake Kryski and G Jack McNaughton. At least one Kootenay Ice fan wasn’t impressed with a Valentine’s Day promotion the team ran on Thursday. The Ice, of course, is leaving Cranbrook for Winnipeg at the conclusion of this season. On Friday night in Cranbrook, they were thanking the families who have billeted players through the Ice’s 21 seasons in the community. F Kyle Crnkovic scored twice and added two assists to help the Saskatoon Blades to an 8-3 victory over the Kootenay Ice in Cranbrook, B.C. . . . Saskatoon (36-13-8) has points in 12 straight games (10-0-2). It also has won one more game than it won all of last season. The Blades are second in the East Division, 12 points ahead of the Moose Jaw Warriors. . . . Kootenay (11-36-8) has lost four in a row. . . . The Blades, in their last appearance in Cranbrook, scored the game’s first four goals to take a 4-0 lead early in the second period. . . . F Max Gerlach (36), Crnkovic and F Eric Florchuk, with two, accounted for those goals. Florchuk now has 20 goals. . . . F Peyton Krebs (19) got the Ice on the scoreboard at 11:22 of the second period. . . . Saskatoon responded with the next four goals, from F Chase Wouters (14), F Ryan Hughes, with two, and Crnkovic, who now has nine goals. Hughes has 23. . . . D Martin Bodak (10) and F Jaeger White (22) had the Ice’s last two goals. . . . Crnkovic enjoyed his first career four-point game. . . . Florchuk also had an assist for a three-point night. . . . Saskatoon D Dawson Davidson had two assists, running his point streak to 15 games; he has two goals and 26 assists in that stretch. He also has at least one assist in 15 straight games. In his past five games, he has 12 points, including 11 assists. . . . Gerlach had a goal and an assist in running his point streak to 14 games. He has 23 points, including 12 goals, in that stretch. . . . Saskatoon had F Kirby Dach back in the lineup. He had missed two games after being struck on the throat by a puck. Tonight’s post-game meal: lasagna, caeser salad, garlic toast Beuf’s rating: 9.57/10 “Cranbrook treated us to some terrific meals. The lasagna was absolutely delicious. Cheese melted nicely into the meat and noodles.”#wholeplateeveryoneknowstherules pic.twitter.com/T4eFVvPiLb — Saskatoon Blades (@BladesHockey) February 16, 2019 G Max Palaga, in his first start since Jan. 20, stopped 31 shots as the Everett Silvertips beat the Rockets, 3-1, in Kelowna. . . . Everett (39-13-3) has points in three straight games (2-0-1). It leads the U.S. Division by nine points over the Portland Winterhawks. . . . Kelowna (23-27-5) had won its previous two games. It is third in the B.C. Division, four points ahead of the Kamloops Blazers. . . . Everett took a 2-1 lead into the third period; it now is 31-0-1 when leading after two. . . . F Kyle Topping (20) gave Kelowna a 1-0 lead, on a PP, at 7:26 of the first period. . . . Everett tied it at 12:18 as D Gianni Fairbrother (9) scored, on a PP. . . . Silvertips F Bryce Kindopp broke the tie at 8:18 of the second period, then added his 32nd goal of the season, into an empty net, at 19:43 of the third period. . . . G Roman Basran stopped 27 shots for Kelowna. . . . Rockets D Lassi Thomson left the game late in the first period, after being high-sticked by Kindopp, then returned in the second wearing a full cage. . . . That may, or may not, have had something to do with the two head coaches — Everett’s Dennis Williams and Kelowna’s Adam Foote — exchanging greetings late in the first period. . . . Everett headed for home after the game as it has to be in Kent, Wash., to meet the Seattle Thunderbirds tonight. Then it’s off to Prince George for the Silvertips who will play the Cougars on Monday (2 p.m.) and again on Tuesday night. Great to have so many @PGCougarsAlumni, along with Tim & Sharla Hirsche with us tonight! #BH10 #AlumniNight pic.twitter.com/VEt4mro5Yh — PG Cougars (@PGCougars) February 16, 2019 F Tanner Sidaway scored the game’s first two goals to get the Victoria Royals started to a 4-1 victory over the Cougars in Prince George. . . . Victoria (28-23-3) is second in the B.C. Division, eight points ahead of the Kelowna Rockets. . . . Prince George (16-33-6) has lost 14 in a row (0-11-3) and is 10 points from a playoff spot. The Cougars are 0-3-0 since firing head coach Richard Matvichuk and replacing him with general manager Mark Lamb. . . . Sidaway, who has seven goals, scored at 3:50 of the first period and seven seconds into the second, while shorthanded. His second goal set a franchise record as the fastest goal to start a period. The previous record of nine seconds had been done on four occasions. . . . This also was Sidaway’s first multi-goal game. . . . The Cougars cut the deficit in half when F Josh Curtis (12) scored at 6:22. . . . F Kaid Oliver (24) restored the two-goal lead at 16:32, and F Logan Doust (4) added another goal, at 6:46 of the third period. . . . Victoria G Griffen Outhouse posted his 109th regular-season victory, and moved into seventh on the WHL’s all-time list. The record (120) for most career victories is shared by Tyson Sexsmith (Medicine Hat, Vancouver, 2004-09) and Corey Hirsch (Kamloops, 1988-92). . . . Victoria F Ty Yoder returned to play after being out since Jan. 4. The Seattle Thunderbirds built up a 5-1 second-period lead and hung on for a 6-4 victory over the Red Deer Rebels in Kent, Wash. . . . Seattle (22-27-6) holds down the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot, three points ahead of the Kamloops Blazes. . . . Red Deer (29-20-5) had points in each of its previous two games (1-0-1). It is tied with the Calgary Hitmen for the Eastern Conference’s two wild-card spots. . . . F Noah Philp gave Seattle a 1-0 lead at 7:45 of the first period, only to have F Zak Smith (10) tie it for Red Deer 37 seconds later. . . . The Thunderbirds responded with four second-period goals, from F Matthew Wedman, Philp (22), on a PP, F Andrej Kukuca (20) and F Henri Rybinski (4). . . . The Rebels got back in it with third-period goals from D Alexander Alexeyev (8), F Oleg Zaytsev (11) and F Reese Johnson (21), the latter scoring at 18:34. . . . Wedman wrapped it up with his 30th goal at 19:03. . . . With his two goals, Wedman, who also had an assist, ran his goal streak to five straight games. . . . F Brandon Hagel had three assists for Red Deer. . . . F Jeff de Wit, a Red Deer native who is on his second go-round with the Rebels, played in his 300th regular-season game. He also has played with Regina, Victoria and Kootenay. He has 54 goals and 55 assists in the 300 games. . . . The Thunderbirds had F Nolan Volcan, their captain, back in the lineup after missing nine games. He hadn’t played since Jan. 26. G Beck Warm turned aside 42 shots to lead the Tri-City Americans to a 5-3 victory over the Kamloops Blazers in Kennewick, Wash. . . . Tri-City (30-20-3) has won two in a row. It is in possession of the Western Conference’s first wild-card spot and is fourth in the U.S. Division, three points behind the Spokane Chiefs. . . . Kamloops (21-28-5) is fourth in the B.C. Division, four points behind the Kelowna Rockets. The Blazers also are three points behind the Seattle Thunderbirds in the race for the Western Conference’s second wild-card spot. . . . Tri-City took a 1-0 lead as F Sasha Mutala (14) scored at 1:45 of the first period. . . . The Blazers tied it at 5:08 as D Montana Onyebuchi (5) scored. . . . The Americans took a 3-1 lead on second-period goals from F Connor Bouchard (6), at 11:08, and F Nolan Yaremko (20), at 18:17. . . . F Kobe Mohr (6) got Kamloops to within a goal at 3:42 of the third period. . . . D Wil Kushniryk (3) restored the two-goal lead at 6:59. . . . F Brodi Stuart (16) again got the Blazers to within a goal, at 17:51. . . . F Parker AuCoin (32) put it away for the Americans at 19:15. . . . G Dylan Ferguson stopped 25 shots for Kamloops. . . . The Americans were without D Dom Schmiemann, who completed a two-game suspension. The Vancouver Giants scored three straight PP goals en route to a 5-4 victory over the Spokane Chiefs in Langley, B.C. . . . Vancouver (38-13-3) has won six straight games. It leads the B.C. Division by 20 points over the Victoria Royals. . . . Spokane (30-18-6) had points in each of its previous seven (6-0-1). It is third in the U.S. Division, six points behind the Portland Winterhawks. . . . The Chiefs took a 1-0 lead at 3:13 of the first period on a PP goal by F Luc Smith. . . . The lead lasted 15 seconds until D Kaleb Bulych (2) scored for Vancouver. . . . Then came the three PP goals, from F Justin Sourdif (16), at 13:28 of the first period; F Milos Roman (21), at 18:38 of the second period; and F Jared Dmytriw (13), at 19:08. . . . The Chiefs got to within a goal, at 4-3, as Smith (25) and F Eli Zummack (13) scored at 3:47 and 11:51 of the third period, respectively. . . . After the Chiefs had a goal disallowed — it was ruled to have been kicked in from the crease — F Jadon Joseph (16) scored for Vancouver at 15:46. . . . F Riley Woods (27) scored for Spokane at 18:50. . . . Zummack also had two assists. . . . The Giants were 3-4 on the PP; the Chiefs were 1-7. With the move of @WHLKootenayICE to Winnipeg next season, it was time for a "Nostalgia Tour" of Cranbrook today…starting with the Memorial Arena…home for the ICE the first 2 years… pic.twitter.com/x7aSauzLdJ — Les Lazaruk (@Bladesvoice) February 16, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on February 15, 2019 February 15, 2019 Tags Beck Warm, Brandon Wheat Kings, Calgary Hitmen, Carl Stankowski, Curtis Hunt, Everett Silvertips, Jadon Joseph, Jake Elmer, Kyle Crnkovic, Les Lazaruk, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Marc Habscheid, Matthew Wedman, Max Paddock, Max Palaga, Niagara IceDogs, Ontario Hockey League, Prince Albert Raiders, Regina Pats, Saskatoon Blades, Seattle Thunderbirds, Tanner Sidaway, Trevor Redden, Tri-City Americans, Tyler Coulter, Vancouver Giants, Victoria Royals, Zach WytinckLeave a comment on Wheat Kings beat Raiders in OT . . . Elmer glues loss on Broncos with hat trick . . . Blades run point streak to 12 games Rebels stuck in Hood River, game postponed 24 hours . . . Hurricanes announce Plan B details . . . Gerlach burns former club Gerard needs to find a #stemcell match & players from @blazerhockey stepped up. #GetSwabbed at https://t.co/nvClrHtgal . #JoinTheLifeline @TheWHL @CHLHockey pic.twitter.com/qKypClRIqr D Dalton Yorke (Kelowna, Prince Albert, Tri-City, 2012-17) has signed a one-year contract extension with Löwen Frankfurt (Germany, DEL2). In 46 games, he has one goal and 11 assists. Yorke is a dual German-Canadian citizen. . . . Frankfurt GM Franz-David Fritzmeier: “Dalton has developed very well this season. He has made a big leap forward and has become an important cornerstone of our defence. We are pleased that we were able to extend the contract with him at an early stage.” . . . F Pavel Brendl (Calgary, 1998-2001) has signed a contract for the rest of this season with Kopla Joensuu (Finland, Division 2). Last season, he had five goals and three assists in 12 games with Arlanda (Sweden, Division 1). We are in Hood River, OR. It’s really nice this time of year. The local McDonald’s has been very accommodating. Highways closed, sure would like to get to Everett for our date with @WHLsilvertips #RDR pic.twitter.com/p0JEEDIvkL — Red Deer Rebels (@Rebelshockey) February 13, 2019 Although we are still #stuckinhoodriver this is the mighty Columbia River. #TheMoreYouKnow pic.twitter.com/SkDtuPQCyv The Red Deer Rebels spent much of Wednesday in Hood River, Ore., tweeting with the hashtag #stuckinhoodriver. It sounds so much like a rock tune. In fact, the only thing missing was CCR. With apologies to John Fogerty . . . “I rode in on the Greyhound “I’ll be walkin’ out if I go “I was just passin’ through “Must be seven months or more “Ran out of time and money “Looks like they took my friends “Oh, Lord, I’m stuck in Hood River again.” The Rebels opened a five-game road swing through the U.S. Division with a 4-3 OT loss to the Chiefs in Spokane on Tuesday night. They tried on Wednesday to get to Everett for a date that night with the Silvertips but they got stopped by what the Pacific Northwest locals have labelled snomageddon. Red Deer wasn’t able to take the usual way, which would have had them on I-90 via the Snoqualmie Pass. But that route was closed due to the poor driving conditions. Instead, the Rebels tried to go south via Yakima and Kennewick, then west to Portland, and north to Everett. They got as far as Hood River on I-84 before running into more road closures. So . . . there they were, stuck in Hood River, an hour east of Portland, which is 200 miles south of Everett. Keep in mind, too, that the traffic conditions in the Seattle area aren’t especially conducive to quick travel at the best of times. All of this resulted in the WHL postponing Wednedsay’s game for 24 hours. The Rebels and Silvertips now are scheduled to play in Everett tonight. All because Red Deer got #stuckinhoodriver. “The man from the magazine “Said I was on my way “Somewhere I lost connections “Ran out of songs to play “I came into town, a one-night stand “Looks like my plans fell through “Oh, Lord, stuck in Hood River again.” The Oregon Department of Transportation reopened the westbound lanes of I-84 last night at 7:30. That, of course, was far too late for the Rebels to make it to Everett by game time. However, the Rebels were able to get to Everett last night. Finally, we are in Everett!!!!! Weirdly, we miss #stuckinhoodriver pic.twitter.com/q6anBOEyod The rescheduling means that the Silvertips will play five games in six nights, four of them on the road. After playing Red Deer, they will have to get to Kelowna for a Friday night date with the Rockets, then head back home to visit the Seattle Thunderbirds on Saturday. On Sunday, Everett will head to Prince George for a Monday-Tuesday doubleheader with the Cougars. Oh, and the Monday game is to start at 2 p.m. The Rebels will visit the Thunderbirds on Friday, the Portland Winterhawks on Saturday and the Tri-City Americans on Tuesday, before heading back to Alberta for a Feb. 22 date with the host Edmonton Oil Kings. Thanks Hood River…..it’s been fun. We expect to be on our way soon, no longer #stuckinhoodriver pic.twitter.com/cVW0ZaaImP The Lethbridge Hurricanes have made it official. With the World Men’s Curling Championship in the 5,479-seat ENMAX Centre, March 30 through April 7, they will be playing some playoff games, as needed, in Nicholas Sheran Arena. According to a news release, there will be 1,176 spots available for as many as three first-round playoff games. They will be distributed through a lottery process to fans who purchase playoff ticket packages. From that news release: “Those who are not selected in the playoff package draw, as well as other interested community members, are invited to attend a free family-friendly community event to watch the games on the big screen, eat and drink, and enjoy some great family programming and giveaways.” The WHL playoffs are scheduled to open on March 22. Nicholas Sheran Arena is home to the U of Lethbridge Pronghorns women’s and men’s hockey teams. The complete news release is right here. It contains all the information you need to know and more. With a goal and two assists tonight Stelio Mattheos moves past Tom McMurchy (pictured) into 28th place on the Wheat Kings all-time scoring list with 258 points! #StelioWatch #bdnmb pic.twitter.com/h76r8DpEX6 — Brandon Wheat Kings (@bdnwheatkings) February 14, 2019 The host Brandon Wheat Kings scored four times in the third period en route to a 5-2 victory over the Edmonton Oil Kings. . . . Brandon (24-22-7) is six points from a wild-card spot. . . . Edmonton (30-17-8) leads the Central Division by one point over the Medicine Hat Tigers. . . . D Conner McDonald gave Edmonton a 1-0 lead at 17:37 of the first period. McDonald’s goal was his 17th of the season, tying the franchise’s single-season record for defencemen that was set by Cody Corbett in 2013-14. . . . F Ben McCartney (16) got Brandon even at 1:55 of the second period. . . . F Vince Loschiavo (24) provided the Oil Kings with a 2-1 edge at 17:25. . . . Brandon followed that with four third-period goals, from F Linden McCorrister (13), shorthanded, at 0:26; F Luka Burzan (31), at 6:30; F Stelio Mattheos (34), at 13:01; and F Connor Gutenberg (13), into an empty net, at 19:43. . . . Mattheos also had two assists. . . . Brandon G Jiri Patera stopped 36 shots, 19 more than Edmonton’s Dylan Myskiw. F Parker Kelly scored twice to lead the Prince Albert Raiders to a 3-1 victory over the Broncos in Swift Current. . . . Prince Albert (46-7-2) has won five in a row. It leads the Eastern Conference by 16 points over the Saskatoon Blades. . . . Swift Current (10-39-4) has lost six straight (0-5-1). . . . F Dante Hannoun (26), who also had two assists, gave the Raiders the lead, on a PP, at 2:24 of the second period and Kelly doubled it at 5:33. . . . F Joona Kiviniemi (14) scored for the Broncos, on a PP, at 2:49 of the third period. . . . Kelly iced it with his 27th goal at 15:23 of the third period. . . . The Raiders had 43-16 edge in shots — 13-5, 17-7 and 13-4 by period. . . . G Isaac Poulter made 40 saves for the Broncos. . . . G Boston Bilous stopped 15 shots for the Raiders. . . . The Raiders were without G Ian Scott, F Brett Leason and F Sean Montgomery. Scott and Leason both are injured; Montgomery, who had played in 155 consecutive games, is ill. . . . The Raiders had F Justin Nachbaur back from a three-game suspension. . . . Prince Albert had F Cole Nagy, 17, make his WHL debut with them. He plays for the midget AAA Saskatoon Blazers. The 6-foot-4, 190-pound Nagy was a sixth-round pick by the Moose Jaw Warriors in the 2016 bantam draft. He signed with the Raiders on Jan. 2. The two Jakes — Elmer and Leschyshyn — scored two goals each and added an assist to lead the Lethbridge Hurricanes to a 6-2 victory over the visiting Calgary Hitmen. . . . Lethbridge (28-16-10) had lost its previous three games (0-1-2). It is third in the Central Division, one point behind the Medicine Hat Tigers and two in arrears of the first-place Edmonton Oil Kings. . . . Calgary (28-21-5) and Red Deer are tied for fourth in the Central Division; they also are tied for the Eastern Conference’s two wild-card spots. . . . Lethbridge is 5-1-0 in the season series with Calgary. . . . The Hurricanes completed a six-game homestand with a 3-1-2 record. . . . The Hurricanes took control early as they scored five times on 16 first-period shots. . . . Elmer opened the scoring at 2:50 of the first period, and Leschyshyn made it 2-0 at 7:05. . . . F Riley Stotts (18) pulled Calgary to within one at 9:35. . . . Elmer upped the lead to 3-1 with his 24th goal, shorthanded, at 15:36; F Jordy Bellerive (25) made it 4-1, at 16:37; and F Taylor Ross (26) got the fifth goal, at 17:11. . . . F Ryder Korczak (6) had Calgary’s other goal, at 9:03 of the second period. . . . Leschyshyn wrapped up the scoring with his 33rd goal, at 6:36 of the third period. . . . G Carl Tetachuk earned the victory with 36 saves. . . . The Hurricanes were without F Scott Mahovlich, who has left the team “to be with family after a family emergency,” according to a news release. General manager Peter Anholt said in the news release that Mahovlich, 19, “has returned home to be with family for whatever length of time that he requires.” Mahovlich is from Abbotsford, B.C. F Max Gerlach, who began his career with Medicine Hat, scored two goals to help the Saskatoon Blades to a 6-3 victory over the host Tigers. . . . Saskatoon (35-13-8) has points in 11 straight games (9-0-2). It is second in the East Division, 10 points ahead of the Moose Jaw Warriors. . . . Medicine Hat (31-19-5) had points in each of its previous five games (4-0-1). It is second in the Central Division, one point behind the Edmonton Oil Kings and one ahead of the Lethbridge Hurricanes. . . . The home side had a 1-0 lead at 2:44 of the first period on a PP goal by F James Hamblin (31). . . . Gerlach tied it, on a PP, at 15:28, and F Ryan Hughes (21) gave the Blades a 2-1 lead, on another PP, at 9:10 of the second period. . . . Gerlach upped the lead to 3-1 with his 35th goal, at 12:47. . . . Gerlach, 20, played the first 180 regular-season games of his WHL career with the Tigers. According to Ryan McCracken of the Medicine Hat News, Gerlach, after his first goal, “shrugged off the lack of support from his former fans and joked, ‘I built this place’ as he returned to Saskatoon’s bench.” His first WHL goal was the first goal scored in the Canalta Centre. It came on Sept. 26, 2015, with the Tigers beating the Lethbridge Hurricanes, 5-3. . . . Last night, Gerlach’s second goal tied his career high. He scored 16 goals in 35 games with the Tigers last season, and added 19 in 30 with the Blades after being dealt to Saskatoon. . . . He also is on a career-high 12-game point streak, with 21 points in that stretch. . . . And one other Gerlach note. According to Les Lazaruk, the radio voice of the Blades, Gerlach’s goal was the 15,000th in franchise history. . . . Lazaruk also pointed out that this was the first time since Jan. 8 that the Blades didn’t score the game’s first goal. They had gone up 1-0 in 12 straight games. . . . F Nick McCarry (2) got the Tigers to within a goal at 15:41, but F Eric Florchuk (18) got that one back at 19:38. . . . The Blades got insurance from F Tristen Robins (8), at 1:52 of the third period, and F Chase Wouters (13), shorthanded, at 3:52. . . . F Ryan Jevne (14) scored Medicine Hat’s last goal, on a PP, at 16:22. . . . Saskatoon D Dawson Davidson had three assists. Davidson is riding a 14-game point streak, with 24 points in that time. . . . Davidson has 64 points, 54 of them assists, in 56 games. His 54 assists are second in the WHL to F Trey Fix-Wolansky of the Edmonton Oil Kings. . . . The Blades scratched F Kirby Dach for a third straight game after he was struck in the throat by a puck. . . . Saskatoon also is without D Aidan De La Gorgendiere, who last played on Feb. 2 when he took a hit from D Jake Neighbours of the Edmonton Oil Kings, who now is three games into a four-game suspension. . . . The Tigers were without D Linus Nassen and D Joel Craven, while F Hayden Ostir remains out. Tigers HC Shaun Clouston says Linus Nassen is only expected to be on the shelf short-term, while fellow defenceman Joel Craven will require further evaluation. — Ryan McCracken (@MHNMcCracken) February 14, 2019 🎵 And we’ll never be Royals…🎵 6-1 WIN 😎 pic.twitter.com/HjJehDgFO7 — Kamloops Blazers (@blazerhockey) February 14, 2019 The Kamloops Blazers scored the game’s first four goals as they skated to a 6-1 victory over the visiting Victoria Royals. . . . Kamloops (21-27-5) had lost its past three games (0-2-1). It is one point behind the Seattle Thunderbirds, who hold down the Western Conference’s second wild-card berth. Kamloops also is fourth in the B.C. Division, four points behind the Kelowna Rockets. . . . Victoria (27-23-3) is second in the B.C. Division, six points ahead of the Kelowna Rockets. . . . The Royals are 5-2-1 in the season series; the Blazers are 3-5-0. . . . Kamloops had scored three goals on 71 shots in going 0-2-1 in its previous three games. In this one, the Blazers erupted for four goals on 13 shots in the first period. . . . F Connor Zary accounted for the game’s first two scores, at 3:58 and 11:42, with the first one shorthanded. . . . F Zane Franklin (25) made it 3-0 at 18:48, and F Brodi Stuart (15) upped it to 4-0 with 3.3 seconds left. . . . F Phillip Schultz (13) got a PP goal for Victoria at 3:20 of the second period. . . . F Jermaine Loewen (21), who also had two assists, counted the Blazers’ second shorthanded goal of the game, at 4:34 of the third period. . . . Zary, who has 16 goals, completed his first WHL hat trick at 13:45 of the third period. . . . Zary, a second-round pick in the 2016 bantam draft, has a late birth date so isn’t eligible for the NHL draft until 2020. He now has 48 points in 48 games. . . . G Dylan Ferguson stopped 36 shots for the Blazers. . . . With F Martin Lang and F Ryley Appelt both out, the Blazers dressed 17 skaters, one under the maximum. . . . D Montana Onyebuchi was back in the Blazers’ lineup after serving a two-game suspension and he had two assists. . . . Darryl Sydor, one of the Blazers’ five owners, made his WHL coaching debut behind the team’s bench. He was named a full-time assistant on Tuesday. A neat tidbit: The Winnipeg Ice open the 2019-20 #WHL schedule with a home-and-home series against the Brandon Wheat Kings. In total, Winnipeg and Brandon will play each other 10 times next season. #wfp — Jeff Hamilton (@jeffkhamilton) February 13, 2019 Author greggdrinnanPosted on February 13, 2019 February 13, 2019 Tags Brandon Wheat Kings, Conner McDonald, Connor Zary, Dalton Yorke, Dawson Davidson, Edmonton Oil Kings, Everett Silvertips, Jake Elmer, Jake Leschyshyn, Kamloops Blazers, Lethbridge Hurricanes, Max Gerlach, Montana Onyebuchi, Parker Kelly, Pavel Brendl, Prince Albert Raiders, Red Deer Rebels, Saskatoon Blades, Stelio MattheosLeave a comment on Rebels stuck in Hood River, game postponed 24 hours . . . Hurricanes announce Plan B details . . . Gerlach burns former club

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511954

__label__wiki

Borders of Belonging: Mixed-Status Families and the Impacts of Family Separation on Population Health Heide Castaneda Elvia is a grandmother caring for her four-year-old granddaughter after her son was deported. He had been on his way to work when he was pulled over at a traffic checkpoint and asked about his documentation. Elvia says, “We told her he had gone away to work, but now he has been gone for a month. She would see his pictures around the house and would talk to them: ‘¿Papá?’ But no, we didn’t tell her anything, just that he was away working.” In 2018, people were shocked to learn about a new Trump administration policy that separated children from parents or guardians at the border. Medical professional organizations swiftly joined the debate, condemning the policy based on the known short- and long-term health impacts on children and parents alike. However, while the policy at the southern border was officially ended, immigration authorities have continued to break up families living in the United States through raids in the workplaces of immigrant parents, and/or simply removing children from their families for reasons as minor as a parent having a traffic citation for driving without a license. The health effects of living in households that include individuals who may be “deportable” plays a largely under-investigated role in health disparities across the United States. This area demands our attention. My recent book Borders of Belonging explores the everyday and long-term impact of immigration policies and practices not only on undocumented migrants, but also on their US citizen family members. A demographic shift is occurring: never before have so many citizen children in the United States grown up with an undocumented family member as today. Nationwide, at least 16.7 million people are part of mixed-status families, living with at least one undocumented family member in the same household. Most children in mixed-status families –an estimated 5.9 million – are U.S. citizens, comprising three-quarters of all children of undocumented immigrants. Put another way, children of unauthorized immigrant parents comprise 7.25% of all children in the U.S. …children of unauthorized immigrant parents comprise 7.25% of all children in the U.S. The reasons for this sharp increase in mixed-status families over the past two decades is itself the result of policy decisions. Beginning in the 1990s, this circular movement between the U.S and migrant-sending countries – most notably, Mexico – was made more difficult, and many people stopped returning home and instead opted to either bring relatives over or start their families in the US. In addition, a visa backlog has made entering the country legally a daunting, almost impossible, process. For Mexicans, obtaining a family-sponsored green card can take up to 22 years, since that country is considered “oversubscribed” because it has exceeded its allocation of visas. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service is currently processing applications that were submitted in 1997 for some categories. With this in mind, it is perhaps no wonder even those who are eligible for a visa may forfeit the wait and attempt entry in another manner to reunite with family. A second trend has been the decline in opportunities to legalize one’s legal status. In prior decades, the overall experience of being undocumented was shorter and affected fewer people. By the mid-1990s, however, policy changes greatly restricted the ability to legalize status for those who are undocumented. Understanding health disparities in mixed-status families requires a careful consideration of immigration status as a structural constraint impacting health. In increasingly interconnected populations, large-scale social forces impact the health of unequally positioned groups of people. Immigration status affects health through several mechanisms including fear, stress, differential access to resources, experiences of prejudice and violence, family separation, and differential access to safe work and housing. Health policies have multiple direct and indirect impacts on these families, including their hesitancy to enroll citizen children in programs due to fear of deportation or to avoid jeopardizing chances of future regularization. …children in mixed-status families are reported to have worse physical health compared to their U.S. citizen counterparts… Parental immigration status is associated with lower healthcare utilization in children, especially the legal status of the mother due to many women’s role as primary care provider. As a result, children in mixed-status families are reported to have worse physical health compared to their U.S. citizen counterparts; they are more likely to lack health insurance and lack a usual source of care compared to children from non-immigrant households. There are also a number of well-documented psychosocial effects. Children in mixed-status families frequently worry about family separation and can exhibit high levels of stress. Children whose parents have been deported or detained are more likely to experience a host of social concerns and mental health problems, including decreased school performance, depression and other internalizing problems such as anxiety, and externalizing problems such as aggression and conduct issues. Further, undocumented immigrants and their family members experience a pervasive fear of deportation that negatively impacts their psychological, emotional, and physical health. The association between worry about the deportation of others (i.e., family members) and cardiovascular risk factors has been quantitatively measured using reference points such as BMI, waist circumference, and continuous measures of systolic and pulse pressure. Additionally, hostile policy environments result in intense feelings of anxiety, and depression, which exacerbate preexisting health conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes. There is little doubt that the rise in anti-immigrant policymaking has fostered an unhealthy environment for mixed-status families. There is little doubt that the rise in anti-immigrant policymaking has fostered an unhealthy environment for mixed-status families. Though more research is needed, the long-term and enduring health effects of related trauma and anxiety are likely large. Further, the effects of illegality are not limited to those who are undocumented, but also impact U.S. citizens in mixed-status families, and the broader communities of which they are a part. Never before have so many citizen children affected by parent “illegality” come of age as in our current historical moment. More research following mixed-status families is needed to better understand the reproduction of inequalities across generations. Heide Castañeda is Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of South Florida. She is the author of "Borders of Belonging: Struggle and Solidarity in Mixed-Status Immigrant Families" (Stanford University Press, 2019) and co-editor of "Unequal Coverage: The Experience of Health Care Reform in the United States" (NYU Press, 2018). Her work has been funded by the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, the Fulbright Program, the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), and the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. Spotlight on Successful Mentoring Four Key Considerations When Creating a Whole-of-University Population Health Initiative Forum, Research Highlight Did You Read Any of These Pop Health Policy Articles? Making Climate Change Coursework Happen in Public Health Education Using Universal Policies to Ameliorate Health Inequalities All comments will be reviewed and posted if substantive and of general interest to IAPHS readers. Unless authored by IAPHS Staff, posts reflect views of individual authors, not those of IAPHS. Our Most-Read Blog Posts for 2019 Population Health and the Global Urban Future

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511963

__label__cc

FOX INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INNOVATOR AWARD SEVENTH ANNUAL IT AWARDS Frank R. Sanchez is the President of the Enterprise Banking and Retail Solutions division of Fidelity National Information Services. His responsibilities include the strategy, architecture and development of the banking suite of products, including core banking, integration and channel solutions. He also has responsibility for the Auto Finance business and the Commercial Lending businesses within FIS. Sanchez also has revenue responsibility for Strategic accounts which consists of top-tier US and global institutions as well as specific product line revenues. Prior to joining FIS in January 2003, Frank was the CEO of Sanchez Computer Associates, a public banking technology company that specialized in real-time banking systems for the global market, enterprise customer integration systems and complete internet banking outsourcing. Frank began his career at Sanchez in 1980 and fulfilled many organizational functions including product architecture and engineering, sales and marketing and executive management. He designed and built the industry’s first highly scalable real-time banking system which has successfully been installed in hundreds of financial institutions spanning 16 countries. In 2001, he deployed the industry’s first core banking system on a Linux platform. Throughout his career, Frank has continually provided technology innovations to the financial services and IT industry and has received numerous individual and corporate achievement awards. Frank served on the technical advisory board for high performance system at Digital Equipment from 1986 – 1991. He was a director of Transaction Systems Architects from 2003 – 2005. He currently serves on the board of Covansys and the Penn State University remote campus curriculum advisory board. Frank attended the University of Connecticut where he studied astrophysics and finance.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511964

__label__cc

Novel Thoughts Be the first to hear about upcoming Ignatius Press novels, author interviews, and more! From Novels to Movies Part 2: The Battle of the Five Senses A Review of The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies by Meryl Kaleida January 5, 2015 1:06 pm | 1 Comment A few months ago I lamented over bad movie adaptations from books. I am always hopeful that some film director will suck me into their painfully accurate rendition of their favorite novel, but I am usually disappointed. I have had to train myself to view movies completely separate from their paper bound counterparts. Every good book I have read has engaged all of my senses—I can see, touch, taste, smell, and hear everything. A good movie really only engages two, at most three, senses—mostly sight, sound, and sometimes touch or taste. So, in order to make up for the lack of sense, there must be substance. If you wish to see an entertaining and action packed film, then The Battle of Five Armies will be highly enjoyable for you. There are great epic battle scenes, and a wonderful soundtrack to go with them. If, however, you are a die-hard LOTR fan with The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and the Silmarillion memorized, you will be disappointed. As potentially the last Tolkien adaptation to be seen on film, it left something to be to be desired. There is a lot to see and hear, but little substance. The bizarre Elf-Dwarf-Elf love triangle was hardly believable. While Evangeline Lilly makes a formidable elf-warrior, Kate’s feelings for Jack in Lost were more believable than Tauriel’s feelings for Kili. And did I forget to mention that she is not a real Tolkien character? Her attempt to save Kili also seemed to cheapen the importance of his death. Personally, I thought her character was distracting and superfluous… which might have been the point. The movie has very little dialogue, but the dialogue that is there is well done. Bilbo is still a very lovable character, and his unusual Hobbit heroics are commendable. However, I would have liked to have seen more of Thorin’s struggle with the ‘dragon sickness’… It was very short-lived and the seriousness of this mental illness and its effect on Bilbo and his fellow dwarves was understated. My final criticism is of the battle between the nine Nazgul, Galadriel, Elrond, and Saruman. First, I am fairly certain this battle is not in the book. Second, it looked like a video game with good CGI, but CGI nonetheless. It was a bit trippy and I almost laughed a couple of times… I am glad I saw it in the theatre, but The Battle of the Five Armies was not Peter Jackson’s best work. If only good film makers would learn that when you can only engage two senses, you have to add some substance. Good dialogue and a solid plot line make the difference between a good film and a great film, especially when it’s a book adaptation. But sadly, I think money speaks louder than words in Hollywood. Meryl Kaleida Meryl Kaleida is Production Assistant and E-book Editor at Ignatius Press. She is also a guest writer for Catholic Word Report. She graduated from Ave Maria University with a Bachelors in Theology and Literature. Meryl is a wife, gardener, singer, author, chef, artist and lover of truth. Her short story "I Couldn't Help but Notice" is available as an eBook. You can also learn more about Meryl on her website Kaleida House. Tags: film movie reviews novels to movies The Hobbit I heartily agree with Meryl’s comments on this film. The battle with the Nazgul does not take place, as far as I know, in any of Tolkien’s oeuvre. Like the female warrior elf and so much else in this trilogy, it is a Peter Jackson invention. I also started laughing during that scene with Elrond, Galadriel, and Saruman. It was nothing but fodder for the video game crowd. Adding stuff to literary works that didn’t need it is not the most absurd thing Jackson has done. After this last offering his hi-tech laden fantasy-superhero-franchise trilogy Jackson attacked other directors for relying too heavily on technology in superhero fanchise films (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Wait-Peter-Jackson-Thinks-Other-Directors-Rely-Too-Much-Technology-68760.html): “I don’t really like the Hollywood blockbuster bandwagon that exists right now. The industry and the advent of all the technology, has kind of lost its way. It’s become very franchise driven and superhero driven.” Pot? Meet kettle. Opinions expressed on the Novel Thoughts weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles. © Ignatius Press. All rights reserved. AMDG+

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511968

__label__cc

You are here: Home » News Posts » Eagle Hospital Physicians Completes Second Hospitalist Practice Management... Eagle Hospital Physicians Completes Second Hospitalist Practice Management Acquisition Dallas, Texas – August 8, 2011 – Eagle Hospital Physicians, Inc. (“Eagle”), a portfolio company of private equity firms Highlander Partners, L.P. and Flexpoint Ford, LLC, today announced the acquisition of Inpatient Management, Inc. (“IMI”), a hospitalist practice management company based in St. Louis, Missouri. Following the acquisition of IMI, Eagle, which also completed the acquisition of PrimeDoc Management Services (“PrimeDoc”) of Asheville, North Carolina in July 2011, now employs more than 400 full-time physicians and provides contract hospitalist management services to 43 hospitals in 17 states across the U.S. Founded in 1997, IMI, which manages 13 hospitalist practices across eleven states in the Midwest, Southeast and West, employs more than 90 full-time physicians. In addition to fully staffing and managing numerous hospitalist programs, IMI uniquely provides practice management services that enable hospitals to benefit from IMI’s practice management skills and experience while employing the hospital’s own professional staff. IMI’s senior management team, led by IMI’s founder and CEO, Kirk Matthews, will continue to play an integral role in management of Eagle going forward. “IMI is a highly respected company and has been a pioneer in the industry since its founding,” said Brent McCarty, chief executive officer at Eagle. “IMI’s experience and knowledge, particularly managing hospitalist programs in which the hospital employs the physician and IMI provides the management services, is a model that many hospitals are considering with the advent of health care reform and Accountable Care Organizations.” Following the acquisitions of PrimeDoc and IMI, Eagle has the capability to provide value-added, high-quality services and patient care to its hospital partners under a variety of operating models. This enables Eagle to continue its focus on being a very flexible partner to its hospital clients, designing and managing practices that best meet the needs and goals of the hospital and its staff. Bobby Sussman, a partner at Highlander Partners, commented, “We continue to be very pleased with the platform that Eagle has developed and believe strongly that the Company has positioned itself to provide the highest quality of inpatient care in an efficient manner that produces superior results for its hospital clients and their patients.” Terry Hyman, a senior principal at Flexpoint Ford, added, “We are excited about the prospects of the combination of Eagle, IMI and PrimeDoc. Flexpoint Ford and Highlander Partners remain committed to continue to provide substantial additional capital to support future growth initiatives of Eagle.” About Eagle Hospital Physicians Eagle Hospital Physicians, a leading group hospitalist practice committed to elevating healthcare, develops and manages hospitalist practices for client hospitals. Founded in 1998, Eagle’s mission is to deliver inpatient professional services that exceed today’s standards and continue to improve quality, satisfaction and efficiency. For more information, visit www.eaglehospitalphysicians.com. About Flexpoint Ford, LLC Flexpoint Ford, LLC is an equity investment firm focused on the healthcare and financial services industries. Flexpoint Ford seeks to build relationships with executives and companies who look for Flexpoint Ford to be a value-added partner. Flexpoint Ford aims to invest $10 to $100 million of equity in each opportunity. For more information about Flexpoint Ford, please visit www.flexpointford.com. ← Highlander Portfolio Company Eagle Hospital Physicians Acquires PrimeDoc Management Services (previous entry) (next entry) Highlander Partners Expands Senior Management Team and Announces Promotions →

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511970

__label__wiki

HomeNeighborhoodsDupont Circle History and Hops at Heurich’s House November 23, 2013 November 23, 2013 Historic District Breweries, Dupont Circle, Homes, Washingtonians Brewmaster's Castle, Christian Heurich, DC Brau, Heurich House Museum, History & Hops This week, three of my favorite things were combined into one evening: local D.C. lore, great craft beer, and an historic house tour. That’s the premise behind the Heurich House Museum’s monthly History & Hops event – and seriously, what could be better? It brings together local brewers (happily a growing breed in the District) and the Brewmaster’s Castle – the museum and mansion that was home to Washington, D.C.’s most successful brewer, Christian Heurich (pronounced HI-Rick). The house has been an iconic place for me since I moved to D.C. Located just off Dupont Circle on New Hampshire Ave, you can’t miss it’s odd shape, Old World architecture, and imposing stone turret. It’s instantly recognizable to Washingtonians, even though most would be hard-pressed to tell you the history behind it. Luckily it’s a fun tale, best told over a cold brew. Christian Heurich’s Dupont Circle mansion, also known as the Brewmaster’s Castle. French Connections for Bastille Day July 14, 2013 July 14, 2013 Historic District Architects, Dupont Circle, George Washington, Homes, Museum Exhibits, Museums, Restaurants, Statues, Washingtonians Anderson House, Bastille, George Washington, Larz Anderson, Marquis de Lafayette, Mount Vernon, Old Town Alexandria, Pierre Charles L'Enfant, Society of the Cincinnati This weekend in D.C. had a decidedly French flavor, and that’s before I even realized that today was Bastille Day. On Saturday I visited the Society of the Cincinnati, an organization founded at the close of the Revolutionary War by French and American officers to preserve the bonds forged during that long struggle. George Washington, the general who helped unify the Continental Army and the colonies, served as its first president. Among its ranks, there were two founding French members who would be well known to future Washingtonians – the Marquis de Lafayette and Pierre Charles L’Enfant. A mural in sumptuous Anderson House showing Washington and Lafayette and the founding of the Society of the Cincinnati. Lafayette was the young French aristocrat who ending up playing a key role in both the American and French Revolutions, and whose name and statue grace the park on the north side of the White House. And L’Enfant of course was the talented but difficult engineer and artist who served General Washington during the war, and was later selected by him during peacetime to design our first capitol – Federal Hall in New York City – and then the capital, the District of Columbia. Beertown August 25, 2012 July 21, 2013 Historic District Breweries, Dupont Circle, Foggy Bottom 3 Stars Brewing Company, Chocolate City, Christian Heurich, DC Brau, Foggy Bottom Lager In the past couple of years, the District has become a veritable beertown. DC Brau Brewery started the wave of new microbrews in the District when it opened up its brewery last year. Chocolate City Beer soon followed suit, and today 3 Stars Brewing Company officially tapped its kegs in the Takoma neighborhood. Before DC Brau, the District had been without a local brewery since 1956. That was the year when the iconic Chr. Heurich Brewing Co. shut its The old Heurich Brewery on the Potomac. It had been founded by German immigrant Christian Heurich (pronounced “Hi-rick”) in 1873 near Dupont Circle, and soon became the most successful brewery in town. Unbuilt Washington November 21, 2011 September 16, 2012 Historic District Abraham Lincoln, Architects, Architecture, Capitol, Congress, Dupont Circle, Kennedy Center, McMillan Plan, Monuments and Memorials, Museum Exhibits, National Mall, Public Spaces, Ulysses S. Grant, White House Abraham Lincoln, Andrea Palladio, Cairo Hotel, Capitol, Congress House, Dolphin America, John Russell Pope, Lincoln Memorial, Meridian Hill, National Aquarium, National Building Museum, President's House, T.F. Schenider, Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant, Unbuilt Washington, White House In conversation, some things are better left unsaid – and in the Historic District, some things are better left unbuilt. That’s the unspoken commentary behind a new exhibit that opened at the National Building Museum this past weekend. “Unbuilt Washington” explores the monuments and buildings – and occasional Venetian-style canal – that might have graced the District, if only they had made it past the drawing board. There’s the colossal pyramid honoring Abraham Lincoln, or the medieval-style Memorial Bridge dedicated to Ulysses S. Grant, or the new executive mansion built further up 16th Street, atop Meridian Hill. The U.S. Grant Memorial Bridge As a D.C. guide, I thought this exhibit was a pretty fascinating tour of an alternate Washington. And with Thanksgiving approaching, I was also left feeling grateful that some of these outlandish structures were left unbuilt – either through lack of funds, shifting priorities, or public outcry. The exhibit reminds you that from its inception, the federal capital has presented a veritable blank slate for architectural imaginations and often competing notions of national expression. Presidential Gridlock February 3, 2011 September 16, 2012 Historic District Dupont Circle, Historic Hotels, Presidents Barack Obama, Dupont Circle, John Hinckley, Jr., National Prayer Breakfast, Ronald Reagan, Washington Hilton This morning there was gridlock in the District. No, not the political wrangling between a Democratic president and a newly Republican Congress. It was the traffic kind. The kind that begins with a capital “O.” I was running out the door a little late (a rare occurrence), and I spotted a bus at the end of my street, turning down Connecticut Ave. This wasn’t just any bus – it was a 43. For those who don’t live in the District, that’s the express bus that runs under Dupont Circle, and deposits me in front of my office in less than 4 minutes, like some sort of cosmic wormhole. It appeared to be momentarily stopped at the corner, so I jogged to the end of my street and knocked on the door. The bus driver let me in, but then declared that we wouldn’t be going anywhere anytime soon. I looked through the windshield, and saw a line of cars and buses ahead of us, all frozen in place. Presidential gridlock in the District. Then I noticed the ubiquitous D.C. police cars blocking traffic, and the motorcycle motorcade parked and at the ready. “It’s Obama,” she said.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511975

__label__wiki

Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume XX, Southeast Asia, 1969–1972 Abrams, General Creighton W., USA, Commander, U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam; Army Chief of Staff from July 1972 Agnew, Spiro T., Vice President of the United States Aichi, Kiichi, Japanese Foreign Minister until July 1971 Alamsjah, H., Indonesian State Secretary Anand Panyarachun, Thai Ambassador to the United States from 1972 Anderson, Jack, syndicated newspaper columnist, “Washington Merry-Go-Round” Aquino, Benigo S., Jr., Philippines Liberal Party Secretary-General Arun Panupong, Thai Chargé d’ Affaires, Thai Embassy Asa Sarasin, Director of Southeast Asia Division, Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs Atherton, Alfred L., Jr., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, March 1970–April 1974 Barger, Herman H., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, 1970–1973 Barnett, Robert W., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs until 1970 Behr, Colonel Robert M., USAF, senior staff member, National Security Council Operations Staff for Scientific Affairs, 1969–1971 Bekker, Konrad, Economic Counselor, U.S. Embassy Bangkok, until 1971 BeLieu, Kenneth F., Under Secretary of the Army from September 1971 Bergesen, Alfred E., Acting Director for Thailand/Burma Affairs, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State Bergsten, C. Fred, member, National Security Council Operations Staff/International Economic Affairs, January 1969–June 1971 Black, Eugene R., Special Adviser to President Johnson on Southeast Asia Blee, David, Chief, Near East and South Asia Division, Directorate of Operations, Central Intelligence Agency Brandt, Willy, West German Foreign Minister until October 1969; thereafter, Chancellor Bray, Charles W., III, Director, Office of Press Relations, Department of State from March 1971 Brewster, Robert C., Deputy Executive Secretary, Department of State, July 1969–August 1971 Brezhnev, Leonid Ilyich, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Brown, Winthrop G., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs until April 1972 Bruce, David K.E., Ambassador to the United Kingdom until March 1969; head of the U.S. delegation to the Paris Peace Talks on Vietnam, 1970–1971 Bundy, William P., Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs until May 4, 1969 Bunker, Ellsworth, Ambassador to the Republic of Vietnam Butterfield, Alexander P., Deputy Assistant to the President Byroade, Henry A., Ambassador to the Philippines from August 29, 1969 Cargo, William I., Director of the Policy Planning Staff, Department of State, from August 4, 1969 Carver, George A., Special Assistant for Vietnamese Affairs to the Director of Central Intelligence Case, Clifford, Representative (R–New Jersey) Cau Van Vien, General, Chairman, Joint General Staff, Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces Chapin, Frank M., member, National Security Council staff and Staff Secretary to the 303/40 Committee Charunphan, Isarangkun, Thai Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Chiang Ching-kuo, Son of Chiang Kai-shek; Minister of Defense, Republic of China, until 1969; Vice Premier of the Executive Yuan from 1969–1972; Premier from 1972; member, Kuomintang Standing Committee and the Republic of China National Security Council Chiang Kai-shek, President of the Republic of China Chi P’eng-fei, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, People’s Republic of China, until April 1971; Acting Foreign Minister until February 1972; Foreign Minister from February 1972 Chou En-lai, Premier of the People’s Republic of China Church, Frank, Senator (D–Idaho) Churchill, Malcom H., Country Officer, Office of Indonesian Affairs, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State Cline, Ray S., Director, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State, from October 26, 1969 Connolly, John B., Jr., Secretary of the Treasury, February 1971–May 1972 Cooper, John Sherman, Senator (R–Kentucky) Curran, Robert, Deputy Executive Secretary, Department of State, August 1970–August 1972 Cushman, Lieutenant General Robert E., Jr., USMC, Deputy Director of Central Intelligence, May 1969–December 1971; thereafter, Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps, from January 1, 1972 Dawee Chullasaspyra, Marshal, RTA; Deputy Minister of Defense, Thai Chief of Staff of the Supreme Command of Thailand Davies, Rodger P., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs Davis, Jeanne W., Director, National Security Council Staff Secretariat, 1970–1971; Staff Secretary, NSC Staff Secretariat, after 1971 De Palma, Samuel, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs from February 7, 1969 Dexter, John B., Country Director, Thailand/Burma, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State from August 1969 Dobrynin, Anatoliy F., Soviet Ambassador to the United States Doolin, Dennis J., Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs responsible for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Ehrlichman, John D., Counsel to the President, January–November 1969; Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs after November 1969 Eisenhower, Dwight D., President of the United States, 1953–1961 Eliot, Theodore L., Jr., Special Assistant to the Secretary and Executive Secretary of the Department of State from August 10, 1969 Esenbel, Melih, Turkish Ambassador to the United States Finch, Robert, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Frelinghuysen, Peter H., Representative (R–New Jersey) Froehlke, Robert F., Assistant Secretary of Defense for Administration, January 1969– June 1971; thereafter, Secretary of the Army Fulbright, J. William, Senator (D–Arkansas), Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Galbraith, Francis J., Ambassador to Indonesia from May 1969 Gandhi, Indira, Prime Minister of India Getz, John I., Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, January 1969–1971 Gleysteen, Dirk, Director, Secretariat Staff, Department of State, until 1971 Godley, George McMurtire, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs until May 1969; Ambassador to Laos after July 24, 1969 Goldwater, Barry M., Senator (R–Arizona) Grant, Lindsey, member, National Security Council Operations Staff/East Asia, February 1969–August 1970; member, Planning and Coordination Staff, Department of State, June 1971–November 1972 Green, Marshall, Ambassador to Indonesia until January 1969; thereafter, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, May 1, 1969–May 10, 1973; also, Chairman, Special Group on Southeast Asia from May 1970 Greene, Joseph N., Jr., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, August 1969–March 1970 Gromyko, Andrei A., Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union Gross, Nelson G., Ambassador and Senior Adviser to the Secretary of State and Coordinator for International Narcotics Matters from August 1971 Habib, Philip C., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs until May 1969; member of U.S. delegation to the Paris Peace Talks until October 1971; thereafter, Ambassador to Korea Haig, Brigadier General Alexander M., Jr., USA, Senior Military Adviser to the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, January 1969–June 1970; Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs from June 1970 Haldeman, H.R., Assistant to the President and White House Chief of Staff Halperin, Morton, Assistant for Programs, National Security Council Staff until September 1969 Handley, William J., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs until May 1969; thereafter, Ambassador to Turkey Hannah, John A., Administrator, Agency for International Development from April 1969 Hannah, Norman B., Counselor and Deputy Chief of Mission, U.S. Embassy Bangkok until 1970 Hardin, Clifford M., Secretary of Agriculture, January 1969–December 1971 Harlow, Bryce N., Assistant to the President for Congressional Relations, January 1969–January 1970; thereafter, Counselor to the President Hatfield, Mark O., Senator (R–Oregon) Hartman, Arthur A., Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of State and Staff Director for the National Security Council Under Secretaries’ Committee until August 1969; thereafter, Deputy Director for Coordination Helms, Richard M., Director of Central Intelligence Ho Chi Minh, leader of the Vietnamese Communist Party and President of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam until his death on September 3, 1969 Holdrige, John Herbert, Director, Office of Research and Analysis for East Asia and the Pacific, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State, until July 1969; thereafter, member, National Security Council Operations Staff responsible for East Asia Hongladarom, Sunthorn, Thai Ambassador to the United States until 1972 Hormats, Robert D., member, National Security Council Operations Staff/International Economic Affairs, 1970–1972 Houdek, Robert, member, National Security Council staff, January 1969–July 1971 Howe, Lieutenant Commander Jonathan, member, National Security Council Staff, 1970–1972 Hughes, Thomas L., Director, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State, until August 1969 Hummel, Arthur W., Jr., Ambassador to Burma until July 22, 1971; Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs from February 1972 Humphrey, Hubert H., Vice President of the United States until January 20, 1969; Senator (D–Minnesota) from January 1971 Ingersoll, John, Director, Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, Department of Justice Inouye, Daniel K., Senator (D–Hawaii) Irwin, John N., II, Under Secretary of State, September 1970–July 1972; thereafter, Deputy Secretary of State Jenkins, Alfred le Sesne, Director, Office of Asian Communist Affairs, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State, from July 1971 Jira Vichitsonggram, General, Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on Security, Thailand Johnson, Lyndon B., President of the United States, November 1963–January 1969 Johnson, Vice Admiral Nels C., USN, Director of the Joint Staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff until July 19, 1970 Johnson, U. Alexis, Ambassador to Japan until January 1969; Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs from February 1969 Karamessines, Thomas H., Deputy Director for Plans, Central Intelligence Agency Kennedy, David M., Secretary of the Treasury, January 1969–January 1971; thereafter, Ambassador at Large for Foreign Economic Development from February 11, 1971; U.S. Permanent Representative, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, from March 17, 1972 Kennedy, Colonel Richard T., USA, member, National Security Council Planning Group Kishi, Nobusuke, former Japanese Prime Minister Kissinger, Henry A., Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs after January 1969 Knowles, Richard T., member, National Security Council staff Kosygin, Aleksei N., Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union Kotschnig, Walter M., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs until 1971 Kriangsak Chamanan, Lieutenant General, Thai Deputy Chief of Staff of the Supreme Command Kuznetsov, Vasily V., First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union Lagdameo, Ernesto V., Philippine Ambassador to the United States, 1969–1970 Laird, Melvin R., Secretary of Defense after January 1969 Lake, W. Anthony, member, National Security Council Planning Group until April 1970 Lodge, Henry Cabot, II, Head of the U.S. delegation to the Paris Peace Talks on Vietnam, January 20–November 20, 1969 Lon Nol, General, FARK, First Vice President of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Defense of Cambodia; Acting Prime Minister and Minister of National Defense, June 1969; Prime Minister and Minister of National Defense after March 18, 1970 Lon Non, head of the Phnom Penh police and younger brother of Lon Nol Lord, Winston, member, Office of International Security Affairs, Department of Defense, until 1969; member, National Security Council Planning Group; staff member for United Nations Affairs, National Security Council Operations Staff, from 1971 Lowman, Shepard C., Country Officer, Office of Philippines Affairs, Bureau of Near Eastern and Pacific Affairs, Department of State Lynn, Laurence E., Jr., Director, National Security Council Program Analysis Staff, 1969–1971 Macapagal, Dosado, former President of the Philippines Macomber, William B., Jr., Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations until October 2, 1969; Deputy Under Secretary of State for Administration (title changed to Management after July 12, 1971) from September 1969 Maestrone, Frank E., Deputy Chief of Mission, U.S. Embassy Manila Malik, Adam, Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs and President, United Nations General Assembly, 1971 Mansfield, Mike, Senator (D–Montana), Senate Majority Leader Mao Tse-tung, Chairman, Chinese Communist Party and Politburo of the People’s Republic of China Marcos, Ferdinand E., President of the Philippines Marcos, Imelda, First Lady of the Philippines Martin, Graham M., former Ambassador to Thailand; Ambassador to Italy from October 30, 1969 Masters, Edward E., Country Director for Indonesian Affairs until September 1970; thereafter, Director for Regional Affairs, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State Mayo, Robert P., Director, Bureau of the Budget, January 1969–July 1970; thereafter, Counselor to the President, July 1970–1972 McAfee, William, Deputy Director, Directorate for Coordination, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State McCain, Admiral John S., Jr., USN, Commander in Chief, Pacific until September 1, 1972 McCarthy, Eugene, Senator (D–Minnesota) McClintock, Robert, Ambassador to Venezuela, 1970; Chairman, Interdepartmental Coordinating Group (Symington Subcommittee), Department of State representative to White House Working Group McCloskey, Robert J., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Press Relations and Special Assistant to the Secretary from July 1969; also Ambassador at Large McGovern, George S., Senator (D–South Dakota) and Democratic nominee for president in 1972 McNamara, Robert S., former Secretary of Defense; President, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, World Bank Meyer, Charles A., Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs and U.S. Coordinator, Alliance for Progress, from April 1969 Moore, Jonathan, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, September 1969–June 1970 Moorer, Admiral Thomas H., USN, Chief of Naval Operations until July 1970; thereafter, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Moose, Richard M., member, National Security Council Staff, 1969–1970 Murphy, George, Senator (R–California) Nelson, William E., Director, Office of Asian Affairs, Directorate of Operations, Central Intelligence Agency Newman, George S., Deputy Chief of Mission, U.S. Embassy Bangkok, June 1970–November 1971 Nguyen Cao Ky, Vice President of the Republic of Vietnam Nguyen Giap Vo, General, PAVN, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defense, Democratic Republic of Vietnam Nguyen Thi Binh, Head of the Provisional Revolutionary Government’s Delegation to the Paris Peace Talks on Vietnam Nguyen Van Thieu, President of the Republic of Vietnam Nixon, Richard M., President of the United States Nutter, G. Warren, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, March 4, 1969–January 30, 1972 Odeen, Philip, Director, National Security Council Program Analysis Staff, from November 1971 Okum, Herbert, Deputy Director, Office of Soviet Union Affairs, Bureau of European and Canadian Affairs, Department of State Packard, David M., Deputy Secretary of Defense, January 24, 1969–December 13, 1971 Palmby, Clarence D., Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Passman, Otto, Representative (D–Louisiana) Pedersen, Richard F., Counselor of the Department of State after January 24, 1969 Percy, Charles, Senator (R–Illinois) Peterson, Peter G., Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs and Executive Director of the Council for International Economic Policy, 1971–1972, Secretary of Commerce from January 1972 Pickering, Laurence G., Officer in Charge of Thai Affairs, Department of State, until June 1970; thereafter, Counselor, U.S. Embassy Bangkok Pierson, George K., Office Director for Southeast Asia, Bureau of East Asia, Agency for International Development Pogorny, N.V., Chairman, Praesidium of the Supreme Soviet Popple, Paul M., Office Director, Office of Research and Analysis for East Asia and Pacific, Department of State Pote Sarasin, Thai Minister of National Development, Thai SEATO council member Praphat Charusthein (Prapass Charusathiara), General, RTA, Deputy Prime Minister of Thailand Prasit Kanjonawatana, Thai Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs Pursley, Brigadier General Robert E., USAF, Military Assistant to the Secretary of Defense until November 1972 Rafferty, James F., Special Assistant, U.S. Embassy Manila Ratliff, Rob Roy, Executive Secretary of the 40 Committee Richardson, Elliot L., Under Secretary of State, January 1969–June 1970 Robinson, Davis R., staff assistant, Office of the Secretary of State Rogers, William P., Secretary of State, January 21, 1969–September 1973 Romualdez, Benjamin (Kokoi), Marcos’ campaign minister and brother-in-law Rush, Kenneth W., Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany, July 8, 1969–February 20, 1972; Deputy Secretary of Defense, February 23, 1972–January 1973; Deputy Secretary of State, February 2, 1973–May 29, 1974 Rusk, Dean, Secretary of State until January 20, 1969 Russell, Richard B., Senator (D–Georgia) Sani, Ch. Anwar, Director General for Political Affairs, Indonesia Saunders, Harold H., member, National Security Council staff, 1969–1971 Sawaeng Senanarong, General, Thai Government House Secretary-General Selden, Armistead, I., Jr., Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Shakespeare, Frank M., Director, United States Information Agency, after February 1969 Shultz, George P., Secretary of Labor, January 20, 1969–June 10, 1970; Director, Office of Management and Budget, June 1970–May 1972; thereafter, Secretary of Treasury Sihanouk, Prince Norodom, Cambodian Head of State until March 1970; thereafter, leader of Cambodian Government in exile in Peking Sisco, Joseph J., Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs until February 1969; thereafter, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs; also Chairman of the NSC Interdepartmental Group for the Near East and South Asia Sison, Jose Maria, Chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines Smith, K. Wayne, Director, National Security Council Policy Analysis Branch, 1971– 1972 Smyser, W. Richard, adviser to the delegation to the Paris Peace Talks on Vietnam, 1969; member, National Security Council Operations Staff/East Asia, 1970–1972 Sneider, Richard L., member, National Security Council Operations Staff/East Asia Division, May 1969–September 1969; Deputy Chief of Mission in Japan, September 1969– July 1972; thereafter, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs from August 1972 Souvanna Phouma, Prince, Prime Minister of Laos Spear, Moncrieff J., Country Director, Thailand/Burma, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State, until October 1970 Spiers, Ronald I., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Politico-Military Affairs, August– September 1969; thereafter, Director, Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs Srey Saman, General, Chief of Staff of the Cambodian Army Stans, Maurice, Secretary of Commerce, January 1969–January 1972 Starbird, Linwood, Country Director, Thailand/Burma, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State Stennis, John D., Senator (D–Mississippi) Sudjatmoko, Indonesian Ambassador to the United States Sudomo, Vice Admiral, Chief of Staff, Indonesian Navy Suharto, President of Indonesia Sukarno, former President of Indonesia Sullivan, William H., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs from April 1969; also Chairman of the Ad Hoc Group on Vietnam Surakit Mayalap, Thai Army Chief of Staff Suthi Nartworathat, Deputy Under Secretary of State, Thai Ministry of Economic Affairs Swank, Emory C., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, June 1969–September 1970; thereafter, Ambassador to Cambodia Symington, W. Stuart, Senator (D–Missouri); Chairman, Subcommittee of U.S. Security Arrangements and Commitments Abroad, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thajeb, Indonesian Ambassador to the United States Thanat Khoman, Foreign Minister of Thailand until November 17, 1971 Thanom Kittikachorn, Field Marshal, RTA; Prime Minister of Thailand, 1969–1971; Thai Foreign Minister from 1972 Thant, U, Secretary-General of the United Nations until December 1971 Tito, Josip Broz, President of Yugoslavia Tomseth, Victor L., Political Officer, U.S. Embassy Bangkok, from April 1970 Tran Thien Khiem, Prime Minister of the Republic of Vietnam until late 1969 Tran Van Huong, Prime Minister of the Republic of Vietnam after late 1969 Trudeau, Pierre-Elliott, Prime Minister of Canada Truehart, William C., Deputy Director for Coordination, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State, until September 1969 Umar Wirahadikusumah, Lieutenant General, Indonesian Army Chief of Staff Unger, Leonard, Ambassador to Thailand Usher, Richard E., Country Director, Philippines, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State, from August 1969 Vaky, Viron P. (Pete), Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, January–May 1969; member, National Security Council Operations Staff/Latin America, May 1969–September 1972; thereafter, Ambassador to Costa Rica from September 11, 1972 Vang Pao, General, RLA, Commander of Military Region II and leader of the Meo (Hmong) forces Vicharn Nivatvong, Director-General, Department of Foreign Trade, Thai Ministry of Economic Affairs Walsh, John P., Acting Executive Secretary, Department of State, February–October 1969 Wanzeck, William T., Narcotics Attaché, U.S. Embassy Bangkok Westmoreland, General William C., USA, Army Chief of Staff until June 1972 Wheeler, General Earle G., USA, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, until July 2, 1970 Widjojo Nitisastro, Chairman, Indonesian National Planning Board Williams, G. Mennen, Ambassador to the Philippines until April 1969 Wolff, Lester, Representative (D–New York) Wright, W. Marshall, Country Director, Philippines, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of State until May 1970; member, National Security Council Operations Staff/African and UN Affairs, June 1970–April 1972; Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations, April–December 1972 Yost, Charles W., U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, January 22, 1969–February 25, 1971 Ziegler, Ronald, L., Press Secretary to the President Southeast Asia, 1969–1972 Note on U.S. Covert Actions Southeast Asia (Documents 1-185) Philippines (Documents 186-265) Indonesia (Documents 266-332) Chiang Kai-shekLon Nol, GeneralSymington, W. Stuart FAR or FARKNSCPAVNRLARTASEATOUNUSAUSAFUSMCUSN

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511977

__label__cc

Tag Archives: youtube video Public Service Announcement Adam Bouska …. NOH8! Posted on March 5, 2014 by Dr. Rex ~~March 5, 2014~~ Adam Bouska Adam was born October 31, 1983 in Decatur, Illinois. He is an award winning American fashion photographer who runs a photography studio based out of West Hollywood, California. He is known for pictures of male models in particular, and is considered a rising ‘superstar photographer‘ in the gay community. His work has been printed in DNA Magazine and reFRESH and has already been featured on a variety of shows and mediums including The New York Times, Life & Style magazine, Guinness Book of World Records 2010, Chelsea Lately, TODAY show, The View, Million Dollar Listing, Millionaire Matchmaker and CNBC. He is also noted for his work with celebrities Barry Manilow, Meghan McCain, James Kyson Lee, Alexa Ray Joel, Deepak Chopra, Lisa Ling, Lt. Dan Choi, Armani Exchange model, Ryan Barry, America’s Next Top Models: Bre Scullark, Michelle Deighton, Amanda Babin and Michelle Babin, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy‘s Jai Rodriguez, and JD Jordan from Bravo’s Work Out. Bouska is openly gay. He lives in West Hollywood, California and was recognized as the community’s leading photographer at the West Hollywood awards in January 2007. The NOH8 Campaign (pronounced “no hate campaign“) is a charitable organization in the United States whose mission is to promote marriage, gender and human equality through education, advocacy, social media, and visual protest. The main goal of NOH8 is to promote marriage, gender and human equality, regardless of the cultural group one may associate with. Through education, advocacy, social media, visual protest and the use of famous celebrities as spokespersons, this campaign raises awareness of marriage equality and anti-discrimination on a global level, incorporating almost 30,000 faces with support continually growing. The campaign was created as photographic silent protest created by celebrity photographer Adam Bouska and partner Jeff Parshley in direct response to the passage of Proposition 8. Photos feature subjects with duct tape over their mouths, symbolizing their voices being silenced by Prop 8 and similar legislation around the world, with “NOH8” painted on one cheek in protest. The phrase refers to “H8” (leet for ‘hate’), short for “Proposition H8” (pronounced “proposition hate”), a nickname used by critics of the proposition. The photos are featured on the campaign’s website, as well as various social networks, as well as a virtual world campaign in Second Life. Nearly four years since its inception, the NOH8 Campaign has expanded at an increasing rate, with more than 33,000 photos taken at 120 open photo shoots in 43 U.S. states. The campaign started with portraits of everyday Californians of various nationalities, and soon rose to include politicians, military personnel, newlyweds, law enforcement, artists, celebrities, and various others. The images are widely used on various social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter to spread the message of equality. Some photographers and student groups have even set up their own photoshoots. The campaign photos have circulated on the internet and are appearing on many supporter’s social networking profiles. Both LGBT and non-LGBT people have participated in the photoshoots. NOH8 Campaign Main article: NOH8 Campaign Bouska and NOH8 Campaign members at the Los Angeles LGBT pride parade in 2011 In November 2008, in response to the narrow approval in California of Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage, Bouska and his partner, Jeff Parshley, founded the NOH8 Campaign to promote the overturn of this ban. While beginning at a grassroots level, by April 2009 the campaign had seen support from such celebrities as Leslie Jordan, Shanna Moakler, and RichGirl; and became involved in the Miss USA 2009 controversy. The campaign has now gained the support of other notables, including Adam Carolla, Brooke Burke, Cindy McCain, Fran Drescher, Dr. Drew, Kathy Griffin, Denise Richards, Jane Lynch, Mark Hoppus, Lisa Edelstein, Rose McGowan, and Steve-O. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOH8_Campaign Here’s a gallery of some of the many celebrities who have posed for this campaign. ~~Pope Francis~~ ~~Model Ryan Barry shows some skin for NoH8~~ ~~Jane Lynch~~ ~~Larry King~~ ~~CHER~~ ~~Lance Bass~~ ~~Kathy Griffin~~ ~~Ricky Martin~~ ~~Taylor Swift~~ ~~Adam Lambert~~ ~~Zach and his Moms~~ ~~Kat Von D~~ ~~Chely Wright …. Country singer~~ Read more at: http://www.heavy.com/entertainment/2013/06/prop-8-doma-supreme-court-celebrity-tweet-twitter/ ~~Lyd and Rose~~ We stand with you! (Pictured: Team #Russia from the World Outgames 2013 – Antwerp) See more pictures here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/lollaparooza/awesome-celebrity-pictures-from-the-no-h8-campaign-8s5g NOH8 Campaigns Im Coming Out PSA http://www.noh8campaign.com NOH8 Campaign is proud to release it’s 2nd PSA titled “I’m Coming Out” to help raise awareness about Propostion 8 and Marriage Equality On Wednesday in June 2013, the Supreme Court made two highly anticipated decisions on same-sex marriage, striking down the Defense of Marriage Act and dismissing California’s Proposition 8 case. In neither decision did the Supreme Court legalize same-sex marriage nationally — that will require a lot more legislation. But for those in a same-sex marriage already, their rights just broadened exponentially. ~~THERE’S STILL A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE~~ ~~Source~~ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/26/doma-prop-8-decisions-explained-what-it-all-means.html ~~Horty and Maryjane~~ We ALL fight the fight!! Posted in Blogging, Education, Entertainment, Equality, Graphics, Human, Human RIghts, Information, Inspirational, Music, Natural, Pictures, Politics, Profession, Spiritual, WordPress, youtube video | Tagged A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE, Adam Bouska NOH8 Campaign Phographer, Adam Lambert Joleen Swettin Zach Moms Chely Wright Rose and Lyd, American fashion photographer photography studio West Hollywood California, and soon rose to include politicians, artists, celebrities, Dr Rex Equality News Information Education, law enforcement, LGBT community Orlando Florida Fight the fight We all are one, military personnel, Model Ryan Barry Jane Lynch Larry King Cher Lance Bass Kathy Griffin Ricky Martin Taylor Swfit, newlyweds, NOH8 Campaign pronounced no hate campaign charitable organization United States mission promote marriage gender human equality education advocacy social media visual protest, noted for work celebrities, photographic silent protest celebrity photographer Adam Bouska partner Jeff Parshley, Pope Francis Raven Symone, portraits of everyday Californians of various nationalities, Russian Team Dr Rex Photoshop, social networking sites Facebook Twitter, Supreme Court DOMA June 2013, youtube video Public Service Announcement | 8 Replies

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511981

__label__wiki

The visa and the damage done Peter Mares Will history repeat itself when the Coalition’s temporary protection visa regulations reach the Senate? Peter Mares looks at the impact of Labor’s decision in 1999 No apologies: as immigration minister, Philip Ruddock warned state governments and community groups not to use Commonwealth funds to assist refugees on temporary protection visas. Julian Smith/ AAP Image THE Abbott government has revived the Howard-era policy of giving only temporary protection visas, or TPVs, to refugees who arrive in Australia without a valid entry permit. According to the most recent official statistics, there are almost 30,000 asylum seekers in Australia awaiting the outcome of their application for refugee status – about 23,000 of them living in the community on bridging visas and more than 6000 held in detention. As decisions are made on their cases, we are likely to see thousands of refugees experiencing intense anxiety about their uncertain futures, just as they did after TPVs were introduced in 1999. Community organisations and state and local government services will again be under pressure as they pick up the pieces of Commonwealth policy. TPV holders are denied the right to permanent settlement or to family reunion. They cannot travel outside Australia without giving up the right to return. They are not given access to settlement services like free English language classes, and they must pay the same fees as international students if they want to study beyond high school. The Howard-era regulations could have been disallowed by the combined vote of the non-Coalition parties in the Senate. But the federal Labor Party decided to vote with the government, even though Con Sciacca, the shadow minister for immigration, had told the ABC’s AM program that Labor tried a similar approach in government in 1990 and abandoned it as a costly failure. In government, Labor abolished TPVs. Back in opposition, the party now has the capacity to stop TPVs being reintroduced by joining with the Greens and disallowing the visa regulations in the Senate. Will Labor oppose the scheme, or is history about to repeat itself? In this edited extract from the 2002 edition of his book Borderline: Australia’s Response to Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the Wake of the Tampa Peter Mares tells the story of the Howard government’s TPV regime and its impact. FINDING stable long-term accommodation is one of the biggest problems facing Australia’s new “temporary” refugees. They qualify for rent assistance and can join the queue for emergency accommodation or long-term public housing, but they are not eligible for financial support in meeting the initial costs of setting up a household (such as buying beds or fridges). And if the refugees have trouble settling into Australia, or need legal or financial advice, they will have to find help outside the traditional network of Migrant Resource Centres. These centres receive funding from the immigration department, but the minister, Philip Ruddock, has barred them from using Commonwealth funds to assist refugees on temporary protection visas. Mr Ruddock makes no apology for this, and has warned other community groups not to use their immigration department funding to help people holding temporary protection visas. “It is certainly the case,” he told ABC TV’s Lateline, “that organisations funded to provide settlement services have been told that it is inappropriate to provide access to people who are here on a temporary basis.” He said that the support the refugees receive “was sufficient for Australians to remain viable in the community” and therefore “ought to be sufficient for these people.” Any additional services would only be an incentive for more people to come to Australia illegally. Mr Ruddock’s Liberal Party colleague and friend, John Olsen, then premier of South Australia, saw the situation rather differently. He told Four Corners that being denied English language classes would hardly act as a deterrent to people who “put their life into their own hands to take a boat trip across difficult waters to get to Australia.” Current Australian policy, according to Mr Olsen, creates “two classes of refugees.” When it comes to Australia’s new “temporary” refugees, the federal government has all but deserted the field. It falls to state governments and local communities to fill in the gaps between the bare boards of Centrelink payments and Medicare benefits. As premier of South Australia, John Olsen authorised the use of state resources – such as the TAFE system for English language training – to fill the void in services left by the Commonwealth. Similar initiatives have been taken in some other states. In Tasmania the state government provided grants to local councils to provide support services to TPV holders. In Victoria the state government paid the salary of a coordinator to help manage and organise services for “temporary” refugees and funded projects designed to assist them to settle into Australian society, through support with training, education and job hunting. While the Labor government in Victoria has voiced its opposition to the TPV policy, the state government of Queensland has gone one step further, adopting a formal policy that state based agencies will not discriminate between refugees who hold TPVs and refugees with a permanent right to stay in Australia. Both “classes” of refugees are eligible for the same level of services. In response to these initiatives the immigration minister issued a press release accusing Labor state governments of “funding incentives which will be used by people smugglers to encourage unlawful arrivals to Australia.” VISITING The Parks, a suburb in Adelaide’s northwest, I meet four men and one fifteen-year-old boy — a dentist, a shopkeeper, a shepherd, a farmer who is constantly fingering prayer beads, and the farmer’s son. Sameer, their case worker, and Mohammed, the shopkeeper, act as dual interpreters. The men are agitated, concerned for their short-term future. Their stay in this house has been limited to four weeks, and half of that time has already elapsed. Sameer managed to find the accommodation by twisting the arm of a contact in the state housing commission. “They bent their own rules,” Sameer tells me, “otherwise these guys would have been on the street and nowhere else.” Sameer also feels hassled. He has no idea where he can accommodate the men next. “The government is relying on local communities to help these people, but they don’t know what to do,” Sameer tells me. “You are asking for help from people who are already relatively powerless.” The men all express a desire to learn and to work. They want help, but not handouts. “I do not like to get the special benefit,” says Gulzari the dentist. “I would much rather work by my own hand. I know that they will not let me work as a dentist, but I hope that they will let me study some kind of course.” Their biggest concern is for their families, scattered across Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. “The new law is very harsh on us,” says Mohammed, referring to the TPV. Under the terms of the visa, the refugees cannot apply to sponsor their families to join them in Australia for at least three years; nor can they leave Australia to visit relatives living in safe countries abroad. “It is causing lots of anxiety and stress,” says Sameer. “Still, we say thank you to Australia that they have accepted us here,” adds Mohammed. “Our lives were in danger because of the Taliban. If they deported us back to Afghanistan, we would have been killed.” I get a deeper insight into the agony of the “temporary” refugee when I meet Hakim, another Afghan. In June 2000 he is living in an outer suburb of Melbourne, sharing a flat with a compatriot and, despite the restrictions on his visa, he has even managed to find some free English lessons. But Hakim does not feel grateful to Australia; in fact, he is angry and upset. This is not immediately obvious when we first meet. “I am living like a single man,” Hakim apologises, smiling warmly as he invites me in and immediately warms a bowl of spiced mutton soup in an aluminium saucepan. The flat is modest but tidy, a small gas stove keeps the cold at bay, and daytime television burbles away from a battered white portable on a desk in the corner. As our conversation proceeds, the television’s cheery tone becomes more and more incongruous. Hakim is forty-four, a father of five children and a grandfather of at least two. He’s not sure whether there may be more because he does not know the whereabouts of his wife and four of his children. Since he was jailed in 1994 Hakim has only had contact with his oldest daughter, who is living in Iran. Hakim’s anguish is caused by the knowledge that, while he is now safe, he must wait at least three years before he can do anything to trace his family or bring them to Australia. He wants to be allowed to go back to Pakistan or Iran to look for them, but this is impossible under the terms of his visa. Adding to Hakim’s uncertainty is the question of whether he will be allowed to settle in Australia permanently when his temporary visa expires. “If I stay here, I work, I read, I help Australian people,” he says. “I buy a house, I plant a garden. I think like an Australian. Now I think like an Afghan, because maybe after two or three years, I have to go back.” During our conversation, Hakim’s mood has shifted markedly. Bright at first, he is now increasingly morbid. He often rubs his palms against his forehead, drawing them down hard across his cheeks, as if trying to push away the pain. “To come to Australia is a bad chance for me,” he keeps repeating, angry at the treatment he has received, treatment he regards as dishonest. “When you came to my door,” he says, “I helped you. I invited you in and offered you food. If I could not help you, I would say, ‘Sorry, I can’t help you, please go away.’ If I invite you in, but offer you no food, offer you no bed to sleep in, then you would say, ‘Why did you ask me to come in at all, if you cannot help me?’ It is better to be honest at first, direct, face-to-face. Better for Australia to say, ‘I can’t help you, I don’t want refugees here.’” Hakim uses his hands to describe the pressure he feels – two clenched fists, pushing against one another. “Pressure this way and this way,” he says. “When I don’t know where my future is, then the depression problem comes back. There is no interest in living for me. Sometimes when I get out of bed in the morning, I am thinking, ‘Why I am living? Here is not my family or my children. For what are you living?’” Hakim is making a supreme effort to keep a hold on life. He takes antidepressants and attends regular counselling sessions at Foundation House for the survivors of torture (one of the few services not denied to “temporary” refugees). He is busy learning English, picking it up again for the first time since he was a teenager, when he was top of his class. Back then he was taught by a friendly American called Paul, who gave Hakim his black Chinese bicycle when he departed Afghanistan. It is a fond memory of a time before the Soviet invasion, a time when life still held promise. THE TPV policy also puts added stress on the bureaucracy of the immigration department itself. There are now some 8000 TPV holders in Australia. Unless they decide to leave Australia voluntarily, all these refugees will have to have their cases reviewed after thirty months, to determine whether or not they are still at risk of persecution in their homeland. This amounts to a repeat of the whole refugee determination procedure, both at the primary level and at the appeal level through the Refugee Review Tribunal. The most severe costs of government policy will be felt by the Australian community as a whole, because the TPV creates a marginalised and distraught community of refugees who live among us but not with us. As a result, these “temporary” refugees are likely to become high demand users of health and welfare services. As former human rights commissioner Chris Sidoti writes in the foreword to a report on TPV holders in the state of Victoria, “Is it in our own interest as Australians to have people here for periods of years who are insecure, traumatised, denied assistance to learn English, accorded a discriminatory status that inhibits their integration into the broader community, left unsupported by and worried about their spouses and children? Surely and self-evidently it is not.” The report he was introducing – Politics of Social Exclusion: Refugees on Temporary Protection Visas in Victoria – identified “despair, disillusionment and unusually high levels of anxiety and health disorders” among refugees on TPVs. It also documented the difficulty faced by “temporary” refugees in finding work, a problem not only due to poor English language skills and the lack of other training opportunities. Even refugees with professional qualifications and fluent English encounter problems because their insecure residency status makes them unattractive to prospective employers. All the refugees interviewed for the report expressed their appreciation for the special benefits payments they received via Centrelink, but said they nevertheless felt “insulted” by this government hand-out and would much rather be working. “Visa restrictions are not benefiting anyone including the government,” stated one of the TPV holders, who believed that if people had access to education and training, their increased rate of employment and/or business establishment would reduce the money the government is paying in benefits. Indeed, he added, “the working person will be paying the government with taxes.” Another woman participant added that this kind of approach would reduce isolation, and improve self-esteem and self-image, which in return will reduce the demand on mental health and physical health services. When a reporter from SBS TV’s Insight program raised these concerns directly with Minister Ruddock in March 2002, he refused to acknowledge that there was a problem. He described the provision of English language education to refugees as “delivering a service which helps someone in their life… [that]… doesn’t necessarily make our situation as an Australian community any better and more effective.” The reporter pressed Mr Ruddock on the issue, suggesting that forcing people to remain on the margins of society could not be beneficial to social cohesion. The minister responded by suggesting that the reporter wanted to “embrace” people who had broken Australian law and who had taken the place of a refugee in far greater need. “And what I’m saying is, ‘No, that embrace is not there.’” • Peter Mares is contributing editor of Inside Story and an adjunct fellow at the Swinburne Institute for Social Research. Topics: asylum seeekers | migration | refugees Essays & Reportage “I don’t want to be one of those absent fathers” Peter Mares 20 December 2019 How immigration law threatens to split a family Books & Arts White Australia’s hangover Peter Mares 2 December 2019 Books | A Labor MP offers an optimistic view of what multicultural Australia could become National Affairs Australia’s multicultural advantage Abul Rizvi 22 November 2019 Our immigration success story didn’t happen by accident — but is it under threat? National Affairs Is Peter Dutton in trouble in Dickson? Peter Brent 23 October 2019 The figures reveal a less than stellar performance in the state that most disappointed Labor Stopping the cheques Australia’s performance at CHOGM and in Warsaw this month will accelerate the decline of its influence in the Pacific, writes Nic Maclellan Nauru’s president Baron Waqa with prime minister Tony Abbott at this month’s CHOGM meeting in Colombo. Robert Schmidt/ AFP

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511985

__label__wiki

New funding for Healx Healx, a rare-disease company supported by the Entrepreneurship Centre at Cambridge Judge Business School, announces a $10 million Series A funding round led by Balderton Capital. Healx, a Cambridge-based company that seeks breakthroughs for rare diseases through artificial intelligence, announced a $10 million Series A funding round. Healx is supported by the Accelerate Cambridge programme at the Entrepreneurship Centre of Cambridge Judge Business School. The new funding round is led by Balderton Capital, which focuses on European technology companies, and existing investors Jonathan Milner and Amadeus Capital Partners also participated in the round. The funding will be used to more than double Healx’s team of software engineers, pharmacologists and other professionals, and to expand its artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies. Healx has created a database for rare diseases to find new treatments, including through redesigning existing drugs in order to speed up development and cut the cost of new drugs. The company says that there are 7,000 known rare diseases affecting 350 million people, but 95 per cent of rare diseases lack an approved treatment. David Brown, the co-founder of Healx and co-inventor of the drug Viagra, said: “The traditional drug discovery process takes 10 to 15 years at a cost of $2 billion per new drug”, so it’s “not economic for rare diseases. However, today’s technology can change that and help 350 million under-served rare disease patients.” Find out more about Accelerate Cambridge Accelerate Cambridge drug development funding Healx The Entrepreneurship Centre

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511986

__label__wiki

The World's Largest Radio Telescope sets to Open in China The Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST) is a mega-project designed to search the cosmos for clues about our creation and whether there are any other civilizations out there. The project began development back in March of 2011. Five and a half years later, it is finally functional. The telescope, as the name would suggest, is a monstrous 500 meters in diameter, able to achieve a zenith angle of 40 degrees. The telescope is incredibly sophisticated, developed with state of the art technology. Recently, engineers fitted the last piece on the telescope, readying it for trials. The US 100 million dollar project was proposed by astronomers from 10 different countries who collaboratively devised a radio telescope that can scan the cosmos in greater detail than ever. The concept system was first developed in 1994 where scientists conducted experiments regarding the feasibility and functionality of the systems. A later international review conducted in 2006 determined the telescope and surrounding technology is viable and is ready for the next phase involving a detailed design. Construction began promptly, and now, 5.5 years later the project is ready to scan the sky in extreme detail. Because of the sheer size of the telescope, special consideration had to go into the supporting technologies that would reach beyond those of any conventional structure. The size of the structure meant that deformation is inevitable. As a result, the engineers behind the project developed an adaptive cable-net system that allows compensation for small changes. Also, because the telescope is so sensitive to radio signals it was required to build it in a completely remote area shielded from radio interference. Over 7000 cables ensure that the structure will not move. On the wires lies over 4600 reflecting panels, adjustable through a complex system of actuators that were designed to minimize noise. Surrounding the entire area is a noise reduction wall on the inside of an even larger wind-wall. Completed Radio Telescope [Image Source: FAST] A cabin looms over top of the dish which collects the data. Beneath it hangs a massive receiving dish that collects the data. The whole assembly is suspended by massive suspension cables. Six cables are used to position the cabin up over the 500m wide dish. It can be positioned to within an error range of 100mm. The assembly was designed to even withstand vibrations thanks to its dampening control systems. The cabin can be controlled in real-time which was an incredibly difficult task to achieve. Multiple lasers are used to determine the exact position including altitude and angle. Then, a computer makes adjustments to maneuver the 10-meter wide reflector to capture as much data clearly as possible. The 10-meter-diameter feed cabin that collects incoming data hangs overtop of the massive dish [Image Source: FAST] "The project has the potential to search for more strange objects to better understand the origin of the universe and boost the global hunt for extraterrestrial life," Says Zheng Xiaonian, deputy head of the National Astronomical Observation. Perhaps the technology will help further analyze the composition of the Milkyway, detecting distant pulsars, or looking for the oldest stars in existence. As the massive, 500-m wide telescope scans the night sky, maybe it will also hear the signals from other civilization. Whatever discoveries the project entails, it is sure to be magnificent. Scientists will soon begin procedures to begin debugging and testing the systems on the telescope. SEE ALSO: Why You Should Never Look at the Sun Through a Telescope Written by Maverick Baker The Amazing Antonov An-225: The World's Largest Cargo Plane BMW Opens Up Its AI Algorithms to the World Donna Fuscaldo World's Largest Neutrino Detector, Hyper-K, Has Been Given The Go-Ahead 7 Out of This World Facts About Pan-STARRS Inventions and Machines

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511988

__label__cc

UK - Yorkshire - Whitby Abbey in the English seaside town of Whitby Whitby Abbey is a ruined Benedictine abbey on the East Cliff above Whitby. It was disestablished during the Dissolution of the Monasteries under the auspices of Henry VIII, and was famously the inspiration for Bram Stoker's gothic tale of 'Dracula'. Whitby is a seaside town, port in the county of North Yorkshire, originally the North Riding. Situated on the east coast at the mouth of the River Esk. Tourism started in Whitby during the Georgian period and developed. Its attraction as a tourist destination is enhanced by its proximity to the high ground of the North York Moors, its famous abbey, and by its association with the horror novel Dracula. Yorkshire, England, UK. 20150916_whitby abbey_T.jpg English England Britain British UK United Kingdom Yorkshire Yorkshire Dales Whitby seaside town Georgian Whitby Abbey ruin ruins abbey

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511989

__label__cc

Youth to The Front for Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons By J Nastranis NEW YORK (IDN) – UN Secretary-General António Guterres in his Agenda for Disarmament on May 24, 2018 underlined the need to establish a platform for youth engagement. This would include “a cadre of youth from around the world,” who will work assiduously to promote disarmament, non-proliferation and arms control in their communities. Engaging with youth groups and community organizations in support of the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals with synergistic linkages to youth, disarmament and non-proliferation education and conflict prevention is the second pillar of the platform for youth engagement. The third pillar are disarmament and non-proliferation training modules hosted on the online dashboard of the Vienna bureau of the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) targeting young diplomats and other youth leaders for knowledge enhancement and capacity-building. On September 24, 2018 the Secretary-General launched Youth 2030: The United Nations Youth Strategy accentuating that young people are “agents of change” and that the young generation is “the ultimate force for change” and proposing actions to promote youth engagement. The Secretary-General tasked his Envoy on Youth, in conjunction with the UN system and youth themselves, to lead development of a UN Youth Strategy. Its aim: scale up global, regional and national actions to meet young people’s needs, realize their rights and tap their possibilities as agents of change. On December 12, 2019 the United Nations General Assembly adopted by consensus a resolution on Youth, disarmament and non-proliferation. The resolution was introduced by the Republic of Korea and co-sponsored by 42 additional governments including a mix of nuclear-armed, nuclear allied and non-nuclear countries. The resolution calls on governments, UN agencies and civil society to educate, engage and empower youth in the fields of disarmament and non-proliferation. As such, it aims to provide impetus for non-governmental organisations to develop youth-focused and youth-led programs in cooperation with the United Nations and with support of governments. The platform for youth engagement and diverse programmes launched by the Secretary-General have been reflected the deep concern of the young people about existential threats posed not only by global warming but also nuclear weapons which are the most inhumane and indiscriminate weapons ever created. They violate international law, cause severe environmental damage, undermine national and global security, and divert vast public resources away from meeting human needs. As the 2017 nuclear peace laureate International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) emphasises, single nuclear warhead could kill hundreds of thousands of people, with lasting and devastating humanitarian and environmental consequences. Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea possess an estimated total of nearly 14,000 nuclear weapons, most of which are many times more powerful than the nuclear weapon dropped on Hiroshima. Thirty-one other states are also part of the problem. Young people play a crucial role in the activities of ICAN, a coalition of non-governmental organizations promoting adherence to and implementation of the United Nations nuclear weapon ban treaty. On July 7, 2017, an overwhelming majority of the world’s nations adopted a landmark global agreement to ban nuclear weapons, known officially as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). It will enter into legal force once 50 nations have signed and ratified it. Meanwhile, 34 nations have ratified the Treaty. Existing Treaties involved in the Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco), South Pacific (Treaty of Rarotonga), Southeast Asia (Treaty of Bangkok), Africa (Treaty of Pelindaba), and Central Asia as well as Mongolia, are contributing their share to a nuclear weapons free world. But the establishment of a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction has been eluding the international community. The Conference on the Establishment of a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction held its First Session from November 18-22, 2019 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York under the presidency of Ambassador Sima Bahous of Jordan. The Conference adopted a Political Declaration and its Final Report. With the support of the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), the Permanent Mission of Kazakhstan to the UN on December 9, hosted a session of the Nuclear Discussion Forum on outcomes of the First Session. The Second Session of the Conference is scheduled to take place from November 16-20 November 2020 at United Nations Headquarters in New York. Apart from official actions at the UN Headquarters in New York, young people have been taking part in several activities initiated by non-governmental organisations gathered in UNFOLD ZERO. During the UN Disarmament Week from October 24-30, 2019 a team of volunteers (mostly youth) in New York City counted out $542 billion – the approximate global nuclear weapons budget for the next five years – and symbolically reallocated this to climate protection, poverty alleviation and the Sustainable Development Goals. The action was initiated by the World Future Council and organised by Peace Accelerators, a youth-led network of 'ethical futurists and entrepreneurs' working for a sustainable future. The money was counted in various locations around the city, including at the United Nations in cooperation with students from the School Strike for Climate movement, in front of New York City (NYC) Town Hall to support divestment of NYC pension funds from the nuclear weapons industry; outside the office of Jacobs Engineering a nuclear weapons contractor; and at Strawberry Fields in honour of peacemaker John Lennon. Youth from around the world who were unable to come to New York for the event, posted social media memes in support. The Basel Peace Office and Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament initiated a new project Youth voices on climate, peace and nuclear disarmament, in cooperation with the Abolition 2000 Youth Network. The project includes: Climate, peace and security: From youth voices to policy action, a roundtable event in Basel on January 9, 2020 bringing legislators and experts together with European youth leaders in the climate, peace and disarmament movements; Video Project: Youth voices on climate, peace and disarmament, a compilation of youth video statements about climate, peace, security and nuclear disarmament and the role of the European Union, United Nations and Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); Peace and Climate action of European Youth (PACEY) Award, a new prize of €5000 to support a European youth project or proposal for action on climate, peace and nuclear disarmament. [IDN-InDepthNews – 28 December 2019] Photo: The second training on Conflict Prevention through Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-proliferation jointly organized by UNODA and the OSCE in May 2019 at Vienna International Centre. Credit: UNODA, Vienna Office.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511990

__label__wiki

Previous index Page 275 of 662 Next All Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 How to get a copy of a picture to edit How to get a fast and reliable Windows 7 installation for new laptop? How to get a good job as a Business Analyst in big scale industry with specialisation of Data warehousing and BI How to get a htm file to upload onto a Google Site How to get a job in SAP How to get a Lastname from a field that contains the Full Name? (RPG-ILE) How to get a POS system How to get a project management certification How to get a random record in MongoDB How to get a SAP FICO career How to get a SAP FICO certification How to get a sub folder back How to get a total of amount field in RPGLE code how to get acces to sites where it is not even blocked but not working;; How to get access to Outlook global address book How to get all t-codes from Role: SAP All How to get an IDOC as a flat file How to get an inbox message from Exchange Server using .NET How to get an iSeries certification How to get an IT job How to get answered prompt details on Report Service Document in Micro strategy 9.0? How to get apps for my tablet How to get AS/400 macro to pull data from Excel How to get back Skype icon on desktop How to get bluetooth working between devices How to get buyers to let our brand into their world how to get calculations in vb.net How to get caller program list by Calle program How to get client info from Exchange EventSink? How to get codesys How to get current date in DDS How to get cursor position on screen in RPGLE How to get data from a Web-installed Microsoft Access database from VB6 How to get data from biometric to VB6? How to get data in DB2 based on index like (LIMIT 2,9) in SQL and other databases. How to get data using Javascript how to get database name? How to get DB2 table name from a column How to get delete history from schema How to get details of all invalid login attempts by a user in AS/400 How to get different font sizes to print on an iSeries report How to get email address from Lotus User ID with Visual Basic How to get everyone connected to the Internet How to get exact count of MySQL database rows How to get Exchange server 2003 Size support as SMTP client How to get Exchange user calender from global account How to get EXIF tags in Windows Phone 7 How to get external sound device & audio out of XP Mode in Win 7 host? How to get Field Labels when we are viewing data from tables How to get File from AS400 to Microsoft Word? How to get FireFox URL using .NET How to get free static IP address How to get frozen screen to reboot How to get Google Chrome into Java app How to get high level estimate for test automation of an application? How to get into a Facebook account How to get into employee voicemail from admin phone how to get into router, previous tech did not leave password. How to get into Safe Mode in Windows 10 How to get into SAP for experieced IT professional How to get into the BPM Field How to get into the IT security industry How to get IP address of AS/400 machine in CL program How to get job attributes for a different job that was submitted and is running on the system How to get job in SAP FICO as a fresher?. How to get job log for prestart jobs in AS/400 how to get list of encrypted objets in sqlserver 2005? How to get list of MySQL database constraints How to get list of tables in Microsoft Access database through C# How to get local time of a SQL server? How to get Lotus Notes attachment names from a document How to get management buy-in to improve our website How to get mutiple client lines to appear on a single line How to get my attachments from a Lotus Notes document How to get my messages back to inbox from the archive folder in the pc suite?? How to get my Ubuntu system PCI DSS compliant How to get no. of items appended into rich text field How to get nth highest salary using SQL/400 query How to get number of fields in SQL Server database How to get number of members in two PF in single CL program How to get number of modified rows in subfile(SFL)? How to get off Windows 10 Safe Mode How to get on the Internet How to get online How to get only one step in daily JCL to run monthly How to get oracle items names from the package How to get Outlook folders to inherit permissions. how to get Page number in specific format in AS400 ( cobol or RPG) how to get particular record How to get passed the BIOS password How to get password on w395 How to get pax file into ZFS for unpaxing How to get phone service How to get print on any HP printer from DOS mode Foxpro software? How to get real cloud security skills? How to get report of J1IEX in SAP How to get rid of blank areas How to get rid of compile error message? How to get rid of geo-fencing

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511994

__label__wiki

amira hass Israel/Palestine negotiations are doomed from the outset! There’s a lot of excitement in the air right now about the apparent resuscitation of the Israeli/Palestinian peace process, with new talks scheduled to begin at any moment! Former US President, Jimmy Carter, and ‘The Elders’ praised John Kerry for his “tireless commitment to bringing Israelis and Palestinians back to the negotiating table after five years of stalemate” while Christian Zionists blasted the US President for actions that they see as compromising the safety of the state of Israel! It seems to me that Amira Hass is one of the few who really grasps the situation, even if hers is a truth that nobody wants to hear. The ‘peace talks’ haven’t got a chance! If they serve any purpose at all it will only be to enhance Netanyahu’s political career by portraying him as a willing negotiator. Father Dave source: www.haaretz.com… After the peace talks fail A Palestinian generation has come of age that is in no hurry to reach an agreement with the Israelis, because the Israelis aren’t ready for a fair agreement. By Amira Hass Don’t worry, in this round of talks with the Palestinians, Israel will again miss the opportunity to change and be changed – just as the Rabin-Peres government and the Barak government missed their opportunities. Discussions over a referendum ignore the essence: Any future worth living for the Jewish community in this part of the Middle East depends on the ability and will of that community to free itself from the ethnocracy (“democracy for Jews only”) that it has built here for nearly seven decades. For this we desperately need the Palestinians. But military and economic superiority is blinding us. We are sure that they need us and that we have pushed them into such a weak position that we can extricate a yes from them regarding what they have been saying no to for 20 years; that is, much less than the 1967 borders. The negotiations expected now, with the very non-neutral American participation (if we even get to that after the pre-negotiation phase), will not produce independence for the Palestinians. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition problems can’t be blamed for that. It’s the Israelis who are not yet ready to demand that their leaders work toward a peace agreement, because they’re still enjoying the occupation too much. It’s not for nothing that we have been blessed with 6,800 weapons exporters, the title of the sixth largest weapons exporter in the world, and first or second place among countries selling unmanned aircraft, which were upgraded by trying them out on the Lebanese and mainly the Gazans. Even if few of our people are involved in the manufacture and export of weapons and in the defense industry in general, that’s a minority with an extensive influence and a great deal of economic power that shapes politics and produces messianic and technocratic rationalizations. The European Union’s directives on noncooperation with the settlements and companies linked to them have come at least 15 years late. As early as the 1990s it was clear to Europe that the colonization of the West Bank and Gaza contradicted its interpretation of the Oslo Accords, but that didn’t prevent it from spoiling Israel with favorable trade agreements. Neither these agreements nor massive support for the Palestinian Authority (that is, compensation for damage done by Israeli rule and its restrictions on movement), gave Europe real political clout in Israel’s eyes and in the corridors of the negotiations. And then a determined first step by Europe rehabilitated its political standing. The Palestinians have made clear that if the Europeans back down on these directives, as Israel has demanded and the United States wants, they will stop the talks (when they start). But the directives’ main psychological impact will dissipate without quick implementation. When and if implemented, the results will not be felt immediately in Israel, and even then, they will be felt only gradually. That is, it will take time before more and more Israelis realize that the occupation isn’t worth it. That will be enough time for us to continue feeling that we’re stronger than the Palestinians. But depending on the Palestinians’ weakness is an optical illusion of the arrogant. True, the PLO’s leadership is fossilized and controlled by one individual who rarely consults and rarely takes his people’s opinions into consideration. But even he can’t accept what the Netanyahu-Bennett-Lapid government plans to offer. True, Palestinian society is more fractured geographically and politically than it was 20 years ago, but it has great stamina, which the Israelis lack. The PA and the Hamas government are groaning under the financial burdens of economies under siege. The social and economic rifts have deepened and an atmosphere of depoliticization has taken over. But beneath the surface there are new developments. Initiatives are afoot to turn the Palestinian people – in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the diaspora – into one deciding body. Ideas are being seriously discussed for methods of struggle outside negotiations. A generation has come of age that is in no hurry to reach an agreement with the Israelis, because the Israelis aren’t ready for a fair agreement. And when we, the Israelis, wake up and beg for an agreement, it might be too late. Tags: amira hass, father dave, Gaza, Gaza Strip, israel and palestine conflict, Netanyahu, palestinian occupation, peace, truth. Filed under Israel and Palestine, israel and palestine conflict by Father Dave on Jul 26th, 2013. Comment. Throwing stones is a Palestinian birthright?! The following article by veteran Israeli journalist and peace activist, Amira Hass, has generated a storm of controversy. Many Israelis think that this time she has gone too far – encouraging violence, inciting murder, etc. Hass herself is committed to non-violence. As an Israeli though who has spent considerable time living in Gaza and West Bank, she understands the frustrations of a subjugated people, and she understands that such frustrations will inevitably bubble over, one way or another. The inner syntax of Palestinian stone-throwing It would make sense for Palestinian schools to give classes in resistance: how to build multiple ‘tower and stockade’ villages in Area C; how to behave when army troops enter your homes; how to identify soldiers who flung you handcuffed to the floor of the jeep, in order to submit a complaint. Throwing stones is the birthright and duty of anyone subject to foreign rule. Throwing stones is an action as well as a metaphor of resistance. Persecution of stone-throwers, including 8-year-old children, is an inseparable part − though it’s not always spelled out − of the job requirements of the foreign ruler, no less than shooting, torture, land theft, restrictions on movement, and the unequal distribution of water sources. The violence of 19-year-old soldiers, their 45-year-old commanders, and the bureaucrats, jurists and lawyers is dictated by reality. Their job is to protect the fruits of violence instilled in foreign occupation − resources, profits, power and privileges. Steadfastness (Sumud) and resistance against the physical, and even more so the systemic, institutionalized violence, is the core sentence in the inner syntax of Palestinians in this land. This is reflected every day, every hour, every moment, without pause. Unfortunately, this is true not only in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, but also within Israel’s recognized borders, although the violence and the resistance to it are expressed differently. But on both sides of the Green Line, the levels of distress, suffocation, bitterness, anxiety and wrath are continually on the rise, as is the astonishment at Israelis’ blindness in believing that their violence can remain in control forever. Often hurling stones is borne of boredom, excessive hormones, mimicry, boastfulness and competition. But in the inner syntax of the relationship between the occupier and the occupied, stone-throwing is the adjective attached to the subject of “We’ve had enough of you, occupiers.” After all, teenagers could find other ways to give vent to their hormones without risking arrests, fines, injuries and death. Even if it is a right and duty, various forms of steadfastness and resisting the foreign regime, as well as its rules and limitations, should be taught and developed. Limitations could include the distinction between civilians and those who carry arms, between children and those in uniform, as well as the failures and narrowness of using weapons. It would make sense for Palestinian schools to introduce basic classes in resistance: how to build multiple “tower and stockade” villages in Area C; how to behave when army troops enter your homes; comparing different struggles against colonialism in different countries; how to use a video camera to document the violence of the regime’s representatives; methods to exhaust the military system and its representatives; a weekly day of work in the lands beyond the separation barrier; how to remember identifying details of soldiers who flung you handcuffed to the floor of the jeep, in order to submit a complaint; the rights of detainees and how to insist on them in real time; how to overcome fear of interrogators; and mass efforts to realize the right of movement. Come to think of it, Palestinian adults could also make use of these lessons, perhaps in place of their drills, training in dispersing protests, and practice in spying on Facebook posts. When high school students were drafted two years ago for the campaign of boycotting settlement products, it seemed like a move in the right direction. But it stopped there, without going further, without broadening the context. Such lessons would have been perfectly in tune with the tactics of appealing to the United Nations − civil disobedience on the ground and defiance of power in diplomacy. So why are such classes absent from the Palestinian curriculum? Part of the explanation lies with the opposition of the donor states and Israel’s punitive measures. But it is also due to inertia, laziness, flawed reasoning, misunderstanding and the personal gains of some parts of society. In fact the rationale for the existence of the Palestinian Authority engendered one basic rule in the last two decades − adaptation to the existing situation. Thus, a contradiction and a clash have been created between the inner syntax of the Palestinian Authority and that of the Palestinian people. Tags: amira hass, Gaza, israel and palestine conflict, israelis, Palestinian, palestinian occupation, time, United Nations, West Bank. Filed under israel and palestine conflict by Father Dave on Apr 10th, 2013. Comment. Does restriction of movement for Palestinians really have anything to do with Israeli security? God bless Amira Hass. As ever she is on the cutting edge – exposing lies in the official narrative that we’ve heard so often that they’ve become a part of general wisdom. The apartheid wall, the checkpoints, the permit restrictions – all seem to be designed to protect ordinary Israelis from suicide bombers and other forms of Palestinian aggression. Hass puts the lie to the entire package! Israeli crackdown on Palestinian mobility began well before suicide bombings Most Israelis labor under the misconception that restrictions on Palestinian movement were a result of suicide bombings, but they started long before that. “I didn’t know you were such an empiricist,” a friend told me impatiently, a veteran peace activist with a doctorate, when I insisted at some meeting on specifying the prohibitions on the movement of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. That was in 1995, and he thought I didn’t see the big picture, the positive direction, the vision, the beat of the wings of history, and instead was merely insisting on going into detail, into temporary malfunctions. He wasn’t alone in thinking that. One of my editors at the time told me I lacked perspective because I lived in Gaza, and so my reports looked the way they did. In short, wearisome. The signs were there right from the start − signs that the so much talked-about Peace Process was a process of subjugation; signs that Israel intended to impose on the other side an agreement whose terms were far from the Palestinian minimum, and far from what many countries in the world envisioned as a two-state solution. But it was hard for these signs to infiltrate public awareness (as well as the Israeli and international media) through the powerful interest in seeing the outward manifestations of something that you believe exists: in Gazans bathing in the sea; in the head of the Israeli Shin Bet security service meeting with the head of the Palestinian security service; in Shimon Peres visiting Gaza; in joint security patrols; and in our soldiers no longer patrolling in the heart of the Palestinian towns. From the supposedly narrow perspective of the Strip, though, the reality of incarceration was, looked and felt like the complete opposite of a peace process. The chronology is important here − I’ve repeated it countless times and will repeat it countless more times − because local readers like to think that the blanket prohibitions on Palestinian mobility were a response to the suicide attacks from 1994 on. That is not the case. It began in January 1991, on the eve of the Gulf War. The Israel Defense Forces GOC Central and Southern Commands then revoked an earlier order, from the 1970s, of a “general exit permit to Israel” − in other words, one that allowed the Palestinian residents of the occupied territory to enter Israel, and move freely within its borders and between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Initially, the revocation was interpreted as something temporary, a preventive measure during the unclear period of wartime. But after a lengthy curfew, the residents of the Strip woke up to a new reality. If up until 1991 Israel had respected (for reasons of its own) the right to freedom of movement for all Palestinians, but withheld it from a few people, after 1991 the situation was reversed: Israel denied all Palestinians (those in the West Bank as well) the right to freedom of movement, aside from a few groups and numbers that it determined. Since then, this is the rule in effect, aside from shifts in the various categories and specific numbers of those permitted to leave. The expectation that signing the transfer of powers from the Civil Administration to the Palestinian Authority in May 1994 would restore freedom of movement was soon dashed. That was the first clear sign. Incarceration within the Gaza Strip bagged several birds during this process of subjugation: Just how important and deliberate that fourth step was may be gleaned from two other signs. Under the Oslo Accords, the PA has the power to change a person’s home address on his or her identity card, and only has to report the change to the Civil Administration (as the representative of Israeli’s Interior Ministry), which enters the new details in the database of its Population Registry. But in 1996, it emerged that Israel was refusing to register address changes from Gaza to the West Bank. In 1997, another military order was issued: Gazans now needed a permit even when entering the West Bank via the Allenby Bridge. That closed a loophole which students and others had exploited until then: They would depart Gaza through Egypt, fly to Jordan, and then continue westward, through the Allenby Bridge crossing. ‘No reason to leave’ As early as 1995 I asked a woman in the Israeli security establishment why, if “confidence-building measures” between the Palestinians and Israel had been declared, there would be no easing up with respect to mobility permits and the convoluted bureaucracy that developed around them. Why not, for example, grant women and children exit permits that were valid for a year − if not to Israel, then at least to the West Bank? This woman, though not a decision maker, was placed in the right junction to answer my question: “Because they have no reason to leave,” she told me, honestly. Clerks and junior officers in the system hear and grasp what is planned in the corridors of power, but are less careful than their superiors about what they say, and do not bother to hide certain intentions. In 1997, when I was already in the West Bank, I started to become acquainted with the traditional Palestinian farming communities in the Jordan Valley, whose tent encampments and shacks had been systematically destroyed by the Civil Administration’s inspectors and soldiers. Several of the people whose homes had been demolished told me: “I asked the inspector, ‘So where will we go now that you’ve destroyed our home?’ And he replied: ‘Go to Arafat, go to Area A [the small area which was then designed to be under Palestinian administrative-civilian control].’” These soldiers also divulged the intentions of their superiors. To this day, 16 years later, that is the policy behind the destruction of the water cisterns and of tent encampments there. To this day, that is the state’s answer to the High Court of Justice in petitions by residents of the southern Hebron Hills against intentions to evict them from their communities: “They have somewhere to live in Area A.” “Area A” and “Area B” (under Palestinian civil control and Israeli military control) are the code names for the Palestinian enclaves that formed in the past 20 years − the years of the “peace process.” The Israeli battle to create the detached and separate Gaza enclave succeeded better than expected when Hamas − aided by foolish decisions of the PA − created its own separate institutions of government. The Israeli campaign strategy to create Palestinian enclaves in the West Bank has also been crowned a great success, and its name is Area C (which is under full Israeli administrative and security control). Areas A, B and C were established in the Oslo Accords as purely temporary categories, to mark the gradual nature by which the military forces would leave the Palestinians’ territory. Fourteen years later, Area C − the last area the military was supposed to vacate (in 1999) − still covers about 62 percent of the West Bank, and is the expansion space reserved for the outposts, settlements, industrial zones and multilane highways. Permanent and sacred and ours, like the Temple Mount. Separation and creation of distance between senior officials and ordinary folks by granting “generous” mobility permits to a select class of Palestinians: freedom of movement for senior PA officials who came from abroad and gave no thought to the reality that existed before, without a need for permits, and to several prisoners who had been released and positioned themselves high in the PA leadership; Satisfying the PA and then PLO leader Yasser Arafat’s sense of pseudo-control − closing the crossings and requesting permits necessitated coordination between the Civil Administration and its Palestinian twin (the Ministry of Civil Affairs); Giving the PA a chance to develop the commercial monopolies of its people and cronies − by sheer dint of the need to coordinate exits between the PA and Israel; Most important of all: Severing the society in Gaza from that of the West Bank. In other words, undermining the basic condition for a Palestinian state, in both parts of the territory conquered in 1967. Tags: amira hass, father dave, israel and palestine conflict, israeli apartheid, Palestinian, palestinian occupation. Filed under israel and palestine conflict by Father Dave on Apr 2nd, 2013. Comment. Amira Hass: Israel’s ‘right to self-defense’ is a tremendous propaganda victory This damning analysis was published in Haaretz by veteran reporter, Amira Hass. Hass is the daughter of two Holocaust survivors. She is unique as an Israeli journalist reporting on the Palestinian situation as she has chosen to live in the West Bank and Gaza and do her reporting from there. Her reporting of events, and her voicing of opinions that run counter to both official Israeli and Palestinian positions regularly exposes her to verbal attacks and opposition from both the Israeli and Palestinian authorities. Israel’s ‘right to self-defense’ – a tremendous propaganda victory By supporting Israel’s offensive on Gaza, Western leaders have given the Israelis carte blanche to do what they’re best at: Wallow in their sense of victimhood and ignore Palestinian suffering. Israels right to self defense a tremendous propaganda victory One of Israel’s tremendous propaganda victories is that it has been accepted as a victim of the Palestinians, both in the view of the Israeli public and that of Western leaders who hasten to speak of Israel’s right to defend itself. The propaganda is so effective that only the Palestinian rockets at the south of Israel, and now at Tel Aviv, are counted in the round of hostilities. The rockets, or damage to the holiest of holies – a military jeep – are always seen as a starting point, and together with the terrifying siren, as if taken from a World War II movie, build the meta-narrative of the victim entitled to defend itself. Every day, indeed every moment, this meta-narrative allows Israel to add another link to the chain of dispossession of a nation as old as the state itself, while at the same time managing to hide the fact that one continuous thread runs from the 1948 refusal to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, the early 1950s expulsion of Bedouin from the Negev desert, the current expulsion of Bedouin from the Jordan Valley, ranches for Jews in the Negev, discrimination in budgets in Israel, and shooting at Gazan fishermen to keep them from earning a respectable living. Millions of such continuous threads link 1948 to the present. They are the fabric of life for the Palestinian nation, as divided as it may be in isolated pockets. They are the fabric of life of Palestinian citizens of Israel and of those who live in their lands of exile. But these threads are not the entire fabric of life. The resistance to the threads that we, the Israelis, endlessly spin is also part of the fabric of life for Palestinians. The word resistance has been debased to mean the very masculine competition of whose missile will explode furthest away (a competition among Palestinian organizations, and between them and the established Israeli army ). It does not invalidate the fact that, in essence, resistance to the injustice inherent in Israeli domination is an inseparable part of life for each and every Palestinian. The foreign and international development ministries in the West and in the United States knowingly collaborate with the mendacious representation of Israel as victim, if only because every week they receive reports from their representatives in the West Bank and Gaza Strip about yet another link of dispossession and oppression that Israel has added to the chain, or because their own taxpayers’ money make up for some of the humanitarian disasters, large and small, inflicted by Israel. On November 8, two days before the attack on the holiest of holies – soldiers in a military jeep – they could have read about IDF soldiers killing 13-year old Ahmad Abu Daqqa, who was playing soccer with his friends in the village of Abassan, east of Khan Yunis. The soldiers were 1.5 kilometers from the kids, inside the Gaza Strip area, busy with “exposing” (a whitewashed word for destroying ) agricultural land. So why shouldn’t the count of aggression start with a child? On November 10, after the attack on the jeep, the IDF killed another four civilians, aged 16 to 19. Wallowing in ignorance Leaders of the West could have known that, before the IDF’s exercise last week in the Jordan Valley, dozens of Bedouin families were told to evacuate their homes. How extraordinary that IDF training always occurs where Bedouin live, not Israeli settlers, and that it constitutes a reason to expel them. Another reason. Another expulsion. The leaders of the West could also have known, based on the full-color, chrome-paper reports their countries finance, that since the beginning of 2012, Israel has destroyed 569 Palestinian buildings and structures, including wells and 178 residences. In all, 1,014 people were affected by those demolitions. We haven’t heard masses of Tel Aviv and southern residents warning the stewards of the state about the ramifications of this destruction on the civilian population. The Israelis cheerfully wallow in their ignorance. This information and other similar facts are available and accessible to anyone who’s really interested. But Israelis choose not to know. This willed ignorance is a foundation stone in the building of Israel’s sense of victimization. But ignorance is ignorance: The fact that Israelis don’t want to know what they are doing as an occupying power doesn’t negate their deeds or Palestinian resistance. In 1993, the Palestinians gave Israel a gift, a golden opportunity to cut the threads tying 1948 to the present, to abandon the country’s characteristics of colonial dispossession, and together plan a different future for the two peoples in the region. The Palestinian generation that accepted the Oslo Accords (full of traps laid by smart Israeli lawyers ) is the generation that got to know a multifaceted, even normal, Israeli society because the 1967 occupation allowed it (for the purpose of supplying cheap labor ) almost full freedom of movement. The Palestinians agreed to a settlement based on their minimum demands. One of the pillars of these minimum demands was treating the Gaza Strip and West Bank as a single territorial entity. But once the implementation of Oslo started, Israel systematically did everything it could to make the Gaza Strip into a separate, disconnected entity, as part of Israel’s insistence on maintaining the threads of 1948 and extending them. Since the rise of Hamas, it has done everything to back up the impression Hamas prefers – that the Gaza Strip is a separate political entity where there is no occupation. If that is so, why not look at things as follows: As a separate political entity, any incursion into Gazan territory is an infringement of its sovereignty, and Israel does this all the time. Does the government of the state of Gaza not have the right to respond, to deter, or at least the masculine right – a twin of the IDF’s masculine right – to scare the Israelis just as Israel scares the Palestinians? But Gaza is not a state. Gaza is under Israeli occupation, despite all the verbal acrobatics of both Hamas and Israel. The Palestinians who live there are part of a people whose DNA contains resistance to oppression. In the West Bank, Palestinian activists try to develop a type of resistance different from the masculine, armed resistance. But the IDF puts down all popular resistance with zeal and resolve. We haven’t heard of residents of Tel Aviv and the south complaining about the balance of deterrence the IDF is building against the civilian Palestinian population. And so Israel again provides reasons for more young Palestinians, for whom Israel is an abnormal society of army and settlers, to conclude that the only rational resistance is spilled blood and counter-terrorizing. And so every Israeli link of oppression and all Israeli disregard of the oppression’s existence drags us further down the slope of masculine competition. Tags: amira hass, Gaza, israeli public. Filed under Israel and Palestine, israel and palestine articles, israel and palestine conflict, map of israel and palestine by Father Dave on Nov 22nd, 2012. Comment.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511996

__label__wiki

SenateHouseAlabama-CaliforniaColorado-IdahoIllinois-MassachusettsMichigan-New MexicoNew York-OhioOklahoma-TennesseeTexas-Wyoming INCUMBENT/ CHALLENGER In office since Pro Israel Score Pro Palestine Score LIFETIME CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PRO-ISRAEL PACS PAC ENDORSEMENTS/DONATIONS <= SCORE S. 2497 US-ISRAEL SECURITY ASSISTANCE AUTHORIZATION 2018 TAYLOR FORCE ACT IN HR 1625, 2018 CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT S. 1697 "TAYLOR FORCE ACT" 2017 (STAND-ALONE) S.720 ISRAEL ANTI-BOYCOTT ACT 2017 S. 170 COMBATING BDS ACT 2017 S.619 - US-ISRAEL TRADE ENHANCEMENT ACT 2015 S. 2673 US-ISRAEL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP 2014 S. 1456 GOLD MEDAL TO (WAR CRIMINAL) SHIMON PERES S. RES. 176 50TH ANNIV OF JERUSALEM "REUNIFICATION" S. RES 6 OBJECTING TO U.N. SETTLEMENT ABSTENTION 2016 S. RES.302 SUPPORTS ISRAEL IN TEMPLE MOUNT STRUGGLES S.RES 498 SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IN 2014 "WAR" S. RES 185 PEACE THRU NEGOTIATION ONLY, NO U.N. 2011 S. RES 138: UN RESCIND GOLDSTONE REPORT ON ISRAEL WARCRIMES S.RES 10 SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IN 2008-9 "WAR" LETTER TO SEC'Y GEN OF U.N. RE: ANTI-ISRAEL BIAS 2017 LETTER TO OBAMA: OPPOSE U.N. INTERVENTION LETTER TO ARMED SVCS CMTE: $320 MIL EXTRA FOR IRON DOME LETTER TO OBAMA: BOOST AID TO ISRAEL 2016 LETTER TO EU, OPPOSING "ANTI-ISRAEL" LABELING GUIDELINES VOTED FOR DAVID FRIEDMAN FOR AMB. TO ISRAEL VOTED FOR NIKKI HALEY FOR US AMB. TO THE U.N. ATTENDED WIDELY BOYCOTTED NETANYAHU SPEECH COMMENT ON HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN GAZA 2018 ("SILENCE" means there has been no comment in spite of the horrific humanitarian crisis) COMMENT ON GREAT MARCH OF RETURN KILLING OF UNARMED PROTESTERS 2018 ("SILENCE" means there has been no comment in spite of the horrific humanitarian crisis) COMMENT ON ANNOUNCEMENT OF JERUSALEM AS CAPITAL/EMBASSY MOVE DEC. 2017, MAY 2018 COMMENT ON VILLAGE DEMOLITIONS 2017-18 COMMENT ON NOMINATION OF DAVID FRIEDMAN AS AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL ANY COMMENT ON ISRAEL ANTI-BOYCOTT BILLS COMMENT ON UN SETTLEMENT ABSTENTION (RES 2334) 2016 COMMENT ON 2014 "WAR" COMMENT ON PALESTINE JOINING UN (2011-2012) COMMENT ON 2008-9 "WAR" ANY COMMENT ON SETTLEMENTS COMMENT ON ISRAEL ANNIVERSARY/OTHER CELEBRATIONS MISC COMMENT !META-COLGROUPS THE BUCK STOPS RIGHT HERE [$] [III] SPONSOR [II] Cosponsor [I] AYE VOTE (N/A INDICATES SENATOR WAS NOT IN OFFICE AT TIME OF BILL) PRO-ISRAEL SIMPLE RESOLUTIONS* [III] SPONSOR [II] Cosponsor [I] AYE VOTE (N/A INDICATES SENATOR WAS NOT IN OFFICE AT TIME OF BILL) PRO-ISRAEL, AIPAC-DRIVEN "LETTERS" [III] INITATED [II] Signed 3 STRONGLY PRO-ISRAEL ACTIONS [III] 1-3 [I] FOR PRO-ISRAEL STATEMENT 1-3 [P] FOR PRO-PALESTINIAN STATEMENT N/A IF SENATOR WAS NOT IN OFFICE !META-FULLTITLE PARTY INCUMBENT/ CHALLENGER State In office since Pro Israel Score Pro Palestine Score LIFETIME CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PRO-ISRAEL PACS PRO-ISRAEL PAC ENDORSEMENTS/DONATIONS S. 2497 US-ISRAEL SECURITY ASSISTANCE AUTHORIZATION 2018 (BACKED BY AIPAC) (VOICE VOTE 8/1/18) VOTED FOR TAYLOR FORCE ACT IN HR 1625, 2018 CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT (PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE 65 - 32 ON 3/23/18) S. 1697 "TAYLOR FORCE ACT" 2017 (BACKED BY AIPAC) (INTRODUCED 8/1/17; NOT VOTED ON) S.720 ISRAEL ANTI-BOYCOTT ACT 2017 (WRITTEN BY AIPAC) (INTRODUCED 3/23/17; NOT VOTED ON) S. 170 COMBATING BDS ACT 2017 (BACKED BY AIPAC) (INTRODUCED 1/17/17; NOT VOTED ON) S.619 - US-ISRAEL TRADE ENHANCEMENT ACT 2015 (BACKED BY AIPAC) (INTRODUCED 3/2/15; NOT VOTED ON) S. 2673 US-ISRAEL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP 2014 (NOW LAW) (BACKED BY AIPAC) (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 9/18/14) S. 1456 GOLD MEDAL TO (WAR CRIMINAL) SHIMON PERES 2013 (BECAME LAW) (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 3/13/14) S. RES. 176 50TH ANNIV OF JERUSALEM "REUNIFICATION" (2017) (PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE ON 90-0 6/5/17) S. RES 6 OBJECTING TO U.N. SETTLEMENT ABSTENTION 2016 (INTRODUCED 1/4/17; NOT VOTED ON) S. RES.302 SUPPORTS ISRAEL IN TEMPLE MOUNT STRUGGLES 2015 (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 11/10/15) S.RES 498 SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IN 2014 "WAR" (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 7/17/14) S.RES 599 SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IN 2012 "WAR" (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 11/15/12) S. RES 185 PEACE THRU NEGOTIATION ONLY; NO SELF DETERMINATION, NO U.N. 2011 (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 6/28/11) S. RES 138: UN RESCIND GOLDSTONE REPORT ON ISRAEL WARCRIMES 2011 (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 4/14/11) S.RES 10 SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IN 2008-9 "WAR" (UNANIMOUS CONSENT 1/8/09) LETTER TO SEC'Y GEN OF U.N. RE: ANTI-ISRAEL BIAS 2017 (SUBMITTED 4/27/17) LETTER TO OBAMA (WRITTEN BY AIPAC): OPPOSE U.N. INTERVENTION (SUBMITTED 9/19/16) LETTER TO ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE CALLING FOR $320 MIL EXTRA FOR IRON DOME (SUBMITTED 7/28/16) LETTER TO OBAMA: BOOST AID TO ISRAEL 2016 (SUBMITTED 4/25/16) LETTER TO EU, OPPOSING "ANTI-ISRAEL" LABELING GUIDELINES (SUBMITTED 11/11/15) VOTED FOR DAVID FRIEDMAN FOR AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL (3/23/17) VOTED FOR NIKKI HALEY FOR US AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N. (1/24/17) ATTENDED WIDELY BOYCOTTED NETANYAHU SPEECH (3/3/15) COMMENT ON HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN GAZA 2018 ('SILENCE" MEANS THERE HAS BEEN NO COMMENT IN SPITE OF THE HORRIFIC HUMANITARIAN CRISIS) COMMENT ON GREAT MARCH OF RETURN KILLING OF UNARMED PROTESTERS 2018 ("SILENCE" MEANS THERE HAS BEEN NO COMMENT IN SPITE OF 170+ DEATHS, ALMOST 20,000 INJURIES) COMMENT ON ANNOUNCEMENT OF JERUSALEM AS CAPITAL/EMBASSY MOVE DEC. 2017, MAY 2018 COMMENT ON VILLAGE DEMOLITIONS 2017-18 COMMENT ON NOMINATION OF DAVID FRIEDMAN AS AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL ANY COMMENT ON ISRAEL ANTI-BOYCOTT BILLS COMMENT ON UN SETTLEMENT ABSTENTION (RES 2334) 2016 COMMENT ON 2014 "WAR" COMMENT ON 2012 "WAR" COMMENT ON PALESTINE JOINING UN (2011-2012) COMMENT ON 2008-9 "WAR" ANY COMMENT ON SETTLEMENTS COMMENT ON ISRAEL ANNIVERSARY/OTHER CELEBRATIONS MISC COMMENT MISC COMMENT FURTHER READING ABOUT THE CANDIDATE !META-SORTING text text text isoDate percent percent currency none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none none !META-ID PARTY STATUS STATE INAUGURATION SCORE-I SCORE-P CONTRIBUTIONS PAC-ENDORSE META-SCORE S2497 [PRO-I] META-SCORE HR1625 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S1697 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S720 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S170 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S619 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S2673 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S1456 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S176 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S6 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S302 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S498 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S599 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S185 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S138 [PRO-I] META-SCORE S10 [PRO-I] META-SCORE SECGEN-LETTER [PRO-I] META-SCORE OBAMA-LETTER-AIPAC [PRO-I] META-SCORE ARMED-SERVICES-LETTER-IRON-DOME [PRO-I] META-SCORE OBAMA-LETTER-BOOST [PRO-I] META-SCORE EU-LETTER-LABELING [PRO-I] META-SCORE DAVID-FREEMAN [PRO-I] META-SCORE NIKKI-HALEY [PRO-I] META-SCORE NETANYAHU-SPEECH [PRO-I] META-SCORE COMMENT-HUMANITARIAN-CRISIS [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-GREAT-MARCH [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-JERUSALEM-CAPITAL [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-VILLAGE-DEMO [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-DAVID-FRIEDMAN [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-BDS [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-UN-SETTLEMENT [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-2014-WAR [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-2012-WAR [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-PALESTINE-UN [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-2008-WAR [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-SETTLEMENTS [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-ISRAEL-ANNIVERSARY [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-MISC-1 [PRO-X] META-SCORE COMMENT-MISC-2 [PRO-X] META-SCORE META-FURTHER-READING !META-DESC The scores above were calculated based on the total number of opportunities each candidate had to show support for either side of the conflict. Since incumbents have been in office for varying lengths of time, we’ve given them a fractional score showing the actual number of times they showed their support for one side or the other by sponsoring and/or voting on bills, legislation, etc. The scores above were calculated based on the total number of opportunities each candidate had to show support for either side of the conflict. Since incumbents have been in office for varying lengths of time, we’ve given them a fractional score showing the actual number of times they showed their support for one side or the other by sponsoring and/or voting on bills, legislation, etc. CONTEXT: According to Open Secrets, the top Senate recipient of donations from pro-Israel PACs is Hillary Clinton, with $2,473,367; the lowest is Dirk Kempthorne - Senator from Idaho from 1993-1999 - with $500. All donations took place between 1989 and the current cycle. Data for the current cycle were released by the Federal Election Commission on Tuesday, August 21, 2018. This information is from the Center for Responsive Politics. SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR PAC ENDORSEMENTS: (4 points for first PAC, 1 point for each additional) A political action committee (PAC) is an organization that raises money privately to influence elections or legislation, especially at the federal level. They endorse candidates and help raise money for them. There are currently 20 pro-Israel PACs. (One PAC - J-Street - is supportive of some pro-Palestinian positions. Any politician endorsed by J-Street receives one pro-Palestine point and one pro-Israel point. For more info on J-Street, click on the endorsement box for any candidate with a Palestine badge.) The 20 pro-Israel PACS are 1. J-Street 2. NorPAC 3. Republican Jewish Coalition 4. Florida Congressional Committee 5. Citizens Organized PAC 6. Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs 7. National Action Committee 8. Desert Caucus 9. Bi-County PAC 10. Friends of Israel 11. SunPAC 12. American Principles 13. Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens 14. To Protect Our Heritage PAC 15. Americans United in Support of Democracy 16. Heartland PAC 17. Washington PAC 18. National PAC 19. Louisiana for American Security 20. Grand Canyon State Caucus SCORING KEY FOR SENATE BILLS: (Each flag symbol represents 1 point) 4 pro-Israel points for sponsoring 3 pro-Israel points for cosponsoring 2 pro-Israel points for voting aye where there was a roll call vote 2 pro-Palestine points for Nay, Present, or Not Voting BACKGROUND: On August 16, 2007, the US and Israel Signed a ten-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on US military assistance to Israel. The total assistance over the course of this understanding would equal $30,000,000,000. SOURCE The 2016 MOU reflected grant assistance to Israel from fiscal year 2019 to fiscal year 2028 at a level of $3,300,000,000 annually, totaling $33,000,000,000, the largest single pledge of military assistance ever and a reiteration of the seven-decade, unshakeable, bipartisan commitment of the United States to Israel’s security. The MOU also reflected US support for funding for cooperative programs to develop, produce, and procure missile, rocket, and projectile defense capabilities from FY 2019 to FY 2028 at a level of $500,000,000 per year, totaling $5,000,000,000. This was a Memorandum of Understanding – a non-binding agreement. Currently Congress is considering legislation to make it law (and even more pro-Israel) : S.2497 – United States-Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act of 2018. Read the bill here. The Taylor Force Act worked its way through Congress over the course of 13 months. Finally it passed in March 2018, tucked away inside an omnibus spending bill. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, self-proclaimed “guardian of Israel" (not of the US) had promised to do “everything possible" to help get the Taylor Force Act through, preferably by unanimous consent. SOURCE Our Congress knows how the program works, but refuses to accept it: Sen. Blunt (R-MO) declared, “This is not a welfare system, but a so-called martyr system and we shouldn’t allow the killers and ruthless attackers to be recognized as martyrs in a system that we are part of." The noteworthy – and unspoken – other side of the coin is American aid to Israel, which continues unimpeded, regardless of Israel’s actions. $10 million a day from the US bankrolls the occupation and blockade, its high-tech wars against the unarmed population of Gaza, and ongoing human rights abuses. SOURCE The Taylor Force Act (now law) grew out of one of the most misunderstood practices of the Palestinian Authority: the provision of financial assistance to widows and children of those killed or imprisoned by Israeli forces. Israel calls it "pay to slay" and insists that it incentivizes terrorism. This characterization dehumanizes Palestinians. Please read about this important social safety net program here. SOURCE Yet the U.S. has not cut aid to Israel after 50 years of West Bank occupation, numerous unlawful killings or beatings, even of American citizens. While voting against the Taylor Force Act may represent concern for Palestinians, in some cases the vote may actually represent a pro-Israel motivation. Some Israeli officials and pro-Israel Americans opposed the Taylor Force Act out of concern that it will harm Israel by undermining the Palestinian Authority, which often takes actions useful to Israel. This bill does not use the word "settlement," but legitimizing settlement-made products as "Israeli" is one of its main objectives. S720 opposes calls by the United Nations or the EU to boycott or “blacklist" companies that support Israeli activities in the territories occupied in the 1967 war. The bill further prohibits any US person from supporting this UN call to boycott and establishes stiff fines and/or imprisonment for Americans who violate this prohibition. SOURCE According to The Hill, this legislation was written by AIPAC. It makes it criminal to heed calls from non-state actors (like the UN) to boycott. The maximum civil penalty is $1 million and maximum prison sentence is 20 years. As the ACLU makes clear, the bill makes no distinction between doing business with Israel and doing business with companies that are part of the occupation. SOURCE "A State or local government may adopt and enforce measures...to divest the assets of the State or local government from, prohibit investment of the assets of the State or local government in, or restrict contracting... an entity that the State or local government determines, using credible information available to the public, knowingly engages in a commerce-related or investment-related boycott, divestment, or sanctions activity targeting Israel." SOURCE Primary purpose is to discourage economic pressure targeting settlements and the occupation (and lay groundwork for imposing sanctions against those who engage in such actions. Strongly lobbied by AIPAC (Cardin announced plans to introduce the bill from dais during the 2015 AIPAC policy conference). SOURCE Expresses the sense of Congress that Israel is a major U.S. strategic partner. Some possible actions: providing Israel with defense articles and defense services, including missile and joint missile defense capabilities; expanding U.S.-Israel cyber cooperation; cooperation in the fields of energy, water, agriculture, and alternative fuel technologies; exchanging research, technology, intelligence, information, equipment, and personnel that will advance U.S. national security interests; any sale or export of major defense equipment to a country in the Middle East may not adversely affect Israel's qualitative military edge. SOURCE Shimon Peres was a member of the pre-state Haganah, the militia primarily responsible for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian villages. Though the Nakba is a matter of historical record, Peres insisted that Zionist forces “upheld the purity of arms," and even claimed that before Israel existed, “there was nothing here." In the 1950s, he worked in the defense ministry, and was “an architect of Israel’s nuclear weapons program" which, to this day, “remains outside the scrutiny of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)." Following the 1967 war, his slogan was "Settlements everywhere." SOURCE In 1996, as part of Operation Grapes of Wrath, Peres ordered the Qana massacre, when Israel shelled a UN compound in Lebanon, killing 106 civilians. Afterwards he said, “I am at peace." Peres has consistently backed collective punishment and military brutality. During Operation Cast Lead, Peres described the “national solidarity behind the military operation" as “Israel’s finest hour." SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR SENATE RESOLUTIONS: The anniversary of the "reunification" of Jerusalem is also the anniversary of the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. In the eyes of Palestinians, it was not a reunification, but a loss. The celebration of this day by Americans signals the invisibility or nonexistence of Palestinians. Read the text here. 1 pro-Israel points for voting Yay where there was a roll call vote Background (Summary of resolution): "Objects to U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334. Such resolution characterizes Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and demands cessation of settlement activities...Urges: (1) the U.S. presidential Administrations to uphold the practice of vetoing all Security Council resolutions that recognize unilateral Palestinian actions...and (2) the incoming presidential Administration to... facilitate the resumption of negotiations without preconditions..." SOURCE Read the text of the resolution here. September 2015 saw an increase in extremist Jewish groups visiting a strictly Muslim holy place in Jerusalem, which caused Palestinians to fear that Israel was about to start allowing Jewish worship at the shrine. Israel banned Palestinian Islamist groups that protested against the visits. Many analysts regard this issue of access as key to the increase in tension in the fall of 2015, as Jerusalem saw a spike in street attacks. 36 Israelis and 2 Americans were killed in Palestinian attacks; 222 Palestinians were killed between September and December 2015. SOURCE Wording of the bill includes: Whereas President Abbas has helped to fuel the current violence in recent weeks by falsely casting Israel as the brutal aggressor in multiple public speeches, refusing to condemn the lethal terror attacks, and failing to acknowledge Israel’s right to self-defense; whereas Israel has in recent weeks been subjected to an alarming wave of terrorism directed against innocent civilians by Palestinians armed with knives, meat cleavers, guns, and cars; whereas there have been approximately 69 such attacks since the beginning of October 2015, leaving 11 Israelis dead and another 145 wounded. SOURCE *"S. Res" or "Sense of" resolutions are non-binding resolutions typically used for: going on the record regarding a particular policy or concept; an attempt by some members to persuade other members to support their cause; an attempt to get the president to take/not take some specific action; to express an opinion to the gov't of a foreign nation; or as a formal Thank You note. Background: In 2014, Israel attacked Gaza with the declared purpose of stopping "unprovoked" rocket attacks (this was the 3rd such attack since 2008), although Israel had provoked Gaza by imposing a brutal blockade since 2007, and Israel had already killed approx. 1,600 Palestinians in the previous "wars" to avenge 17 peacetime Israeli rocket deaths in 11 years. The US Senate supported this incursion even though the previous 2 had been bloodbaths. In this "war," 2,200 Palestinians and 73 Israelis were killed. "Condemns the unprovoked rocket fire at Israel and calls on Hamas to cease all rocket and other attacks against Israel." Read the resolution here. Background: In 2012, Israel attacked Gaza with the declared purpose of stopping "unprovoked" rocket attacks (this was the 2nd such attack - the 1st being in 2008-9), although Israel had provoked Gaza by imposing a brutal blockade since 2007, and Israel had already killed over 1,400 Palestinians in the previous "war" to avenge 17 peacetime Israeli rocket deaths in 11 years. The US Senate supported this incursion even though the previous one had been a blood bath. In this "war," 174 Palestinians and 6 Israelis were killed. "Any Palestinian unity government must forswear terrorism, accept Israel's right to exist, and reaffirm previous agreements made with Israel"¦Urges Palestinian leaders to cease efforts at circumventing the negotiation process, including through a unilateral declaration of statehood or by seeking recognition of a Palestinian state from the UN"¦Senate will consider restrictions on aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) should the PA persist in efforts to circumvent direct negotiations..." SOURCE Throughout the summer [of 2011] many Israeli politicians seemed to be in a state of near hysteria over the possibility that the Palestinians would seek to gain recognition of a state through the U.N. It is unclear why this was considered such a threat to Israel, except that it might hinder Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's apparent strategy of pretending to want to negotiate while relentlessly expanding Israeli colonies in the West Bank and Jerusalem. SOURCE See background on 2008-9 "War in the next column, S.Res 10." After the "war," the UN established a fact-finding mission to investigate possible violations of human rights laws by Israel. Richard Goldstone, head of the team, a Jew and Zionist, insisted on also investigating Hamas. The team's findings, a 574-paage report published in Sept 2009, indicated possible war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides, but allegations against Israel were much more serious, including the use of disproportionate force and the targeting of civilians. In 2011, Richard Goldstone unexpectedly rescinded parts of the report; however the rest of the team stood by the report. "AIPAC, in concert with every mainstream pro-Israel organization in the United States, supports this important resolution," said Josh Block, a spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "In echoing the administration's condemnation and calling for concrete action, Congress will be sending the strong message that the United States will not stand for turning the victim into the perpetrator." SOURCE The stated reason for Operation Cast Lead was to "stop the rockets." Rockets launched from Gaza had killed 14 Israelis from 2001-mid 2008, an average of less than 2/year. During the same period, 136 Gazans were killed. (During the US-supported incursion, 1,417 Palestinians and 9 Israelis were killed.) “Expresses commitment to the welfare and survival of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders and recognizes Israel's right to act in self-defense. Reiterates that Hamas must end the rocket and mortar attacks against Israel, recognize Israel's right to exist, renounce violence, and agree to accept previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. Encourages the President to work to support a sustainable cease-fire in Gaza that prevents Hamas from retaining or rebuilding the capability to launch rockets and mortars against Israel and allows for the long term improvement of daily living conditions for Gaza's people…" SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR OPEN LETTERS: 2 points for signing a letter All 100 US senators Signed a letter to United Nations Secy-General António Guterres demanding an end to the “unacceptable" anti-Israel bias in the international body. “…we urge you to ensure that Israel is treated neither better nor worse than any other UN member in good standing," the letter said, describing the “continued targeting of Israel" as “unacceptable." SOURCE And “most troubling" of all, the senators maintained, is the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) which is “charged with shining a light on gross human rights violations." The letter states that “the UNHRC — whose membership currently includes some of the world’s worst human rights violators — instead devotes time to unwarranted attacks against Israel." Read the letter here. SCORING KEY FOR OPEN LETTERS: "AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, flexed its muscle against President Obama and on the side of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu by posting a letter Signed by 88 senators warning President Obama not to back any international measures that would pressure Israel to withdraw from occupied territories. "AIPAC issued a press release announcing the letter and highlighting this passage: “Even well-intentioned initiatives at the United Nations risk locking the parties into positions that will make it more difficult to return to the negotiating table and make the compromises necessary for peace… we must continue to insist that neither we nor any other outsider substitute for the parties to the conflict. "The letter is entirely consistent with the Democratic Party platform pushed through by Hillary Clinton in July, which removed references to occupation and settlements; Cornel West said then that the party was “beholden to AIPAC." SOURCE Read the letter here. 36 US senators called on Congress to add $320 million for Israeli missile defense to the Senate version of a 2017 defense appropriations bill. Their letter to the Armed Services Committee chairmen included: “Amid growing rocket and missile threats…it is prudent for the US and Israel to...accelerate bilateral cooperation on missile defense technologies." Pres Obama threatened to veto legislation with that level of funding. He “opposes the addition of $455 million" for Israeli missile defense procurement and cooperative development programs, though the bill cuts $324 million from non-Israel related defense systems. SOURCE Read about the letter and its signatories here. Legislation to give Israel $38 billion over the next ten years has been working its way through Congress. This is the largest military aid package in U.S. history. Yet, while Israeli media are covering the legislation, virtually no U.S. news reports have informed American taxpayers about this proposed disbursement of their tax money. The proposed military aid amounts to $23,000 per every Jewish Israeli family of four. (Aid to Israel has been on average about 7,000 times greater per capita than U.S. aid to others around the world.) SOURCE 2 points for signing letter 11/9/15 U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) today sent a bipartisan letter Signed by 36 senators to Federica Mogherini, VP of the European Commission. The letter expresses concern over reports that the European Union (EU) intends to move forward with new guidelines this week to label certain products made by Israeli companies imported into the EU. According to the guidelines, products made in Israel's illegal settlements cannot be labeled "Made in Israel." Instead, the labeling must clearly indicate that they were produced in an Israeli settlement. Although the EU explicitly stated that it "does not support any form of boycott or sanctions against Israel," dozens of members of Congress have castigated the EU's decision. SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR AMBASSADOR CONFIRMATION VOTES: 3 pro-Israel points for voting in favor of confirmation See all Senate votes for this confirmation here. David Friedman personally identifies with Israel’s illegal colonization of Palestinian land and raises millions of dollars each year to fund an Israeli settlement. He opposes Palestinian exercising sovereignty over any portion of their historic homeland and speaks approvingly of Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. This contradicts decades of US policy. Our ambassador to Israel must uphold US opposition to Israeli settlements, not represent Israel’s settler movement. SOURCE U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman on Monday accused the media of major bias against Israel in its coverage of the recent violence on the Gaza border, telling reporters to “keep your mouths shut until you figure it out"…Friedman claimed that most journalists covering the clashes in recent weeks had never bothered investigating whether Israel had other viable alternatives for defending its border besides using live fire. SOURCE To see voting record for confirmation, go here. 3 points for voting for or against the confirmation of an Israel partisan as ambassador From Nikki Haley’s confirmation hearing opening statement: “Nowhere has the UN’s failure been more consistent and more outrageous than in its bias against our close ally Israel. Last month’s passage of UN Resolution 2334 was a terrible mistake, making a peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians harder to achieve…I was the first governor in America to sign legislation combatting the anti-Israel Boycott, Divest, and Sanction, or “BDS" movement. .. In fact, I pledge to you this: I will never abstain when the United Nations takes any action that comes in direct conflict with the interests and values of the United States." SOURCE Nikki Haley’s words upon leaving the UN Human Rights Council 6/19/18: "For too long, the Human Rights Council has been a protector of human rights abusers, and a cesspool of political bias." Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu praised the move however, thanking Trump and Haley for their "courageous decision against the hypocrisy and the lies of the so-called UN Human Rights Council. For years, the UNHRC has proven to be a biased, hostile, anti-Israel organization that has betrayed its mission of protecting human rights," he said. SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR ATTENDANCE AT NETANYAHU SPEECH: 1 pro-Israel point for attending BACKGROUND: 1/8/15 House Speaker John Boehner (R) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) arranged to have Netanyahu speak before Congress without notifying the White House, to "make sure," in Boehner's words, "that there was no interference" from the administration... Attendance at Netanyahu's speech became a litmus test of a Congress person's dedication to Israel. SOURCE President Obama believed that reaching a deal with Iran...waas the best way to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, and to prevent a war with Iran. Netanyahu believed that the Iranians are not negotiating in good faith, and that any deal likely to be struck would be a bad one...He believes a nuclear Iran would pose a threat to Israel's very survival. SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: 1-3 pro-Israel or pro-Palestine points, depending on the strength of content 0 points for comments that were "on the fence" BACKGROUND: 7/17/18 From OCHA: Of particular concern is the impact that shortfalls in fuel will have on the provision of critical health, water and sanitation services in Gaza. With electricity cuts up to 20 hours per day, over 220 health and WASH facilities in the Gaza Strip depend on donor-funded emergency fuel to power back-up generators to deliver essential services. 15,000 Palestinians have been injured since 30 March in the context of demonstrations; the health system is on the verge of collapse; and the Israeli blockade has created an 11-year humanitarian crisis that has raised concerns over collective punishment. Simultaneously, historically low levels of funding, along with the unprecedented financial crisis facing UNRWA, leave humanitarian partners ill positioned to meet increasing needs or responding to any further deterioration. SOURCE "SILENCE" for this issue reflects an unwillingness to acknowledge the collective suffering of 2 million people for 11 years, an illegal blockade, and the systematic starvation and forced economic collapse of a people group. It can only be described as a conscious pro-Israel position. As of 11 September 2018, at least 172 Gazans have been killed and approximately 19,000 injured in the peaceful protest that began on March 30 and has continued every Friday since. The demonstrators have been unarmed except for slingshots, some Molotov cocktails, and some kites and tires which have been set on fire. A few people have approached the border fence, but at no time were IDF soldiers' lives threatened. Yet Israel employed snipers with live bullets, including exploding bullets. In many cases, medics were shot, as well as bystanders, children, the disabled, and people with their hands up or running away from the conflict. Yet other than 14 May (the day the US embassy in Jerusalem opened) there has been almost no news coverage. SOURCE "SILENCE" for this issue reflects an unwillingness to acknowledge the right of 2 million people under blockade to peacefully protest their oppression, and the heavy-handed approach by Israel in using snipers to control them. It can only be described as a conscious pro-Israel position. BACKGROUND: On 12/6/17, President Trump said, “I have determined that it is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel…I’ve judged this course of action to be in the best interests of the United States of America and the pursuit of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. This is a long-overdue step to advance the peace process and to work towards a lasting agreement." Both Israelis and Palestinians claim [Jerusalem] as their political capital and as a sacred religious site…The city’s status has been disputed, at least officially, since the 1948 Arab-Israeli War…During the war, Israel seized the city’s western half. It seized the eastern half during the next Arab-Israeli war, in 1967. Most foresee a peace deal that gives western Jerusalem to Israel and eastern Jerusalem to a future Palestinian state. Much of the world already considered the United States a biased and unhelpful actor, promoting Israeli interests in a way that perpetuated the conflict. SOURCE BACKGROUND: Trump's move overturns nearly seven decades of foreign policy and analysts warn it could threaten efforts to broker a peace deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Arab leaders warn it could elicit new outbreaks of violence, prompting the White House to prepare by coordinating plans to protect Americans abroad. Israeli security officials say they are prepared for all scenarios. In addition to angering key allies in the in the Arab world, the move threatens to infuriate allies in the West. SOURCE BACKGROUND: In late August 2017, Israeli Minister of Defense Avigdor Lieberman announced that the Israeli government would evacuate the entire community within several months. Residents of the village were set to be transferred to a site near the former Jerusalem municipal garbage dump near the village of Abu Dis. The Israeli Supreme Court ruled to allow the Israeli army to demolish the entire village of Khan al-Ahmar - a devastating blow to the families who have spent nearly a decade campaigning and fighting a legal battle to remain on their land and maintain their way of life. “Going ahead with the demolition is not only cruel, it would also amount to forcible transfer, which is a war crime," said Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Magdalena Mughrabi. SOURCE BACKGROUND: The so-called “Israel Anti-Boycott" bills, promoted by AIPAC, have made some progress. Both S. 720, introduced by Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) in March 2017, and H.R. 1697, introduced by Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) the same month, claim that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movements penalize firms doing business in Israel, but in fact they are about doing business in Israel’s colonies, not Israel. Both the ACLU and Amnesty International have expressed their opposition to the bills because of their attacks on free speech. SOURCE These bills effectively erase the Green Line in U.S. law. They: declare efforts to promote differentiation between Israel and settlements “reminiscent" of the Arab League Boycott of Israel (which U.S. law bars US companies from participating in); include a Statement of Policy that when it comes to UN policies explicitly targeting settlements and the occupied territories, Congress, “views such policies as actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel" SOURCE Further Reading SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: Background (Summary of resolution): "Objects to U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334. Such resolution characterizes Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and demands cessation of settlement activities...Urges: (1) the U.S. presidential Administrations to uphold the practice of vetoing all Security Council resolutions that recognize unilateral Palestinian actions...and (2) the incoming presidential Administration to... facilitate the resumption of negotiations without preconditions..." SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: Background: In 2014, Israel attacked Gaza with the declared purpose of stopping "unprovoked" rocket attacks (this was the 3rd such attack since 2008), although Israel had provoked Gaza by imposing a brutal blockade since 2007, and Israel had already killed approx. 1,600 Palestinians in the previous "wars" to avenge 17 peacetime Israeli rocket deaths in 11 years. The US Senate supported this incursion even though the previous 2 had been bloodbaths. In this "war," 2,200 Palestinians and 73 Israelis were killed. SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: Background: In 2012, Israel attacked Gaza with the declared purpose of stopping "unprovoked" rocket attacks (this was the 2nd such attack - the 1st being in 2008-9), although Israel had provoked Gaza by imposing a brutal blockade since 2007, and Israel had already killed over 1,400 Palestinians in the previous "war" to avenge 17 peacetime Israeli rocket deaths in 11 years. The US Senate supported this incursion even though the previous one had been a blood bath. In this "war," 174 Palestinians and 6 Israelis were killed. SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: Since 1967, Israel has been building illegal settlements on Palestinian land. Today there are at least 600,000 Israelis living on land that was taken from Palestinians. Israel has been unwilling to negotiate a peace agreement and Palestinians want the 1967 borders. So in 2012, Palestine requested a vote, and the UN decided 138-9 (with 41 abstaining) to make Palestine a “non-member observer state. Israel, the US, and a few of Israel’s allies insist that this move is harmful to the peace process; Palestinians need instead to “return to the negotiating table," which they have insisted they will not do until settlement building stops. SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: The stated objective for Operation Cast Lead was to "stop the rockets." Rockets launched from Gaza had killed 14 Israelis from 2001-mid 2008, an average of less than 2/year. During the same period, 136 Gazans were killed. (During the US-supported incursion, 1,417 Palestinians and 9 Israelis were killed.) SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: It is unlawful under the Fourth Geneva Convention for an occupying power to transfer parts of its own population into the territory it occupies. This means that international humanitarian law prohibits the establishment of settlements, as these are a form of population transfer into occupied territory. Any measure deSigned to expand or consolidate settlements is also illegal. Confiscation of land to build or expand settlements is similarly prohibited. 600,000 Israelis live in settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. SOURCE SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: Senators often make speeches congratulating Israel on the anniversary of its founding or of "the reunification of Jerusalem." The Senate as a body also passes resolutions recognizing these occasions and using them as an opportunity to restate the US's "unbreakable bond" with Israel. SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: 1-3 pro-Israel or pro-Palestine points, depending on the strength of content 0 points for comments that were "on the fence" SCORING KEY FOR COMMENTS: 1-3 pro-Israel or pro-Palestine points, depending on the strength of content 0 points for comments that were "on the fence" Provided here are links to online articles where you can learn more about this candidate. Because there are so many candidates and the internet is such a big place, we are not providing further reading for everyone. If you read an article that you think should be included here, please email it to us at elections2018@ifamericansknew.org Sinema, Krysten ⓘ D Challenger AZ $266,730.00 NORPAC, Citizens Organized PAC, National Action Committee, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, SunPAC, Heartland PAC, Grand Canyon State Caucus, Democrats for Israel Cmte IIIIIIIIIIIIII Statement about Krysten Sinema: Ron Klein, Executive Director of the Jewish Democratic Council, says of Sinema, “her record has been pretty bulletproof on Israel. Her position has been very clear: She is supportive of the agenda of pro-Israel Democrats." The Kyrsten Sinema/Martha McSally race is one of the most hotly contested in the country. RealClearPolitics has it as a tie. Green Party candidate Angela Green has just pulled out of the race and is asking her supporters to vote for Democrat Kyrsten Sinema. NBC News/Marist shows Green polling at 6%. If those 6% go to Sinema, that might make this race winnable. (Krysten Sinema is PEP - "Progressive Except Palestine") SOURCE McSally, Martha R Challenger AZ $182,258.00 American Principles IIII FEINSTEIN, DIANNE D Incumbent CA 1992/11/10 $608,064.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs The only PAC that works for some Palestinian rights is J Street, which calls itself "The Home for pro-Israel, pro-peace Americans." Most of J Street’s positions are pro-Israel: It does not recognize Palestinians' right to land that has been confiscated by Israel It opposes BDS, the international boycott movement against Israel It supports giving Israel billions of dollars of U.S. aid It opposes Palestinians' wish to engage the ICC, Opposed the Goldstone Report, etc. However, J Street also takes some positions counter to those of the Israeli government: it opposes Israeli settlements, sometimes opposes Israel’s more violent actions, supports a state for Palestinians (albeit a very small one), opposes war with Iran and is condemned by a great many Israel partisans (e.g. Alan Dershowitz) and pro-Israel donors to be “anti-Israel” and “pro-Palestinian.” For these reasons, it is fairly courageous for a candidate to be associated with J Street, since many Israel partisans will likely oppose the individual in favor of a candidate whose positions are more hardline Since association with J Street denotes both support for Israel and for some Palestinian rights, we are giving candidates associated with it 1 pro-Israel point and 1 pro-Palestinian point. IIIIIP Nay PP P P P P Yay II Cosponsor III Yay I (see comment)[COMMENT-UN-SETTLEMENT] Yay I Yay I Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay I Yay I Signed II Signed II Signed II No (see comment) PP Yes II Yes I 5/15/18 Letter from Bernie Sanders, Dianne Feinstein, and 11 other senators encouraging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to "do more to alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." The senators suggested that the United States restore its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), encourage the easing of restrictions on the movement of people, goods and equipment in and out of the territory, and support proposals to build Gaza's economy through bold initiatives such as the proposed Gaza Seaport. SOURCE PP "Yesterday, the world witnessed the worst outbreak of violence in Gaza since the last conflict in 2014. Fifty-eight people were killed, and more than 2,700 were injured, raising the death toll to more than 100 since these protests began. While protests must remain peaceful, Israeli forces must exercise greater restraint in the use of live ammunition. I'm deeply disappointed in Ambassador Haley's decision to block a U.N. inquiry into yesterday's events. Without question there should be an independent investigation when the lives of so many are lost. Instead of remaining silent, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo should immediately head to the region to de-escalate this situation. Refusing to act will only reinforce the perception that this administration has chosen a side in this decades-long conflict and can no longer be an honest broker to bring peace to the region." SOURCE PP 12/6/17 “President Trump's decision today to unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel without any progress toward peace is a major setback to a two-state solution. His announcement rejects decades of bipartisan policy and undermines our standing with the Palestinians and our partners in the region." SOURCE PP 11/29/17 Letter from Feinstein and 9 other Senators to PM Netanyahu: "We write today to urge your government not to demolish the Palestinian village of Susiya and the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar. The displacement of entire communities would be an irreversible step away from a 2-state solution, and we urge your government to abandon its efforts to destroy these villages." SOURCE PP The U.S. ambassador to Israel is one of the most sensitive diplomatic postings in the world…It requires carefully chosen words and actions, each of which are weighed and analyzed for even the subtlest of policy implications. In David Friedman, President Trump has nominated someone who lacks the necessary temperament to serve in such a crucial position. His divisive rhetoric and dangerous positions are contrary to long-held policy and would undermine our national security by further inflaming tensions in the region…He has directly supported settlement activity…As a benefactor of the settlement enterprise, it's impossible to imagine Friedman will push to stop settlement expansion…Friedman expressly rejects the two-state solution…I feel his confirmation would only fan the flames of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict…We need an ambassador who will bridge the divide between Israelis and Palestinians, not make it worse. SOURCE PP Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today released the following statement in response to the White House's refusal to veto the UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements: "President Obama's refusal to veto today's UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlements sends a strong message that the United States still supports a two-state solution. Ending settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is an absolute necessity if we're ever to achieve a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians. I've watched with growing concern the increase in Israeli settlements over the years, where approximately 400,000 individuals now live. I believe the expansion of settlements has but one goal: to undermine the viability of a two-state solution. I've met with displaced Palestinian families who have been kicked off land they've lived on for many generations. The ill will that results from these settlements is a significant roadblock to peace, and I again call on Israel to end their expansion so that a two- state solution remains a possibility." SOURCE PP 11/16/16 "I'm deeply concerned by legislation the Netanyahu government is considering that could retroactively legalize all settlements built on private Palestinian land in the West Bank…There are nearly 400,000 settlers already living in 131 officially-recognized Israeli settlements and 97 illegal outposts in the West Bank. Enacting this legislation would fuel further expansion by encouraging the outright confiscation of private Palestinian land. I strongly believe the only way to preserve Israel as a Jewish, democratic state is the establishment of an independent Palestinian state by its side. I'm afraid any hope for two independent states would be lost if this legislation passes. My concerns are compounded by recent calls from some in the Netanyahu government to abandon the two-state solution completely. To preserve the possibility of peace, the Netanyahu government must reject this legislation that forever legalizes West Bank settlements and take steps to demonstrate its commitment to a two-state solution." SOURCE PP de Leon, Kevin (also Dem) D Challenger CA News on Kevin de Leon: In 2013, de Leon, then part of the California State Legislature, signed onto a letter signed onto a letter to the UC Regents congratulating them for fighting off an attempt by some UC student governments to urge University of California to divest from U.S. companies doing business with Israel. de Leon and the other signatories shared the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California (JPAC’s­) concern Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions (BDS) movement on UC campuses is a "divisive and harmful tactic to antagonize and alienate Jewish students on campus, and serves to create further divisiveness rather than a solution that benefits both sides." MURPHY, CHRIS D Incumbent CT 2013/1/03 $154,561.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs IIIIIP Cosponsor III II P P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I (see comment) Yay I Cosponsor (see comment) II N/A (see comment) Yay (see comment) I N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 12/6/17 "President Trump's decision was made without fully considering the political and security implications, and will further set back any hope of a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians. If we mess this up, it could lead to violence in Israel and across the Middle East, put American diplomats in harm's way and jeopardize the fragile regional partnerships we have in our fight against ISIS." SOURCE P 8/1/14 I have consistently supported Israel's right to defend itself. However, I worry nonetheless that the widespread suffering in Gaza will radicalize a new generation of Palestinian and Arab youth against Israel and its backers, including the United States. I am deeply saddened by the loss of life in this conflict, and support an immediate ceasefire to negotiate a political solution to Israel's legitimate concerns about Hamas's weapons and tunnels into Israel, as well as the humanitarian concerns of the Palestinian people."SOURCE 11/20/12 “I strongly condemn the ongoing rocket attacks against Israel, which began without provocation and have resulted in the death of innocent civilians. No country in the world would stand by while missiles were launched towards its towns and cities. I support Israel's inherent right to self-defense and call on those responsible to immediately halt the attacks and avoid a further escalation of violence, which will hurt both Israelis and Palestinians." SOURCE I I 9/29/11 Today, in response to President Mahmoud Abbas' request for the PLO to join the UN as a full member state, Foreign Affairs Committee member Chris Murphy released the following statement: “This bid for recognition attempts to take shortcuts to statehood and a final peace deal -- a deal that can only be made by negotiating with Israel…" SOURCE I I N/A "The settlement construction under Netanyahu did make peace less likely because it ultimately carved out sections of a future Palestinian state in a way that wasn’t constructive. I think, I’m a believer in supporting Israel, but also in not being afraid to call them out, when they’re doing something that isn’t ultimately good for peace." SOURCE P 5/9/17 Senator Chris Murphy knows that being a friend of Israel means speaking out when government policies hurt Israel's future and go against democratic values. (full article available) SOURCE P Corey, Matthew R Challenger CT Russell, Jeffery Green Challenger CT BDS is foreign policy of the sort that each of us can engage in. We've got to talk with our friends and families and neighbors and co-workers about everything! As a result of BDS, I understand that G4S (a multi-faceted "security" multinational with private prisons) has pulled out of the West Bank. SodaStream, an outfit that actress Scarlett Johansson famously has touted, likewise responded to the BDS groundswell. There are many corporate targets of boycott, divestment and sanctions: Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, and more, complicit in Israel's oppressive, unethical practices in Gaza and the West Bank and up in Syria's Golan Heights. Stockholders can put an end to the bulldozing of houses and olive orchards. During the Nakba anniversary, as the U.S. opened some embassy offices in Jerusalem, Israel slaughtered human rights protesters at the security fence. The goals of BDS are Right to Return, Recognition of Equality and Ending the Occupation of Arab Territories. Green Party supports the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination Green Party seeks the end of the occupation and colonization and dismantling of the wall Green Party wants fundamental rights and full equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel Green Party supports the rights of Palestinian refugees to return home as stipulated in UN resolution 194. CARPER, TOM D Incumbent DE 2001/1/03 $165,820.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs IIIIIP III Yay II P (see comment) P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Yay I Yay I Yay I Cosponsor II Yay I Cosponsor II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I 5/15/18 Letter from Bernie Sanders, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Carper, and 10 other senators encouraging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to "do more to alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." The senators suggested that the United States restore its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), encourage the easing of restrictions on the movement of people, goods and equipment in and out of the territory, and support proposals to build Gaza’s economy through bold initiatives such as the proposed Gaza Seaport. SOURCE PP Silence II 11/29/17 Letter from Feinstein, Carper, and 8 other Senators to PM Netanyahu: "We write today to urge your government not to demolish the Palestinian village of Susiya and the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar. The displacement of entire communities would be an irreversible step away from a 2-state solution, and we urge your government to abandon its efforts to destroy these villages." SOURCE PP "Over the past months, many members of Delaware's Jewish community have voiced their concerns to me that Mr. Friedman's track record of divisive statements is not only concerning, but disqualifying as our next ambassador to Israel. This kind of reckless rhetoric, translated into policy, could threaten prospects for a peace agreement and ultimately undermine Israel's security. Unfortunately, Mr. Friedman's hardline views, lack of diplomatic experience and volatile temperament leave me no choice but to oppose his nomination." SOURCE PP 10/20/17 With the Israel Anti-Boycott Act receiving considerable attention on Capitol Hill, Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) revealed that the ACLU’s “legitimate concerns" led him to decline to co-sponsor the bill. “I have not co-sponsored the legislation," the Delaware lawmaker told Jewish Insider. “The ACLU raises some serious concerns about free speech and possible violations of free speech, and those concerns were part of the reason why a number of us chose not to co-sponsor the legislation." SOURCE P May 2008, Israel's 60th anniversary: "To the citizens of Israel, our message is simple and clear: We will continue to stand in solidarity with you. We are proud of what you have become...."Let me close with the words of Israeli President Shimon Peres, spoken only a few days ago: “Over the last 60 years, we have something that previous generations of Jews, those who were trampled in the pogroms and who were burned in the crematoria, did not have...The miracle of the state of Israel…For 60 years, they fought in seven wars that were forced upon us, and that we won. They enabled us to establish an exemplary society, to be trailblazers in the world in… agriculture, medicine and defense, to be a peace-seeking people, a democratic state and a state that seeks justice." SOURCE I I Arlett, Rob R Challenger DE Theodoropoulos, Demitri Green Challenger DE NELSON, BILL D Incumbent FL 2001/1/03 $890,924.00 NORPAC, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, National Action Committee, Desert Caucus, SunPAC, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Democrats for Israel Cmte, Because We Care IIIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) III Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 5/8/08 (Israel's 60th anniversary)... Most of us out here support two states living side by side in peace and security...Palestinians need to reform their institutions and cease those continued terrorist activities against all the innocents. Continued engagement by our country is required to help us get to that goal of peace in the Middle East. I look forward to the continued cooperation of Israel and the United States toward that goal. My hearty congratulations to Israel on its 60th anniversary. SOURCE I I Scott, Rick R Challenger FL $57,568.00 Republican Jewish Coalition, American Principles IIIII HIRONO, MAZIE D Incumbent HI 2013/1/03 $60,875.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Friends of Israel IIIII Cosponsor III Yay II P P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II “We have ongoing concerns as to what’s happening in that part of the world. We’re monitoring the situation." When [interviewers from the Intercept] asked her if she would urge the Israeli military to use restraint, she declined further comment. SOURCE N/A N/A N/A Curtis, Ron R Challenger HI DONNELLY, JOE D Incumbent IN 2013/1/03 $198,196.00 Citizens Organized PAC, Friends of Israel, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, City PAC IIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II P Cosponsor III P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II N/A N/A N/A Braun, Mike R Challenger IN $34,700.00 Republican Jewish Coalition IIII WARREN, ELIZABETH D Incumbent MA 2013/1/03 $152,325.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs IIIIIP Cosponsor III Nay PP P (see comment) P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Yay I N/A N/A (see comment) N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II NO 8/3/18 (Signed by 9 Senators) As the Administration considers its policy towards Gaza, we urge you to release funds for existing programs and projects that could immediately benefit Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip as well as restore U.S. support for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). As you know, as a result of Congressional passage of the Taylor Force Act, none of these funds could be used to directly benefit the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, but instead must be used to help the people most in need in Gaza. SOURCE PPP 4/12/18 (PRE-MAY 14) “I am deeply concerned about the deaths and injuries in Gaza," Warren said. “As additional protests are planned for the coming days, the Israel Defense Forces should exercise restraint and respect the rights of Palestinians to peacefully protest." SOURCE PP 11/29/17 Letter from Feinstein, Warren, and 8 other Senators to PM Netanyahu: "We write today to urge your government not to demolish the Palestinian village of Susiya and the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar. The displacement of entire communities would be an irreversible step away from a 2-state solution, and we urge your government to abandon its efforts to destroy these villages." SOURCE PP "I think the boycott is wrong, but I think outlawing protected free speech activity violates our basic constitution." SOURCE N/A 1/1/12 “I am also a strong proponent of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which I believe to be in the interest of Israel and the United States, with a Jewish, democratic state of Israel and a state for the Palestinian people. The U.S. can and should play an active role in promoting a diplomatic resolution to the conflict that is agreed to by the parties, but I do not believe that a lasting peace can be imposed from the outside or that either party should take unilateral steps - such as the Palestinians' application for UN membership - that move the parties further away from negotiations." SOURCE I N/A Diehl, Geoff R Challenger MA CARDIN, BEN D Incumbent MD 2007/1/03 $987,325.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, National Action Committee, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Washington PAC, CITY PAC IIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III SPONSOR (see comment) III Cosponsor III SPONSOR IIII Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II SPONSOR (see comment) III Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II No (see comment) PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II “I expect that in advance of the President’s announcement appropriate planning and precautions were taken to ensure the safety of U.S. personnel and facilities, and also that careful consideration and consultations focused on not exacerbating conflicts in a region already suffering from unprecedented levels of violence. I look forward to learning more about the Administration’s plans for restarting direct negotiations for a just, sustainable two-state solution." SOURCE "Following extensive consideration of Mr. Friedman's record and taking into account his statements during his nomination hearing, I have concluded that his past record would make it very difficult for him to serve as that unifying force. For that reason, I am unable to support his nomination as America's top diplomat in Israel…Taken together, Mr. Friedman's statements and affiliations make it clear that he does not believe the two-state solution is necessary for a just and lasting peace. I am concerned that Mr. Friedman's history on this issue undermines his ability to represent the United States as a credible facilitator of the peace process. There is no realistic, sustainable prospect for a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians other than two states living side by side with security." SOURCE PP 9/29/16 (Cardin, Portman) "Opponents of Israel around the world...have increasingly promoted efforts to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel as a way to delegitimize and isolate Israel, while bypassing the direct negotiation process necessary to resolve political disagreements... The United States must support Israel by using the considerable economic and diplomatic tools at our disposal to stand up to this economic discrimination against our ally... We cannot allow these attempts to bypass direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians to go unchecked." SOURCE I I “The Security Council resolution…does nothing to move forward the shared goal of two states living side-by-side in peace and security. This resolution is one-sided and unfairly calls out Israel without assigning any blame for the Palestinian role in the current impasse. I support policies and actions working toward a two-state solution through direct negotiations between the parties, but this resolution does nothing to reinforce direct talks…Security Council have not had sufficient time to consider the text. I therefore call on the administration to veto this resolution." SOURCE I I In the letter to President Obama, Senator Cardin urges the president not to pressure Israel into a ceasefire before the threats from Hamas are fully eliminated. “We cannot force a ceasefire upon Israel that leaves them vulnerable to future deadly attacks. … Both Palestinian and Israeli civilians are dying because of the distorted priorities of the leaders of a terrorist organization whose primary goal is to destroy Israel. We must do everything possible to ensure they do not succeed." Senator Cardin’s letter to Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon was a firm rebuttal to the Secretary-General’s recent comments describing Israel’s military operations in Gaza as “atrocious action." In the letter, Senator Cardin writes: “When leaders and organizations of the United Nations blur the clear distinction between a nation-state defending itself and a terrorist organization attempting to murder civilians – and suggest the two are morally equivalent – it results in … dangerous outcomes." SOURCE I I “I strongly support Israel’s right to defend its citizens against threats to its security and existence. The recent military action in Gaza is a direct response to numerous and ongoing rocket attacks from militants in the Hamas-controlled Gaza, which have injured dozens of Israeli citizens. I am deeply saddened by the continued violence and loss of innocent lives." SOURCE I I 6/29/11 “The Senate has delivered a clear message to the international community that United Nations recognition of a Palestinian state at this time does not further the peace process. A permanent and peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only be achieved through direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations...any effort to seek unilateral statehood at the United Nations will have serious consequences for future U.S. aid to the Palestinians...But the road to peace is through negotiations, not subverting them and making a case before the United Nations." SOURCE I I 1/7/09 “I am deeply saddened by the continued violence and loss of innocent lives on both sides of the Israel-Gaza border. I strongly support Israel's right to defend its citizens against threats to its security and its existence. I wholeheartedly agree with President-elect Obama who defined the problem very clearly: If somebody was sending rockets into my house, where my family slept at night I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. The recent military action in Gaza is in direct response to numerous rocket and mortar attacks from militants in the Hamas-controlled Gaza, which have killed and injured Israeli citizens and currently paralyzes the southern regions of Israel. Southern Israel cities have been the target of over 4,000 rockets." SOURCE I I On Israel’s 70th anniversary: “Today I’m mindful of the courage it took President Harry Truman, against the advice of some of his closest advisors, to recognize Israel’s right to exist…It is imperative the United States continue to stand by Israel, help her thrive, and support her on the international stage. In order for Israel to have the future she and her people aspire toward, it is imperative that both the Israelis and the Palestinians agree to a framework to jumpstart negotiations toward a two-state solution. Two states living side-by-side in peace and security remains the only viable option to ensure Israel’s best years are ahead of her – a goal shared by Jews and peace- and freedom-loving people the world over." SOURCE I I 2/1/18 Senators Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Rob Portman (R-OH), co-authors of the Israel Anti-Boycott Act (S. 720), issued the following statement in response to the UN Human Rights Council's (UNHRC) report detailing its work establishing a list of companies operating or investing in certain Israeli-controlled territories, which preliminarily targeted 22 U.S. companies: "We strongly oppose the ongoing efforts to compile a blacklist of companies that do business in Israeli-controlled territories. Twenty-two U.S. companies have been preliminarily identified by the UNHRC's methodology. We oppose all efforts by international organizations seeking to undermine prospects for resuming negotiations for a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians. In response to specific actions like the 2016 UNHRC resolution that created the blacklist, we introduced the Israel Anti-Boycott Act. This bipartisan legislation protects U.S. companies from unsanctioned international boycotts and preserves the space for direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians." SOURCE I I 4/22/10 “Today, it is Israel who continues to acknowledge the necessary framework for any peace agreement --a two state solution. While Israel has shown willingness for direct negotiations, the Palestinians continue to be an unreliable partner in moving forward towards peace." SOURCE I I Campbell, Tony R Challenger MD KING, ANGUS I Incumbent ME 2013/1/03 $171,494.00 J-Street, National Action Committee, National PAC IIIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II P Cosponsor III P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Yay I Yay (see comment) I N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II [Senator King] is hopeful that Secretary Kerry can help facilitate an end to the present conflict. SOURCE P N/A N/A N/A 1/20/15 King was part of a delegation returning from a trip to the Middle East: In Israel, the delegation met with President Reuven Rivlin, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah, and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, as well as Labor Party Leader Isaac Herzog and Hatnua Party Leader Tzipi Livni. The discussion focused on a broad range of bilateral and regional issues as well as a reaffirmation of support for the U.S.-Israel strategic partnership. SOURCE I Brakey, Eric R Challenger ME STABENOW, DEBBIE D Incumbent MI 2001/1/03 $880,330.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, National Action Committee, Friends of Israel, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Heartland PAC, City PAC IIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II P P Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay I Yay I Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 12/29/16 “I strongly disagree with the United States’ abstention [in UN vote on settlements] which allowed a one-sided resolution concerning Israel to be adopted. This resolution is not the way to achieve peace and undermines opportunities for direct negotiations." SOURCE I I ...One important attribute that the people of Israel share with the people of the United States is our system of values. Both countries are lands of freedom and democracy. While these two countries were formed at very different times, they both uphold and honor critical freedoms--freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedom of the press, and government by the consent of the governed. This foundation has led to a country that truly celebrates life and works to improve life across the world. Israel began in a desert, but today, it is a fountain of culture, innovation and industry. This didn't happen overnight, though. David Ben-Gurion and the founders of Israel had a great vision for their country. They built Israel from scratch, turning the arid land into fertile farms and thriving cities. The Israeli people are leaders in celebrating life, as evidenced by their humanitarian works and their pioneering medical advances that will save and improve people's lives, and they are making a real difference throughout the world. SOURCE I I James, John R Challenger MI Squier, Marcia Green Challenger MI KLOBUCHAR, AMY D Incumbent MN 2007/1/03 $259,847.00 National Action Committee, Friends of Israel, SunPAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy IIIIIII Cosponsor III Cosponsor III P P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay (see comment) I Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay (see comment) I Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, meeting with more than 40 critics of the Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip, said Tuesday that she would push for humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza and favored a cease-fire, but she refused to condemn the Israeli offensive. SOURCE I 2008: “Today is a great milestone for the people of Israel and for all…Each step along the way has been paved with the two fundamental and complimentary tenets of the Israeli nation: resilience and faith. The existence of Israel across these six decades, the way it has grown and flourished has provided security and opportunity for its citizens. It has strengthened and enhanced Jewish life around the world. And it has been a beacon of democracy that has made the entire world a safer, more hopeful place…But the people of Israel must know that wherever forces of intolerance gather to endanger their safety or security, the United States will stand beside them in defying and defeating those foes…" SOURCE I I SMITH, TINA D Incumbent MN 2018/1/03 $18,750.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, National Action Committee IIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Silence II Silence II N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Newberger, Jim R Challenger MN Overby, Paula Green Challenger MN Housley, Karin R Challenger MN $6,100.00 MCCASKILL, CLAIRE D Incumbent MO 2007/1/03 $546,905.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Americans United in Support of Democracy IIIIIIP Cosponsor III Nay PP P Cosponsor (see comment) III P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay Yay I Cosponsor II Yay I Yay Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II McCaskill was asked about the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Movement, commonly referred to as BDS, during a town hall stop in Camdenton, Missouri, last week. "I don't know what anti-BDS is," McCaskill said as she moved on to the next question. (HOWEVER SHE CosponsorED BOTH S 170 AND S 720, ANTI-BDS BILLS) SOURCE I Hawley, Josh R Challenger MO $53,650.00 Republican Jewish Coalition, American Principles IIIII Crain, Jo Green Challenger MO WICKER, ROGER R Incumbent MS 2007/12/31 $308,581.00 Florida Congressional Committee, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, American Principles, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, National PAC, Louisiana for American Security, Grand Canyon State Caucus, NorPAC, City PAC IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) III Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II Yay I Yay I Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II No PP YES I Silence II Silence II 12/6/17 "President Trump's courageous decision to relocate America's embassy to Jerusalem is long overdue…Jerusalem is the eternal and undivided home of the Jewish people. We should treat Israel like we do every other country and locate our embassy in its capital city…Concerns that moving the embassy will endanger negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians distract from the real and enduring threats to peace -- the continued refusal to acknowledge Israel's right to exist and the lingering hostility toward the Jewish state from Palestinian leadership and other groups around the world. A peace process that cannot withstand moving the location of America's embassy was never serious in the first place." SOURCE I I 8/3/17 Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) wholeheartedly backed the legislation, “I think it’s pro-free speech. I think it’s self-explanatory." SOURCE I I “Throughout this year, and especially during the past week prior to the recent ceasefire, we have witnessed the citizens of Israel suffer from a continual barrage of missiles, rockets, and mortar shells from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. The Iron Dome system’s success has protected civilians living in Israel’s population centers targeted by these rockets. The Senate has a record of standing with Israel. This amendment [recognizing the success of the Iron Dome] continues that long-held commitment of support." SOURCE I I 9/26/11 “If necessary, the United States should use our U.N. Security Council veto to prevent the Palestinian Authority's unilateral bid for statehood. Any vote by the General Assembly in favor of statehood would be non-binding, but the Palestinians' success there could have broad implications. President Abbas wrote in the New York Times earlier this year that it could ‘pave the way for the internationalization of the conflict as a legal matter’-- ultimately allowing for Palestinians to cause trouble for Israel in international courts and agencies. We cannot let Israel stand alone. As the Palestinian Authority moves away from negotiations, the US must maintain its resolve and work to bring the two sides back together. We cannot let Israel stand alone." SOURCE I I HYDE-SMITH, CINDY R Incumbent MS 2018/4/09 $17,050.00 Citizens Organized PAC, To Protect Our Heritage PAC IIIII Cosponsor III Yay II N/A Cosponsor III Cosponsor III N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Silence II Silence II Mississippi's newest U.S. Senator calls Jerusalem "the cultural and political center of Judaism." Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith posted the comment online, where she says she applauds President Donald Trump's decision to move the American embassy in Israel there from Tel Aviv. SOURCE I I N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6/21/18 The FY2019 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday provides $3.3 billion for military aid for Israel. Overall, the Senate measure is written to support U.S. allies, counter extremism, and promote democracy around the globe. "Our commitment to Israel as our most important ally in the Middle East is backed up with funding in this bill," Hyde-Smith said. "I appreciate that this bill also continues restrictions on the United Nations Human Rights Council, which is decidedly skewed against the best interests of Israel and American interests." SOURCE I I 6/20/18 (S.2497) would authorize U.S. foreign military assistance to Israel over 10 years pursuant to a 2016 Memorandum of Understanding Signed between the two countries. "Strengthening our critical strategic alliance with Israel is in U.S. security interests and the absolute right thing to do for our closest friend in a very dangerous part of the world. I'm pleased to support legislation to guarantee Israel has the resources to protect itself from existing and evolving threats from Iran, Hezbollah, and other bad actors," Hyde-Smith said. In addition to authorizing security assistance for Israel, S.2497 would extend loan guarantee authority and War Reserve Stockpile Authority for five years. The bill reaffirms U.S. policy to ensure Israel's Qualitative Military Edge (QME) or ability to defeat all conventional military threats. SOURCE I I Baria, David D Challenger MS Espy, Mike D Challenger MS $13,600.00 unknown TESTER, JON D Incumbent MT 2007/1/03 $328,629.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, National Action Committee, Friends of Israel, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens IIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II P P Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Yay Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay I Yay Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II When asked during [a pro-Israel] event what could be done to keep the US-Israel relationship bipartisan in this highly polarized political climate, the Senator answered that pro-Israel advocates “need to keep visiting and educating members of Congress on Capitol Hill." SOURCE I Rosendale, Matt R Challenger MT $13,600.00 American Principles IIII HEITKAMP, HEIDI D Incumbent ND 2013/1/03 $228,831.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Because We Care IIIIIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II P Cosponsor III P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Yay I Cosponsor (see comment) II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II N/A N/A N/A Cramer, Kevin R Challenger ND $45,550.00 Republican Jewish Coalition IIII FISCHER, DEB R Incumbent NE 2013/1/03 $155,900.00 NORPAC, Citizens Organized PAC, National Action Committee, Friends of Israel, SunPAC, American Principles, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Heartland PAC, Grand Canyon State Caucus IIIIIIIIIIIIII Nay PP P Cosponsor (see comment) III Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay I Cosponsor II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 12/7/17 “I support POTUS announcement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. It demonstrates a strong commitment to our ally & is consistent with a bill passed by Congress & enacted into law under President Clinton in 1995." SOURCE I I 7/20/17 Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) told colleagues that over the preceding five weeks visiting constituents, “[n]ot a single Nebraskan told me to go back to Washington and vote to limit free speech." She decried the effort as gutting “the First Amendment and the principles of free speech that have endured since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791," and said it “would actually diminish democratic participation and decrease freedom." SOURCE P 7/25/14 “Violence is also raging in the Middle East, including in Israel and Gaza. The deaths of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians are truly tragic, and I completely support Israel's right to defend itself from the rocket attacks launched by Hamas. These attacks on Israel are a reminder to the world that Hamas is undeniably a terrorist group -- one that is committed to Israel's destruction and willing to use indiscriminate violence to achieve its goals. Hamas is firing rockets from civilian areas and hiding rockets in mosques, hospitals and schools. They even tried to hide rockets in a school run by the U.N. This latest round of violence should galvanize the entire international community to press Hamas to renounce violence and commit to peace." SOURCE I I N/A N/A N/A Raybould, Jane D Challenger NE $2,000.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs IIII MENENDEZ, BOB D Incumbent NJ 2006/1/18 $1,306,599.00 Citizens Organized PAC, National Action Committee, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, SunPAC, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Heartland PAC, Louisiana for American Security, Grand Canyon State Caucus, Because We Care, NorPAC, Mid Manhattan PAC IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 12/6/17 "Today, I welcome the announcement from the President affirming established U.S. law that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and that the Embassy of the United States should reside in the capital. I have always supported moving the United States Embassy to Jerusalem." SOURCE I I "Today, I cast my vote to confirm David Friedman as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. In recent weeks, I have heard from many constituents with a passion for the U.S.-Israel relationship and with different views on Mr. Friedman's nomination…We discussed his commitment not just to America's national security and the U.S.-Israel relationship, but also his commitment to supporting Israelis and Palestinians in their efforts to negotiate a two-state solution, and the right of the Palestinian people to self-governance and prosperity. Mr. Friedman also spoke of his past work promoting economic development and opportunity in the West Bank…" SOURCE I I At 2017 AIPAC: "[BDS is] a campaign to boycott Israeli goods and Israeli scholars that treats the only democratic, free-market economy in the Middle East as the cause of all the region's challenges. The last time I checked, Israel stands alone in a desert full of despots that have no regard for democratic freedoms, human rights, and the rule of law…BDS activists turn the other way as Bashar al Assad and Vladimir Putin bomb civilians without hesitation…And they claim the mantle of free speech to defend this smear campaign against Israel, they demand that Israeli academics in every field of study be silenced, that students who are Jewish, who are pro-Israel…are silenced. But we must not be silent. We must stand together to ensure that the letters B.D.S. are seen for what they are-- bias directed solely at one people and one country by those who should know better." SOURCE I I 12/23/16 "I am deeply disturbed by today's actions at the UN Security Council. The international body once again, instead of focusing on grave humanitarian crises and political instability throughout the world chose to single out Israel and further weaken prospects for peace. This resolution was biased, ignored the role Palestinians play in undermining stability and peace, and serves only to continue to delegitimize Israel on the global stage." SOURCE I I 7/10/14 Robert Menendez and 3 others today introduced a resolution expressing support for the State of Israel as it defends itself against unprovoked attacks from the Hamas terrorist organization. The resolution: Reaffirms the United States' support for Israel's right to defend its citizens and ensure the survival of the State of Israel; condemns the unprovoked rocket fire at Israel; calls on Hamas to immediately cease all rocket and other attacks against Israel; and calls on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to dissolve the unity governing arrangement with Hamas and condemn the attacks on Israel. SOURCE I I 2012: "For years now, the terrorists in Hamas-controlled Gaza have refused to recognize Israel's right to exist and have launched thousands of rockets and missiles at Israel and innocent civilians in southern Israel…resulting in the senseless destruction of countless homes and the tragic loss of innocent lives. In the face of this undeterred threat, we must again recognize Israel's absolute and inherent right to defend itself and demand that Hamas immediately renounce the use of violence and recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state." SOURCE I I 2011: "If President Abbas insists on acting irresponsibly this week in New York [by pursuing UN Security Council recognition of a Palestinian state], he will make clear that he does not value America's support and assistance to the Palestinian people and that Israel does not have a serious partner in the peace process," said Menendez. "My Senate colleagues and I, as we make difficult budget decisions in the months ahead, will have no choice but to re-evaluate the priority of U.S. taxpayer contributions to the Palestinian Authority," he added. SOURCE I I Jan. 2009: "For months…the terrorist organization Hamas has been relentlessly firing missiles into Israel from Gaza, spreading terror, inflicting damage, and killing innocent civilians. No country would be expected to sit on its hands and simply allow its citizens to endure these kinds of vicious attacks without retaliating against the responsible party. I strongly support Israel's right to self-defense and its decision to go after Hamas in response to the unyielding and increasingly far-reaching missile attacks. We all want peace in Gaza and hope that it will come very soon, but peace cannot be achieved so long as Hamas continues missile attacks." SOURCE I I 2008: “60 years after its founding, we now witness a strong nation, a steadfast ally and strategic partner of the United States, a dynamic democracy with a thriving economic, political, cultural, and intellectual life, that survives despite the heavy costs of war, terrorism, and unjustified diplomatic and economic boycotts. We now witness a compassionate nation, which regularly sends humanitarian aid, search-and-rescue teams, mobile hospitals, and other emergency supplies, to help victims of disasters around the world…By honoring and commemorating the 60th anniversary of Israel…we take a stand against hatred and discrimination everywhere." SOURCE I I 3/28/17 "Those of you who know me know three things: First, you know that I believe it is in the best interests of the United States to have a strong, unwavering, unyielding, unbreakable bond with the State of Israel. Second, you know that I believe in the right of the Jewish people to live in peace and security in the indisputable homeland of their ancestors….And finally, you know that no matter which way the political winds are blowing, or which way the news cycle is going, when it comes to standing up for Israel, you will never -- ever-- find me spinning like a weathervane, but rather a strong moral compass that bears due east the 5,879 miles from Washington to Jerusalem." SOURCE I I 10/31/11 "Today's UNESCO vote to recognize Palestine as a Member State is an unacceptable attempt by the Palestinians to circumnavigate the peace negotiation process. This is a symbolic vote, but one that will harm the attempts at restarting negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. I strongly urge the State Department to enforce U.S. law and immediately cut off all funding to UNESCO and any other international organization that recognizes a Palestinian state. The Palestinian leadership is aware of U.S. law on this issue and it is very unfortunate that it is forcing the U.S. to take such drastic steps." (U.S. law prohibits funding for UN agencies in which a Palestinian state is given membership. At the time of this statement, the United States currently pays 22 percent or $80 million annually of UNESCO's budget.) SOURCE I I Hugin, Bob R Challenger NJ Hoffman, Madelyn Green Challenger NJ HEINRICH, MARTIN D Incumbent NM 2013/1/03 $262,725.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, National PAC IIIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II P P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I (see comment) Cosponsor II Cosponsor II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP No PP NO 5/15/18 Letter from Bernie Sanders, Martin Heinrich, and 11 other senators encouraging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to "do more to alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." The senators suggested that the United States restore its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), encourage the easing of restrictions on the movement of people, goods and equipment in and out of the territory, and support proposals to build Gaza’s economy through bold initiatives such as the proposed Gaza Seaport. SOURCE PPP Silence II “Moving the United States embassy in Israel to the holy city of Jerusalem upends a 50-year policy of both Democratic and Republican Presidents and will endanger Israel's security and harm American interests. The decision is misguided and unnecessarily provocative. Once again, this President appears oblivious to the consequences of his actions." SOURCE P 11/29/17 Letter from Feinstein, Heinrich, and 8 other Senators to PM Netanyahu: "We write today to urge your government not to demolish the Palestinian village of Susiya and the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar. The displacement of entire communities would be an irreversible step away from a 2-state solution, and we urge your government to abandon its efforts to destroy these villages." SOURCE PP 2017 joint statement from Heinrich and Feinstein: “Since the Jewish people are already a minority, a one-state solution cannot be both majority Jewish and democratic. We have not heard a plausible proposal where a one-state solution wouldn’t require a Jewish minority to govern a non-Jewish majority. To avoid this outcome, we urge the Trump administration to prioritize the Israeli-Palestinian conflict…That must include a halt to Israeli settlement construction and an end to Palestinian incitement of terror." SOURCE PP N/A N/A N/A Rich, Mark R Challenger NM HELLER, DEAN R Incumbent NV 2011/5/09 $170,145.00 Republican Jewish Coalition, Citizens Organized PAC, Friends of Israel, Americans United in Support of Democracy IIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II Yes II YES I Silence II Entering tent for Jerusalem Embassy ceremony, I ask, @SenDeanHeller what he thinks of Gaza death toll. “It’s obviously terrible...We’re all praying we don’t have these kinds of incidents" SOURCE P 5/14/18 (Sen. Heller was in Jerusalem for the embassy opening) “Today is a day of celebration for the United States and Israel, two nations that are now joined closer together. The United States is finally righting a wrong and fulfilling its decades-old promise by relocating the American embassy to Jerusalem. As the author of legislation that would do just that, I’m humbled to witness this ceremony." SOURCE I I 7/24/14 Today, U.S. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) spoke on the Senate floor in steadfast support of Israel’s right to defend itself against terrorism caused by Hamas, including the eradication of underground tunnels used by the terrorist organization to kidnap Israeli citizens SOURCE I I N/A 2012: “As Israel celebrates this anniversary, it’s important that the United States remains committed to standing by our strongest ally in the Middle East. Israel has been a friend of the United States for many decades and has consistently promoted the ideals of democracy. This partnership has historically provided invaluable international intelligence that has saved the lives of countless innocent civilians. I will continue to support the State of Israel and its citizens as they strive for peace in the region." SOURCE I I 1/18/15 A new bill introduced in the Senate demands that President Obama move the US embassy to Jerusalem… Sponsored by Dean Heller of Nevada and Ted Cruz of Texas... the bill, if passed, will eliminate the president’s authority to delay or not implement the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995. In other words, it is an attempt to force the United States to move its embassy to Jerusalem. SOURCE I I 1/3/17 “My support for Israel is unwavering," said Heller. “From my very first days as a United States Senator, I have prioritized the strengthening of the important relationship shared between Israel and the United States. That’s why I’m proud to reintroduce the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act." He was one of three to introduce bill. SOURCE I I Rosen, Jacky D Challenger NV $240,791.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Washington PAC, Democrats for Israel Cmte IIIIII GILLIBRAND, KIRSTEN D Incumbent NY 2009/1/26 $431,578.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs IIII Cosponsor III Nay PP P WITHDREW (see comment) PP P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) III Cosponsor (see comment) II SPONSOR III N/A Signed II Signed II Signed (INITIATED) III Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 8/3/17 Re anti-BDS bill, which Gillibrand had co-sponsored: “I’m going to urge them to rewrite it to make sure it says specifically this does not apply to individuals," she said after a meeting with the ACLU. “It has to be very specific that someone who is in favor of BDS can speak their mind and somebody who is against BDS can speak their mind, but you are always allowed to speak your mind. So I’m going to try and get the bill revised so there’s no ambiguity, that it’s just an extension of this foreign policy, which I think does make sense." Gillibrand withdrew her co-sponsorship. SOURCE P Dec. 2016: "One-sided resolutions at the UN are not helpful in trying to resolve the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians...The only way to resolve this conflict is through direct negotiations between the two parties that lead to a two-state solution with a future Palestinian state living in peace and security with Israel." SOURCE I I Gillibrand urges $622 million for Israel during Operation Protective Edge: “I stand with the people of Israel in this difficult time and firmly support Israel’s right to self-defense against rocket attacks by terrorists in Gaza. This critical investment will go a long way towards protecting our nation’s strongest ally in the Middle East. We must continue to advance and strengthen the U.S.-Israeli cooperation on missile defense." SOURCE I I “We strongly reiterate our support for Israel’s right to self-defense as a barrage of missiles from Gaza are attacking the people of Israel and endangering innocent lives. The passage of this Senate resolution clearly expresses the United States’ unwavering commitment to the security of our nation’s close and historic ally in the Middle East. We firmly stand united with Israel against terrorism." SOURCE I I 9/23/11 "I am deeply disappointed in Palestinian President Abbas' actions today. The Palestinians' unilateral bid for statehood through the United Nations is a harmful distraction from achieving true peace and stability between Israel and Palestine. The only credible path for a two-state solution is through the negotiating table. The United States has made clear to the Palestinians and to others around the world that we stand with our ally Israel at this time of grave risk and insecurity." SOURCE I I N/A Farley, Chele R Challenger NY $2,500.00 unknown BROWN, SHERROD D Incumbent OH 2007/1/03 $835,382.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Desert Caucus IIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II P (see comment) P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay (see comment) I Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II Yay I Cosponsor II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I 5/15/18 Letter from Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown, and 11 other senators encouraging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to "do more to alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." The senators suggested that the United States restore its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), encourage the easing of restrictions on the movement of people, goods and equipment in and out of the territory, and support proposals to build Gaza’s economy through bold initiatives such as the proposed Gaza Seaport. SOURCE PPP Silence II "Our ambassador to Israel must represent the broad American support for a two-state solution and be a passionate advocate for peace. Mr. Friedman's past comments, temperament, and lack of experience give me serious doubts that he can fulfill America's commitment to Israel's security and values." SOURCE PP “I strongly support Israel and measures to combat BDS efforts directed against Israel. I commend Senators Cardin and Portman on this new version of their anti-BDS legislation, which signals progress in their efforts to ensure strong enforcement and clarify the activities covered by the bill. I’ll continue to work with my colleagues to move this legislation forward." SOURCE I "Any lasting peace must be negotiated between Israelis and Palestinians, not imposed by the international community. My hope is that a new year will bring a new commitment by both sides to earnestly work towards a peace agreement." SOURCE I 7/16/14 "Israel has a right and an obligation to defend its people against indiscriminate rocket attacks launched by a terrorist group. The American people stand alongside our closest ally in the Middle East in opposing these senseless provocations." SOURCE I I “Israel must have the right and the resources to defend itself. Hamas and its terrorist allies must cease these rocket attacks immediately. Terrorist attacks are not the path to peace. From Iron Dome, to other military aid and assistance, to engaging those who seek peace—the United States stands with Israel." SOURCE I I 9/21/11 “In the coming days, the next step in an escalation against Israel will take place should the Palestinians seek recognition as a state from the United Nations. Instead of negotiating directly with Israel, as the Palestinians have often committed to do as far back as the Oslo agreement, they are about to seek to exclude Israel from any role in deciding issues that are critical to achieving a permanent peace. That must not occur. This action could set back the peace process for decades to come...Today, as it has done in the past, Congress must stand firm with Israel. It must oppose any Palestinian action at the U.N. which would circumvent its commitment to negotiate. Our support for Israel must be united." SOURCE I I 9/14/12 U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) released the following statement today to commemorate Rosh Hashanah--the Jewish New Year "Especially during the High Holy Days, we pause to reflect upon our nation's friendship with our most important ally in the Middle East--Israel. Just as families in Ohio will hear the call of the shofar and toast to a sweet New Year with apples and honey, so will our friends and allies in Israel. As Israel continues to face growing dangers to its security, our unshakeable bond remains stronger than ever--and I have been proud to work to ensure that Israel can defend itself against these threats." SOURCE I I Renacci, Jim R Challenger OH $34,250.00 Citizens Organized PAC, American Principles IIII CASEY, JR, BOB D Incumbent PA 2007/1/03 $600,619.00 Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, National Action Committee, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Heartland PAC, Washington PAC, City PAC IIIIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III (see comment) P Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II When [interviewers from the Intercept] asked if the Israeli military should stop shooting at demonstrators, he claimed ignorance. “I just haven’t seen those reports," he said. SOURCE II “Longstanding U.S. policy has been to stand with Israel against attempts to use the United Nations to internationalize the peace process, and that policy should be maintained. The best path to peace is direct talks between the parties, and resolutions like the one offered at the Security Council this week have the potential to move peace further from our reach." SOURCE I I “It is an appalling but often-used tactic by Hamas to launch rockets indiscriminately at Israeli population centers…Hamas is a terrorist organization that rejects a two-state solution and celebrates the kidnapping and murder of innocent civilians…and has no intentions of working towards peace in the region…Hamas must immediately cease the unprovoked rocket attacks that terrorize the Israeli people…my thoughts today are with the families on both sides who continue to live under constant security threats. Israel has an inherent right to self-defense and we should reaffirm our unwavering support for the security and safety of its people." SOURCE I I Statement from Casey and 4 other senators after meeting with Israeli ambassador Michael Oren: “we express our solidarity with Israel during this deeply challenging period and denounce the reprehensible and indiscriminate rocket attacks launched by Hamas and Islamic Jihad against innocent Israeli citizens. We strongly support Israel's right to defend its people and call on those responsible for the violence to cease their attacks against Israel immediately. Escalation will only lead to further suffering on both sides." SOURCE I I 5/16/11 U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) today joined a bipartisan group of Senate colleagues in introducing a resolution opposing Palestinian efforts to seek unilateral recognition at the United Nations and expressing firm belief that any Palestinian unity government must publicly and formally forswear terrorism, accept Israel's right to exist, and reaffirm previous agreements made with Israel. SOURCE I I 1/8/09 U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-PA), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, cosponsored a resolution that recognizes Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirms the United States' strong support for Israel. The resolution is expected to pass the Senate later today. "Israel, like every other state, has the sovereign right to defend itself against attacks on its citizens. The situation we see today in Gaza is a tragedy, but we cannot afford a return to the status quo where Hamas continues to terrorize the Israeli people. I look forward to working with the incoming Obama Administration to restore American leadership on behalf of a durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with two states co-existing side by side in peace and security." SOURCE I I “This week, we are celebrating 68 years of Israel’s independence…More than 45 years ago, President John F. Kennedy said, “Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and the home of the brave… It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom." Incredible sacrifices that have been made for Israel’s national security and economic growth…As we mark 68 years of independence, we should reflect upon the service and sacrifice, as well as the unbreakable bond of friendship that has helped Israel to “endure and flourish." SOURCE I I Barletta, Lou R Challenger PA $12,500.00 American Principles IIII Gale, Neal Green Challenger PA WHITEHOUSE, SHELDON D Incumbent RI 2007/1/03 $409,867.00 J-Street, Florida Congressional Committee, Citizens Organized PAC, Friends of Israel, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, Americans United in Support of Democracy IIIIIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II P P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III (see comment) Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay (see comment) I Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II NO 5/15/18 Letter from Bernie Sanders, Sheldon Whitehouse, and 11 other senators encouraging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to "do more to alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." The senators suggested that the United States restore its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), encourage the easing of restrictions on the movement of people, goods and equipment in and out of the territory, and support proposals to build Gaza’s economy through bold initiatives such as the proposed Gaza Seaport. SOURCE PPP Silence II 5/14/18 “President Trump’s decision to relocate the embassy to Jerusalem without a broader plan has inflamed tensions and risks undermining our leadership role in the region," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. “This brings us no closer to a lasting peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians — the outcome all parties should be working toward." SOURCE PP "Hamas has cast aside a cease-fire agreement brokered by the Egyptians and indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilians with a barrage of rockets and mortars…leaving Israel with little choice but to respond with force. Israel must defend its people against these attacks. Now, like all Americans, I hope for strong diplomatic intervention…I regret that the Bush Administration's years of neglect allowed the peace process to deteriorate so gravely, and I'm confident that President-Elect Obama's Administration will bring a new commitment and new leadership to address the wider conflict in the Middle East." SOURCE I I 2009: "Today, we celebrate the 61st anniversary of Israel's statehood. The United States has a unique bond with Israel and her people, a staunch and enduring alliance founded on our nations' shared commitment to democracy. I had the opportunity to visit Israel for the first time earlier this year, and in meetings in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and the West Bank, I saw some reasons for hope for a durable peace…Israel's continued success is a living monument to the strength and will of the Jewish people there and around the world. I have no doubt that Israel will continue to grow and prosper into the future." SOURCE I I Flanders, Bob R Challenger RI Blackburn, Marsha R Challenger TN $46,600.00 Desert Caucus IIII Bredesen, Phil D Challenger TN $49,800.00 Citizens Organized PAC, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Friends of Israel IIIIII CRUZ, TED R Incumbent TX 2013/1/03 $703,241.00 Republican Jewish Coalition, Citizens Organized PAC, American Principles, Maryland Association for Concerned Citizens, Louisiana for American Security IIIIIIII Cosponsor III Nay PP Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II Yes II YES I Silence II 5/16/18 "They weren't [peaceful protests] at all, and what we're seeing from the media is absolute propaganda. It's absolutely shameless," Sen. Cruz said. "What's going on is a propaganda effort, which is to coincide with the opening of the embassy. Hamas is sending people out to die charging the wall with maps. If they breach the wall and enter Israel, they have maps of where there are residential communities and go and commit a terror act. They're using Molotov cocktails. One of the things they're using is they're flying kites with Molotov cocktails attached to the kite, in order to get the kite over the wall and use it to light on fire the Israeli fields and to wage terror. The IDF (Israel Defense Forces) are protecting the nation of Israel from terrorists who are attacking and provoking." SOURCE III "I have long advocated for the U.S. to relocate our Embassy to Jerusalem, where it should be, and I applaud President Trump for keeping his word and moving the embassy. Jerusalem has been Israel's capital going back to founding of the modern state of Israel and it's been the eternal capital of the Jewish people for over 3,000 years. Moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem recognizes this reality and sends a powerful message to those who wrongly seek to delegitimize Israel. Today, America kept her word and stood with the nation of Israel as we move the U.S. Embassy to Israel's rightful capital." SOURCE I I "I strongly support David Friedman to serve as the next U.S. Ambassador to Israel and commend President Trump for nominating Mr. Friedman to this position. Israel is one of America's closest and strongest allies in the world. David Friedman is dedicated to restoring and strengthening our critically important alliance with Israel that provides enormous benefits for our two countries. He recognizes the U.S. must firmly stand with Israel against those that threaten the existence and security of both our countries, and combat efforts to delegitimize Israel, such as biased resolutions at the United Nations and the discriminatory Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement. His leadership will bring exceptional moral clarity to such an important position during a pivotal time of immense and growing instability in the Middle East. I congratulate Mr. Friedman on being approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and urge my Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support him during his vote on the Senate floor." SOURCE I I "On a momentous day in which we joined our close ally Israel in celebrating its 69th Independence Day, I am deeply proud that the state of Texas adopted legislation to combat the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. Texas has sent a powerful message that it stands with Israel and will not do business with or invest certain public funds in companies that participate in this discriminatory economic campaign that intentionally seeks to delegitimize and destroy the Jewish State. This bill strengthens an already steadfast Texas-Israel relationship -- anchored by shared values and exemplified through a robust economic and military partnership. I commend Governor Greg Abbott for signing this anti-BDS bill into law and Representative Phil King and Senator Brandon Creighton for their steadfast leadership in sponsoring this measure." SOURCE I I 1/12/17 U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) today introduced the Safeguard Israel Act, which will cut off funding to the United Nations until the President certifies to Congress that UNSC Resolution 2334 has been repealed. The resolution passed last month undermines and delegitimizes our ally, Israel. In their legislation, Sens. Cruz and Graham outline numerous reasons why UNSC Resolution 2334 should be repealed, including: It attempts to pre-judge the basis for negotiations, predetermine the outcome of negotiations, and dictate terms and conditions...It falsely claims that Israel's sovereignty over the eastern part of Jerusalem and Jewish communities in the West Bank are illegal under international law, and that the Old City of Jerusalem, along with the Temple Mount, the holiest site for the Jewish people, and the Western Wall are "occupied Palestinian territory.'' It encourages the International Criminal Court to open an illegitimate formal investigation against Israel. It will help to strengthen the Palestinian diplomatic, economic, and legal warfare campaign against Israel and encourages boycotts, divestments, and sanctions against Israel. SOURCE I I N/A N/A N/A 7/3/15 U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, released the following statement in response to the United Nations Human Rights Council vote in condemnation of Israel: "Our single vote in opposition is just and the abstentions of our friends are welcome, but at this point they are meaningless gestures. It is time to stop ceding moral authority to the UNHRC and tell the truth about this hopelessly biased and anti-Semitic institution. There is no equivalency between Israel's right to self-defense and Hamas' genocidal aggression against the Jewish people. There is no equivalence between Israel's extraordinary efforts to protect civilians and Hamas' use of the Palestinian people as human shields. Being party to any body that believes there is only perpetuates this injustice. The United States should stop legitimizing the UNHRC with our membership and withdraw now." SOURCE II 4/28/14 “Every Member of this body has expressed our bipartisan commitment for the United States to stand resolutely with our friend and ally, the nation of Israel…It was therefore with great sadness that I read this morning about the comments of Secretary of State John Kerry, who reportedly suggested… that Israel could become an apartheid state if his proposed two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process fails… Apartheid is inextricably associated with one of the worst examples of state-sponsored discrimination in history--the apartheid system in South Africa that was ultimately brought down by the heroic resistance of Nelson Mandela inside the country, supported by a concerted campaign of diplomatic and economic sanctions by the international community. There is no place for this word in the context of the State of Israel." SOURCE I I O'Rourke, Beto (voting record shown is from House) D Challenger TX $315,727.00 J-Street IP In the House, cosponsored H Res 729, support for robust new MOU with Israel SOURCE III Yay II Cruz on O'Rourke: "On Israel, he has the most anti-Israel record of any Democratic Senate nominee in the country. In 2014, when Hamas was raining rockets down on Israel, Beto O’Rourke was one of eight members of the House of Representatives to vote against funding Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system.” O'Rourke's response: “When asked to add a supplemental quarter of a billion dollar appropriation to the Iron Dome without debate, without discussion, without any real information, I didn’t feel that I could in good conscience vote to spend that money." That vote did not go over well with members of the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Members of that group, including some from El Paso, began circulating emails saying O’Rourke was anti-Israel. O’Rourke was flooded with e-mails, texts, and calls at the time, according to the El Paso Times, and was blasted by some residents at a town hall meeting as he tried to explain his vote. 2 months later, O'Rourke voted for $351 million in funding to Israel's military, on top of the $700 million already approved. N/A N/A (see comment) N/A N/A N/A N/A NO As strong supporters of the United States' commitment to the security of the State of Israel and the safety and dignity of Israelis and Palestinians alike, we write to urge you to continue vital US contributions to the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) and bilateral assistance to the Palestinians...Alongside robust and expanding US aid to Israel, Congress has regularly appropriated funds to help bolster Palestinian quality of life and governance, both bilaterally and through contributions to UNRWA, and security in the region. This assistance also helps to improve the lives of millions of children in the Palestinian territories, where more than 50 percent of children live below the poverty line... SOURCE PP II "This policy on the part of the president, this decision he made to move the embassy, was absolutely, unnecessarily provocative..."Ultimately, it's going to be up to those two powers to produce the peace, but we can do a better job and we can certainly stop providing incentives and incitement to violence, which I think that move did," SOURCE II We should be aware of the fact that the U.N. is dangerously preoccupied with Israel (to the exclusion of other serious and more pressing issues: e.g. Syria) and clearly biased against her. That is of great concern to me — as are other manifestations of this bias, including the Boycott Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement. There is not enough pressure applied to the Palestinian Authority and those who have leverage with its leadership to refrain from acts of terror, incitement to terror, and the cultural context (including in textbooks) that provides part of the moral underpinning for terror to thrive. SOURCE II In my opinion, the U.N. resolution does not do justice to all of the issues that have prevented peace in the region over the last half-century. And the resolution is too one-sided. While it appropriately identifies settlement construction as a major obstacle to peace, it doesn’t do nearly enough to call out fundamental failures in Palestinian leadership that have also contributed to the violence and stalemate. SOURCE I “I could not in good conscience vote for borrowing $225 million more to send to Israel [for Iron Dome], without debate and without discussion, in the midst of a war that has cost more than a thousand civilian lives already, too many of them children," he wrote. He also stressed that with an aid package for Israel up for a vote in two months, he felt no need to rush more spending without adequate debate when Congress was all but empty. SOURCE P N/A N/A N/A “Thanks for reaching out. Beto is a proud advocate of Israel. He believes that Israel is critically important to the United States, because it is the home of the Jewish people, because it is an exemplary democracy that shares our values, and because it is a crucial contributor to our national security objectives in the region. Beto has voted for and will continue to support foreign aid for Israel. He cosponsored and then voted for a resolution in the last Congress to encourage the Obama Administration to quickly finalize a robust and long-term Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Israel. The resulting agreement will last 10 years and provide Israel $3.8 billion per year..." SOURCE II While in the House, Beto O'Rourke did not cosponsor HR 4391, No Way to Treat a Child SOURCE II Romney, Mitt R Challenger UT $1,027,393.00 unknown Wilson, Jenny D Challenger UT KAINE, TIM D Incumbent VA 2013/1/03 $527,449.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Friends of Israel, Americans United in Support of Democracy IIIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Yay I Cosponsor II Yay I Cosponsor (see comment) II N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II NO 4/27/18 "I am deeply saddened by the cycle of violence and protests at the Gaza-Israel border. These events make clear the desperate need to alleviate this ongoing humanitarian crisis and actively pursue a political resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The lack of power, clean water, adequate medical care and other necessities in Gaza not only exacerbates the hardships faced by its population, but benefits extremist groups like Hamas who use this deprivation and despair to incite violence against Israel. With Gaza on the brink of economic collapse, the Trump Administration should urgently restore funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) and work with Israel and Egypt to ease the blockade and reduce human suffering." SOURCE P Silence II 12/6/17 "Meaningful progress towards an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal has been stalled for years. While I hope that dynamic will change, I am very concerned that President Trump's announcement will further s‎et back efforts to achieve a two-state solution. I support ‎the longstanding U.S. policy that Jerusalem's permanent status needs to be decided by the parties in final peace negotiations. SOURCE P "I am a staunch supporter of the critically important U.S.-Israel partnership and have long been committed to strengthening the unbreakable bond between our two countries. The U.S. Ambassador to Israel serves as the steward of this vital relationship in a volatile part of the world and must be able to engage effectively with representatives across Israeli society, promote dialogue, and demonstrate respect for different views. While it is clear that David Friedman is committed to the U.S.-Israel relationship, his history of inflammatory rhetoric is poorly matched for this role." SOURCE P 7/18/14"The escalating conflict between Hamas and Israel is deeply tragic and inflicts serious damage on the people in Israel and Gaza. Based on a cynical political calculation, Hamas, which is a terrorist organization, appears to be intentionally disrupting any chance for progress on peace discussions between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Hamas's decision to escalate rocket attacks on Israel was deSigned to provoke an Israeli defensive response that would necessarily endanger Gaza residents. I fully support Israel's right to defend itself against these indiscriminate rocket attacks, but they also should do everything necessary to minimize harm to civilians and facilitate humanitarian access." SOURCE I N/A N/A N/A Stewart, Corey R Challenger VA SANDERS, BERNIE I Incumbent VT 2007/1/03 $85,707.00 J-Street IP Nay PP P P P P Yay III Yay II Yay I (see comment) Yay I Yay I Yay I Yay I Yay I Yay I Signed II No PP No PP NO 5/15/18 Letter from Bernie Sanders and 12 other senators encouraging Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to "do more to alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip." The senators suggested that the United States restore its funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), encourage the easing of restrictions on the movement of people, goods and equipment in and out of the territory, and support proposals to build Gaza’s economy through bold initiatives such as the proposed Gaza Seaport. SOURCE PPP The killing of Palestinian demonstrators by Israeli forces in Gaza is tragic. It is the right of all people to protest for a better future without a violent response. SOURCE PP 12/5/17 "I'm extremely concerned by reports that President Trump plans to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the state of Israel. There's a reason why all past U.S. administrations have avoided making this move, and why leaders from all over the world, including a group of former Israeli ambassadors, have warned Trump against doing it: It would dramatically undermine the prospects for an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, and severely, perhaps irreparably, damage the United States' ability to broker that peace. What the U.S. should be doing now is bringing adversaries in the Middle East together to seek common solutions, not exacerbating tensions in this highly volatile region." SOURCE PP 11/29/17 Letter from Feinstein, Sanders, and 8 other Senators to PM Netanyahu: "We write today to urge your government not to demolish the Palestinian village of Susiya and the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar. The displacement of entire communities would be an irreversible step away from a 2-state solution, and we urge your government to abandon its efforts to destroy these villages." SOURCE PP Israel is not, cannot, just simply expand when it wants to expand with new settlements. I think if the expansion was illegal, moving into territory that was not their territory, I think withdrawal from those territories is appropriate. I happen to think that those expansions were illegal. SOURCE PP I think most international observers would say that the attacks against Gaza were indiscriminate and that a lot of innocent people were killed who should not have been killed. Look, we are living, for better or worse, in a world of high technology, whether it's drones out there that could, you know, take your nose off, and Israel has that technology. And I think there is a general belief that, with that technology, they could have been more discriminate in terms of taking out weapons that were threatening them. SOURCE PP “The Israelis must…cease developing settlements on Palestinian land." “Peace will mean an end to what amounts to the occupation of Palestinian territory, establishing mutually agreed upon borders, and pulling back settlements in the West Bank, just as Israel did in Gaza." SOURCE PP 3/21/16 To my mind, as friends -- long term friends with Israel -- we are obligated to speak the truth as we see it. That is what real friendship demands, especially in difficult times...But it is important among friends to be honest and truthful about differences that we may have...I am here to tell the American people that, if elected president, I will work tirelessly to advance the cause of peace as a partner and as a friend to Israel. But to be successful, we have also got to be a friend not only to Israel, but to the Palestinian people, where in Gaza unemployment today is 44 percent and we have there a poverty rate which is almost as high. So when we talk about Israel and Palestinian areas, it is important to understand that today there is a whole lot of suffering among Palestinians and that cannot be ignored. You can't have good policy that results in peace if you ignore one side. SOURCE P “If we are ever going to bring peace to that region which has seen so much hatred and so much war, we are going to have to treat the Palestinian people with respect and dignity. We cannot continue to be one-sided. There are two sides to the issue…I read Secretary Clinton's statement speech before AIPAC. I heard virtually no discussion at all about the needs of the Palestinian people. Almost none in that speech. You gave a major speech to AIPAC, which obviously deals with the Middle East crisis, and you barely mentioned the Palestinians…There comes a time when, if we pursue justice and peace, we are going to have to say that Netanyahu is not right all of the time." SOURCE PP Zupan, Lawrence R Challenger VT CANTWELL, MARIA D Incumbent WA 2001/1/03 $326,146.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, Friends of Israel IIIIIIP Cosponsor III Yay II P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III AYE I Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay I Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Yay I Yay I Signed II Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II 2018, 70th anniversary: “Since 1948, Israel and the United States have fostered a truly unique union, a bond rooted in our shared values of democratic representation, freedom of expression and religion, and the rule of law. As your representative in the US Senate, I remain committed to ensuring the US remains Israel’s most steadfast and vital ally and that the ironclad friendship between our two countries continues to grow and prosper." SOURCE I I Hutchison, Susan R Challenger WA BALDWIN, TAMMY D Incumbent WI 2013/1/03 $431,381.00 J-Street, Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs IIIIIIIIIIIP Cosponsor III Cosponsor III P P P P Cosponsor III Cosponsor III Cosponsor II Yay I Yay I N/A N/A N/A N/A (see comment) Signed II Signed II Signed II No PP Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II N/A N/A 1/9/09 (BALDWIN WAS IN THE HOUSE AT THIS TIME, NOT THE SENATE) "The current violence in Gaza is of great concern to me and many of my constituents who have called or written to express their opinions and sorrow. Today, I voted in support of H. Res. 34, recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, reaffirming the United States' strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. I want to be clear that my vote in no way condones the loss of innocent civilian lives or any disruptions in humanitarian assistance reaching Gaza. I firmly believe it is imperative that both Israel and Hamas work together toward a durable and sustainable cease-fire, and I am hopeful that the incoming Obama administration will lead an effort to forge a lasting peace in the Middle East. My heart goes out to the many innocent victims of this conflict." SOURCE I I 6/16/10 RE: Israel's Attack on Humanitarian Ship, Mavi Marmara: “I was deeply troubled to learn of the violence and loss of life when six ships delivering humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip were attacked last week. My heart goes out to the many innocent victims...The situation on the ground in Gaza is dire: The flow of humanitarian goods has been limited to food and medicine, and Israel continues to block the importation of construction materials and fuel necessary for reconstruction. I have consistently voiced my strong opposition to the blockade and the restrictions on humanitarian aid reaching those who are suffering, and will continue to do so. This event underscores the urgency of securing an enduring peace in the Middle East. United States leadership is essential in that process. As a strong supporter of both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, I firmly believe it is imperative that the leaders of both Israel and Palestine work together toward a durable and sustainable cease-fire. I will never waver from my belief that peace is possible no matter what the circumstances." SOURCE P 1/1/11 “Addressing the plight of the Palestinian people must be a part of any long-term solution [to the Israel/Palestine conflict]. It is simply unacceptable for the Palestinian people to spend another fifty years living in refugee camps. Creating political stability is a prerequisite for developing economic opportunity and hope for the future. All sides need to take immediate steps to break the cycle of violence so that long-term peace negotiations can resume. Each side must assume responsibility for stopping the escalation of violence and retaliation." SOURCE P Vukmir, Leah R Challenger WI $500.00 MANCHIN, JOE D Incumbent WV 2010/11/15 $285,599.00 NORPAC, Citizens Organized PAC, Desert Caucus, Friends of Israel, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Heartland PAC, Louisiana for American Security, Grand Canyon State Caucus IIIIIIIIIII Cosponsor III Yay II Cosponsor III Cosponsor (see comment) II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor II Cosponsor (see comment) II Yay I N/A Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II “The timing is in the diplomacy of it. Does it cause more friction and more problems than what we need right now, or can we go ahead and put a timetable to it? I don’t think with all of the negotiations going on right now that we need to be in a situation that will make things a little bit more challenging." SOURCE I 2/10/17 Re anti-BDS bill: "This bipartisan legislation gives state and local governments a legal way to combat the shameful boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel," said Democratic senator for West Virginia Joe Manchin, a co-sponsor of the bill. SOURCE I I 12/23/16 U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) released the following statement on the UN resolution on Israel settlements: "I urge the Obama Administration to veto the United Nations resolution demanding an end to Israeli settlement building. I support two-party negotiations to reach agreement on any settlement issues, and this U.N. resolution is not the way to pursue peace between the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel." SOURCE I I N/A 6/5/17 "The Unification of Jerusalem in 1967 is a significant event in the history of the State of Israel," Senator Manchin said. "That year became a pivotal moment for the holy city of Jerusalem as the State of Israel abolished laws of religious persecution and allowed the city to become a home for people of all religions to freely exercise their faith. I am proud to join my colleagues in cosponsoring a bipartisan resolution commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the Unification of Jerusalem. This resolution reaffirms the unwavering support for one of our greatest allies by recognizing Jerusalem, a united city in which all religions are respected and valued, as the capital of the State of Israel. Not only does this resolution continue to declare a strong show of support for one of our greatest friends and their commitment to the free exercise of all religions but it affirms that peace between Israelis and Palestinians can only be achieved through direct, bilateral negotiations." SOURCE I I 5/30/14 "I don’t see a pathway to negotiations that can lead to peace unless the Palestinians openly, to the free press and in their native language, are able to acknowledge that the Israelis, the native people of Israel, have a right to their own state." SOURCE I I Morrisey, Patrick R Challenger WV Republican Jewish Coalition IIII BARRASSO, JOHN R Incumbent WY 2007/6/25 $211,250.00 NORPAC, Florida Congressional Committee, National Action Committee, American Principles, To Protect Our Heritage PAC, Americans United in Support of Democracy, Washington PAC, National PAC, NORPACGrand Canyon State Caucus, Americans for Good Government IIIIIIIIIIIII Nay PP P P P P Yay II Cosponsor III Yay (see comment) I Cosponsor II Yay I Cosponsor (see comment) II Yay I Yay I Signed II Signed II Signed II Yes II Yes II YES I Silence II Silence II I support [moving the embassy to Jerusalem]. I think it's the right thing to do. SOURCE I “Obviously, our hearts go out to all of those families involved. There will be justice, I believe that. We hear that from the ambassador. There's obviously emotions, there's been revenge, senseless violence—and you worry about it spiraling downward." SOURCE “I oppose the decision of the Palestinian Authority to seek a declaration of statehood by the United Nations. The unilateral action of the Palestinian Authority is intended to circumvent the peace process. It is not a good faith effort to achieve peace in the Middle East but to me rather it is a political maneuver. Instead of embarking on the time consuming campaign to gain support in the United Nations General Assembly, the Palestinian leadership should be working directly with Israel on creating a real and sustainable peace agreement. The quest for recognition by the United Nations is part of a terrible, emerging trend from the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority continues to engage in troubling behavior that is contrary to peace. The quest for recognition by the United Nations is part of a terrible, emerging trend from the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority continues to engage in troubling behavior that is contrary to peace." SOURCE I I 5/19/17 U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) spoke on Thursday at an event in Washington, DC, which celebrated the 50th anniversary of the unity of Jerusalem in the Six Day War. Barrasso promised the people of Israel, “We stand singly with you. We’ll continue to do that in every way, and that’s not a Republican position, that’s not a Democrat position. It’s an American position." SOURCE I I Trauner, Gary D Challenger WY $18,300.00 unknown Please wait while the data loads. Formatting the table… This table was last updated: November 3, 2018 1:29 am Attention Mobile Users This table contains a large amount of data and may be difficult to view on smaller screens. For the best experience, we recommend viewing on a tablet or desktop computer. IE Detected It looks like you’re using Internet Explorer. As a result, you may run into problems when viewing this page. For a better user experience, try a different browser. We have had good results in Safari, Chrome, Brave, Epic, and Vivaldi. Sorry for the inconvenience. The Senate Scoreboard is brought to you by If Americans Knew. It shows voting records, comments, and other actions that indicate a preference towards either Israel or Palestine. Each action is rated depending on how pro-Israel or pro-Palestine it is. Each candidate is scored according to percentages of pro-Palestine actions available, percentages of pro-Israel actions available. For background information, please read our article at IsraelPalestineNews.org. It’s important to note that the bar is set low for “pro-Palestine” actions. Behind some actions lies a true desire to do the right thing for oppressed people; behind others lies a “liberal” Israel partisan agenda or “soft” approach to pro-Israel legislation. [For information on the Libertarian Party, which has not taken a position on this issue, see the article on the If Americans Knew Blog.] Color rows according to: incumbent/challenger Show Column Categories Show Column Numbers Keep Names & Categories Visible Keep First Column Visible Use Smaller Text Remember these choices Candidates are listed on the left. Issues and actions are along the top. Scroll up and down, and left and right to see how candidates voted or commented on various issues relating to Israel/Palestine. Cells containing large amounts of data are clickable to reveal their full contents. The first several column titles are sortable by clicking on them. As you scroll to the right, each title can be clicked for more information. Hold shift when sorting to further sort by another category while keeping the previous sort order. Click the “Options” button in the upper right corner of the screen to show this page again.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511997

__label__wiki

As an aside, I can't write music, I can't play music. But I do have an ear for music, in particular identifying the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 11 minutes ago Guy Hamilton, Goldfinger director, dies Posted on April 21, 2016 by The Spy Commander Guy Hamilton, director of the first 007 mega-hit, Goldfinger, died at 93, according to an OBITUARY BY THE BBC. Hamilton directed four Bond films, with Diamonds Are Forever, Live And Let Die and The Man With the Golden Gun being the others. He initially agreed to direct The Spy Who Loved Me, but bowed out after agreeing to direct Superman. He ended up not directing that movie either, paving the way for Richard Donner to helm Christopher Reeve’s debut as the Man of Steel. Hamilton also was offered the opportunity to direct Dr. No, the first 007 film produced by Eon Productions. He refused, with Terence Young eventually getting the job. After Young turned down Goldfinger, Hamilton didn’t say no to Bond a second time. Hamilton was no rookie in the film industry when he got the Goldfinger job. He had been assistant director on The Third Man (1949) and The African Queen (1951). In the early 1950s, he graduated to the director’s chair on a series of films. In the 1990s, Hamilton was interviewed by the British writer and film historian Adrian Turner for the book Adrian Turner on Goldfinger. Some highlights: –On Eon Productions founders Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman: “Harry had the subtlety of an ape and he made Sean (Connery) feel like a complete gorilla…I could work happily with Harry and happily with Cubby, but when they were together it was a nightmare.” — On Pussy Galore being gay in Ian Fleming’s original novel: “We had to glide over it. And you had to be wary of the censor who played a very big part in Bond.” — On how a skeleton crew shot at the real Fort Knox: “It was just (Director of photography) Ted (Moore), Cubby ( producer Albert R. Broccoli) and me, and we did more shooting the next day than I think I’ve ever done in my life.” –On taking over from Terence Young’s crew on Dr. No and From Russia With Love: “They were obviously surprised by the success of Dr. No and Russia so they were a bit lazy and arrogant…It was part of my job to put a big boot up all their arses.” –On Live And Let Die and The Man With the Golden Gun: “I regret doing the two with Roger (Moore)…They made me an offer I couldn’t refuse.” –On how Hamilton though Burt Reynolds would be a good James Bond: “I was in America and found the perfect Bond, who was Burt Reynolds. He had all Sean’s (Connery’s) qualities, a nice wit, but he moved like a dream. But UA (United Artists) said forget it, he’s just a stuntman.” In the 21st century, some fans view Hamilton as being lucky with getting the Goldfinger job, while his three following 007 films didn’t come close to meeting the same standard. Regardless, Hamilton was in the director’s chair for the first Bond film that made 007 a worldwide phenomenon. His record also includes directing a Harry Palmer film for Harry Saltzman (Funeral in Berlin) as well as the producer’s Battle of Britain movie. With Hamilton’s passing, only Lewis Gilbert (b. 1920) remains among the directors of the first 11 Bond films. Terence Young died in 1994 and Peter Hunt died in 2002. Roger Moore took to Twitter to write about Hamilton. Incredibly, incredibly saddened to hear the wonderful director Guy Hamilton has gone to the great cutting room in the sky. 2016 is horrid. — Sir Roger Moore (@sirrogermoore) April 21, 2016 Filed under: James Bond Films | Tagged: Albert R. Broccoli, Diamonds Are Forever, Goldfinger, Guy Hamilton, Harry Saltzman, Live and Let Die, Roger Moore, Sean Connery, The African Queen, The Man with the Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, The Third Man | « Jason Bourne trailer debuts Guy Hamilton, an appreciation » Guy Hamilton, an appreciation | The Spy Command, on April 21, 2016 at 7:42 pm said: […] his fifth Bond, The Spy Who Loved Me, but changed his mind and bowed out. In the 1990s, Hamilton told writer Adrian Turner that he probably had stayed too long with the […] Why this blog posts obituaries | The Spy Command, on May 18, 2017 at 7:35 pm said: […] was for Guy Hamilton, a four-time 007 film director whose credits included Goldfinger. The blog’s obit for Hamilton was, literally, written two days before his death. That was, admittedly, a little […]

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1511998

__label__wiki

Format: APAMLAChicagoHarvard Download Chen, D. T., & Uzzo, R. G. (2009). Optimal Management of Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: Surgery, Ablation, or Active Surveillance, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 7(6), 635-643. Retrieved Jan 20, 2020, from https://jnccn.org/view/journals/jnccn/7/6/article-p635.xml Chen, David Y. T., and Robert G. Uzzo. "Optimal Management of Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: Surgery, Ablation, or Active Surveillance". Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7.6: 635-643. < https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2009.0044>. Web. 20 Jan. 2020. Chen, David Y. T., and Robert G. Uzzo. "Optimal Management of Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: Surgery, Ablation, or Active Surveillance", Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7, 6: 635-643, accessed Jan 20, 2020, https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2009.0044 Chen, D. T., and Uzzo, R. G. (2009). Optimal Management of Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: Surgery, Ablation, or Active Surveillance. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7, 6, 635-643, available from: < https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2009.0044> [Accessed 20 January 2020]

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512003

__label__wiki

Maggie’s Farm Espresso to Open Next Month in Downtown Jersey City Author: Adam Cazaz Published on: September 11, 2018 Published in: Uncategorized Convenient and Chic Loft Living at 371 4th Street in The Village, Jersey City Chipotle Inks Lease in Journal Square IT’S EASY TO FIND US 100 Challenger Rd, Suite 401 Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660 info@kabrgroup.com © KARB GROUP 2019 DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED BY HUDSON FUSION Kenneth Pasternak Mr. Pasternak is the Founder, Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of KABR V Management and the other KABR fund managers. Mr. Pasternak founded KABR in 2008 and has been responsible for the firm’s strategic direction since inception. Mr. Pasternak is chairman of the KABR Investment committee. In 1995, Mr. Pasternak founded Knight Capital Group (“KCG”), a global financial services firm. Mr. Pasternak served as the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman for seven years. Under his leadership, KCG’s market capitalization exceeded $5 billion. Mr. Pasternak was awarded the national Entrepreneur of the Year by Ernst & Young. He began his career in 1979 at Spear, Leeds & Kellogg, now a part of Goldman Sachs, rising to become the head of NASDAQ trading. Throughout his career, he has served on the boards of numerous publicly traded and private institutions. Mr. Pasternak has over 40 years of real estate and investing experience. Mr. Pasternak has a B.S. in Education from the State University of New York at New Paltz. ADAM ALTMAN Adam Altman – Managing Member Mr. Altman is the Founder and Managing Member of the KABR V Management and the other KABR fund managers. His primary focus is on the sourcing and acquisition of real property, the structuring of partnerships and the execution of the firm’s business strategy. Prior to joining KABR, he focused on acquisition and development for a multi-billion dollar healthcare company. He has also worked with the private wealth team at Deutsche Bank, served as a portfolio manager/analyst at Chestnut Ridge Capital and founded and sold Freshpair.com, an ecommerce company. Mr. Altman has over 15 years of real estate experience. Mr. Altman has a B.A. degree in economics from New York University. MICHAEL GOLDSTEIN Mr. Goldstein is a Managing Director of KABR V Management and the other KABR fund Managers. He is responsible for the firm’s finance strategy as it relates to equity/debt capital structures, acquisitions, dispositions, asset/property/project management, investment analysis and ground-up development. He joined KABR in 2010. He has over 15 years of experience in real estate investment, development and private equity. Mr. Goldstein graduated with the highest honors achieving his Master Degree in Real Estate Finance from New York University and a B.S. from the State University of New York at Albany. MICHAEL DWYER Mr. Dwyer is the Chief Financial Officer of KABR V Management and the other KABR managers. He is responsible for all financial and tax reporting as well as fund administration, treasury management and operational activities. He joined KABR in 2016. Prior experience includes senior finance, accounting and administration roles at Citi and Goldman Sachs. He has over 25 years of experience in real estate and private equity. Mr. Dwyer has an MBA from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University and a B.S. from the State University of New York at Albany. He is a Certified Public Accountant in the State of New York.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512008

__label__wiki

Analysis of the Contemporary and Historical Middle East Joshua Teitelbaum Saudi Arabia and the New Strategic Landscape Political Liberalization in the Persian Gulf Holier Than Thou: Saudi Arabia’s Islamic Opposition The Rise and Fall of the Hashemite Kingdom of Arabia מדינה נאבקת על נפשה: האופוזיציה האסלאמית בערב הסעודית السعودية والمشهد الإستراتيجي الجديد Journal Articles/Studies Commentary: 2006 – Present Commentary: 2000 – 2005 Commentary: Prior to 2000 Media: 2006 – Present Media: Prior to 2006 The Shiites of Saudi Arabia Since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003 and the ensuing alteration of the regional balance of power in favor of Iran, Saudi Arabia has looked at the world through an Iranian and Shiite prism. This prism affects the way it views its neighbor across the Gulf, its position in the Arab and Islamic world, and its own Shiite population. Full Text: “The Shiites of Saudi Arabia,” Current Trends in Islamist Ideology, Vol. 10 (2010), pp. 72-86. An analysis of the contemporary and historical Middle East, with emphasis on Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf countries, Israel and the Jewish people, and democratization and liberalization in the Middle East. Archives Select Month June 2014 January 2014 May 2012 March 2012 January 2012 December 2011 April 2011 Is The GCC in Peril? Saudi-Israeli Relations: Balancing Legitimacy and Security The Iranian Leadership’s Continuing Declarations of Intent to Destroy Israel Saudi Arabia Ponders Its Syrian Conundrum Consider This: Iran- talking cure… JPost – Opinion – Columnists Prof. Joshua Teitelbaum is a leading historian and expert on the modern Middle East. He is Professor of modern Middle Eastern history in the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, Israel. Teitelbaum holds several research positions in Israel and abroad. Contact Joshua Teitelbaum Prof. Joshua Teitelbaum Department of Middle Eastern Studies Bar Ilan University

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512024

__label__wiki

Centuries-old Alabama cave may contain secrets of Cherokee tribe on the Trail of Tears Posted 12:27 pm, July 17, 2019, by Tribune Media Wire DEKALB COUNTY, Ala. - Almost 200 years after the Cherokee tribe lived in DeKalb County, archaeologists and Cherokee scholars have transcribed the writings they left behind in a cave, uncovering secrets and a rich history. Manitou Cave contains recorded history people first hear about in classrooms. We learn about the Trail of Tears, and that President Andrew Jackson forced the Cherokee to walk across the country to Oklahoma; we know many died along the way. Near the city of Fort Payne, in the base of Lookout Mountain, Manitou Cave sits filled with Syllabary. Syllabary, also known as the Cherokee's alphabet, is written throughout the cave. When Annette Reynolds came across the cave, she didn't realize what she had found. "Sequoyah, in fact, lived here, in this area, and he was the one that created the Cherokee Syllabary which really saved the whole culture during their whole diaspora when they had lost all their territory in eight states and had a forced removal," she said. Reynolds found Manitou Cave in its worst condition, after it had been used in 1888 as a tourist attraction and a commercialized cave in 1961. The cave was then shut down and left vacant until 2015 when Reynolds came across Manitou. Between 1961 and 2015, people used it as a secret hideout where they held parties and vandalized the cave. As soon as Reynolds stepped inside, she knew she had to preserve the history written on the walls. Reynolds said Sequoyah was also known as George Guess. He led an active role in politics and war and left his signature throughout the cave. She said his signature and the writings show a glimpse of the past. "Even though this assimilation process was taking place on the outside and in the town, and what it meant was to be civilized, there was a lot of criteria about not speaking your language, not following your spiritual traditions, not doing your ceremonies," Reynolds said. "They had a special place in this cave which they used in the form of prayer, a form of communication, a form of documenting history that in fact there was a group that kept their traditions alive and to me this is really so significant and empowering for the Cherokee people." Reynolds invited archaeologists and scholars from all three recognized bands of Cherokee to research and translate the syllabary and writings throughout the cave. She said these writings they left behind are unlike the written communication we have today because they were made to last, standing the test of time. Archaeologist Beau Carroll from the Eastern Tribal Historic Preservation Office said for the Cherokee to leave their messages required serious thought and effort, and everything they wrote was so important to them that they risked their lives to make sure it stuck around. "For a Cherokee just to go into a cave, it's fairly dangerous. You're going into another world where things live that are more powerful than you are. You're pretty much invading their space coming in here," Carroll said. "The places that they wrote, they're not easy to get to, and it's not like you can go to the hospital." Carroll helped translate the syllabary; he said some of it explains the rules to their famous game of stickball. Other writings mark where and how to start their sacred medicinal practices. These practices were considered so sacred that even Carroll wouldn't say exactly what they mean. "Historically we've had trouble with people translating medicinal formulas and printing them, so we try not to fully translate everything and say exactly what it says so, it's a little touchy," Carroll said. Carroll did share the legend of how writing ended up on the cave ceiling, though. "The guy that translated this stuff for me, he said a long time ago people could do a lot of things that people today can't do, and he says just because you couldn't get up there doesn't mean they couldn't, and I said 'Well how did they get up there?' and he said 'well, they could fly,'" Carroll explained. Carroll and Reynolds said this entire space needs to be preserved. "The mission is to respect and protect this historic, sacred site, through conservation and education so that the cave and the land and the water are preserved for visitors and the wildlife," Reynolds said. Reynolds said she made Manitou Cave a 501c3 non-profit organization because the Cherokee didn't intend for the cave to be commercialized. She has no intention of opening it to the public. Instead, she hopes to use it as a gathering place for educational purposes. Reynolds said as long as the cave is taken care of properly, it will recover from the past neglect. Headless body found in Idaho cave 40 years ago identified as notorious outlaw who died in 1916 Tribes file suit against Governor Stitt over gaming compact renewal Oklahoma casinos still open despite Stitt’s warning it’s illegal Tribal leaders file federal lawsuit to end uncertainty about tribal gaming compact Hidden History: Journey to freedom through Central PA Thai Navy Seal dies from infection he contracted during cave rescue Old West Oklahoma Chillers: The Legend of Ghost Mound and Dead Woman Mound Families lose everything in severe storms in Cherokee County Oklahoma man accused of kidnapping woman, forcing her to work at gentleman’s club 7-year-old Georgia boy taken to emergency room after swallowing Apple AirPod Former Georgia cop sentenced to 12 years in prison for killing a naked, unarmed black man Flashpoint News Flash Point team talks tribal gaming compacts with former State Treasurer Tahlequah woman killed in crash, ejected from vehicle

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512025

__label__wiki

VAN GOGH: UNIQUE PHOTO FOUND OF THE ARTIST... KLM HOUSES TRIVIA UNDER THE CORK WORLD EXLUSIVE KLM’s most recent miniature house is a replica of the monumental Hotel New York, the Grand Old Lady of Rotterdam. The historic building (the former HQ of the Holland-America Line) is located at Koninginnenhoofd 1. Between 1880 and 1925, almost one million people departed from here to the New World. Settling in America had always appealed to emigrants from across Europe, and the Rotterdam shipping company HAL played a central role in this mass migration. An American dream Initially named ‘Nederlandsch-Amerikaansche Stoomvaart-Maatschappij’, Holland-America Line was set up in 1869 by two young and aspiring business pioneers, Hon. Otto Reuchlin and his friend Antoine Plate. Their first steam ship, the Ariadne, left port on July 4, 1872 to carry a company of immigrants to America. In that same year, Rotterdam was given the decisive boost that would rank it among the world’s major ports, as the newly constructed Nieuwe Waterweg canal gave it direct deep-water access to the North Sea. A bridge across the ocean By the end of the 19th century, Holland-America Line went full steam ahead. Thousands of inhabitants from the Netherlands’ northern provinces, along with massive numbers of Eastern European emigrants, made the journey to New York via Rotterdam for economic, religious or political motives. The crossing would cost them between 55 and 70 guilders, depending on the travel class they could afford. In 1893, Holland-America Line opened its own settlers’ hotel, which could accommodate no fewer than 900 guests. To speed up admission procedures at Ellis Island, the emigrants were already checked for hygiene, deloused and decontaminated here. By now, Holland-America Line had commissioned 20 ocean liners to serve as a ‘bridge across the ocean’, and the company steadily expanded its operations. George, a son of founder Otto Reuchlin, decided to followed in his father’s footsteps, becoming one of the directors. In 1901, a new and robust head office was built close to the settlers’ hotel, designed by architects J. Muller and C.M. Droogleever Fortuyn. Board rooms laid out on the second floor allowed the directors to watch their ocean steamers arrive and depart. A warehouse was built on the back of the monumental building, while one of its corners featured a 38-meter high tower crowned by a green copper roof, designed by architect C.B. van der Tak. ‘De Halve Maen’ weathervane Following the end of World War I, Holland-America Line’s head office underwent a third extension. Both the building’s exterior and interior were decorated with Jugendstil elements. The reliefs on the wall contain references to shipping and exotic destinations, including Indians and persons in Egyptian and Arabic attire. The new front facade was adorned with the words “Holland Amerika Lijn” in large gilded letters, as well as reliefs of the coats of arms of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, New York and Batavia. To complete the extension works, was a second tower was built, incorporating a four-faced clock. Crowning the green copper roof was a weathervane with the silhouette of the De Halve Maen (Half Moon) VOC ship, as featured in Holland-America Line’s corporate logo. This is the ship on which Henry Hudson attempted to find a northern passage to the East Indies, discovering Manhattan by chance in 1609. The heydays are over By the early 1920s, no fewer than 14 million people from across the globe had settled in the United States, and the country was having a hard time coping with the massive influx. In 1921, attempts were made to ease the wave of immigrants, imposing strict quotas. As the reading and writing ability requirement proved insufficient, numerical limits were set for each country of origin. Holland-America Line’s heydays appeared to be over due to the new immigration policy, and the Rotterdam-based shipping company decided to change tack, focusing instead on offering cruise travel in the Caribbean in the 1920s and 1930s. In the line of fire once again On May 10, 1940, World War II broke out in the Netherlands. The Germans dropped paratroopers in Rotterdam, occupying strategic positions. The next day, they took possession of the SS Statendam III, moored at the Wilhelmina Pier, using it as a stronghold to take aim at the north bank of the Nieuwe Maas river. A Dutch marine company then opened fire, destroying the ship. Two more ships, the Boschdijk and the Veendam, suffered severe damage during the battle. In the Rotterdam Blitz, four days later, several of Holland-America Line’s barracks went up in flames due to the aerial bombardment, but the head office miraculously escaped destruction. Two weeks after the start of the war, the company relocated its headquarters to Curacao, with the executive board operating from London and New York. Between 1940 and 1945, the German occupying force confiscated 16 of the company’s 22 steam liners for use in its warfare. Again, many saw their new life start in Rotterdam After the liberation from Nazi Germany, Holland-America Line relaunched its operations, and in the following years it helped around half a million people begin a new life in such countries as Canada, Australia and New Zealand. At that time, its fleet numbered 25 liners. With competition from airlines heating up, Holland-America Line decided to discontinue its regular trans-Atlantic passenger service to New York in 1971. The Nieuw-Amsterdam II was the last of its passenger liners to make the crossing, on November 8 of that year. One year later, the settlers’ hotel was demolished to make room for a container storage facility. Holland-America Line then relocated to the United States in 1978, where it could serve the booming cruise travel market better. Nevertheless, the company’s departure was widely deplored, given its manifest significance in Rotterdam’s maritime and economic history. In its century-long existence, its 133 vessels transported nearly 4 million passengers and 75 million tons of cargo. The distinctive building with its two green towers, at the head of the Wilhelmina Pier, was put up for sale. After many years of dilapidation, the building was occupied by squatters in 1988, after which the City of Rotterdam decided to purchase ‘the Grand Old Lady’ for 26 million guilders a year later. Monumental celebration It took until 1993 before the former head office of Holland-America Line began its own second life. In May of that year, a bottle of champagne was swung at its facade, marking the festive opening of Hotel New York. At that time, the Wilhelmina Pier was still poorly accessible, but with the iconic Erasmus bridge constructed three years later, the entire ‘Kop van Zuid’ district came to life. Hotel New York offers 72 rooms, furnished in maritime grandeur, including the towers converted into splendid suites and the ornately appointed board rooms. The former caretaker’s house on the roof was converted into a luxurious penthouse. Hotel New York is a monumental celebration of Rotterdam’s rich maritime heritage. KLM-HOUSE Mark Zegeling Author Kingdom by the Sea, A celebration of Dutch cultural heritage and architecture Frits Bolkenstein Former Dutch Minister of Defence, European Commisioner for Internal Market and Services ‘…an impressive work’, ‘…detailed insight into the history of urban development. This book is fantastic and highly original.’ Coffee table book ‘Kingdom by the Sea’ MUST HAVE: 8,7

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512027

__label__wiki

This football coach disarmed a student with a gun. Then he hugged him Posted 10:11 am, October 20, 2019, by CNN Wires, Updated at 10:09AM, October 20, 2019 coach disarm A high school football and track coach in Portland, Oregon, was celebrated as a hero earlier this year after he disarmed a student with a shotgun. The student walked into a classroom at Parkrose High School in May, intending to use the firearm to take his own life, the Multnomah County District Attorney’s office said in a statement last week. At the time, reports said the coach, Keanon Lowe, tackled the student. But according to emotional surveillance footage released by the district attorney’s office Friday, Lowe did nothing of the sort. Instead, he embraced the student. Footage shows the student, identified as Angel Granados-Diaz, walking down the hallway where the camera is filming. He moves out of view as he enters the classroom, right behind Lowe. Seconds later, people begin running through the hallways. Lowe is seen backing out of the classroom, with the shotgun in his right hand. With his other arm, the coach holds the student at arm’s length. Another staff member enters the hallway and takes the gun from Lowe. Then Lowe wraps the student in his arms. The coach rubs his back and holds him close. They’re later seen sitting on the floor of the hallway as police arrive and arrest the student. Lowe, who was a standout wide receiver for the University of Oregon between 2010 and 2014, told reporters at the time that they had an “emotional” moment together, according to CNN affiliate KATU. “In that time, I felt compassion for him,” Lowe said. “A lot of times, especially when you’re young, you don’t realize what you’re doing until it’s over.” The district attorney’s office said Granados-Diaz had made suicidal statements to another student. He never pointed the shotgun at anyone but himself and never fired the gun on campus, the district attorney’s office said. He did try to pull the trigger, but the shotgun, which only had one round, did not fire. That is when Lowe took the firearm from him. Granados-Diaz eventually pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful possession of a firearm in a public building and one count of unlawful possession of a loaded firearm in public, the office said. He was sentenced last week to three years of probation. “Through the course of the investigation it became clear to law enforcement and our office that Mr. Granados-Diaz did not have the intent to hurt anyone other than himself while at Parkrose High School,” Deputy District Attorney Parakram Singh said. Under the agreement, Granados-Diaz will receive mental health and substance abuse treatment, the district attorney’s office said. Roosevelt High School students march in St. Louis streets to support fired coach In 46 weeks this year, there have been 45 school shootings Aldermen, parents and players hope SLPS will reconsider Roosevelt coach termination Cardinal Ritter football coach fired, school’s football program suspended for using ineligible player Hazelwood Central’s basketball program winning on and off the court Second troubling incident this week at Edwardsville High School Cardinal Ritter College Prep announces new coaching staff after season suspension Vianney grad, Mizzou student struck and killed by car Mizzou students have mixed opinions of new football coach After Parkland, Saugus High students walked out to protest school shootings. Thursday, their school was the target Student found with loaded gun at Holt High School in Wentzville Team manager’s dream comes true homecoming night High school to reinstate teacher who used the n-word

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512029

__label__cc

Michelle Madaras Michelle Madaras joined FOX2/ KPLR11 news team in March of 2017 as a reporter and producer. Before moving to St. Louis she worked at WSIL News 3 in southern Illinois where she anchored their weekend morning show, reported and produced. Michelle’s career began at WCIA in Champaign, Illinois. She started as an intern there in 2012, but was soon after hired to produce their morning show while she finished her journalism degree at the University of Illinois. During her time at the U of I, Michelle also had the opportunity to intern at NBC5 Chicago and write for a local newspaper that covers the Chicagoland suburbs. When Michelle isn’t out reporting or working hard in the newsroom she enjoys yoga, golf and playing fetch with her dog Finn. Michelle is also a lifelong competitive figure skater and coaches in her spare time. Crisis Nursery seeks winter clothing for families ST. LOUIS – Bitter cold temps have Crisis Nursery asking for help. As the temperatures dipped back below freezing, Crisis Nursery finds itself in a crisis of its own as more families needed winter gear and their closets were running bare. After a plea on Facebook, the donations started to trickle in. Some decided to provide a heartwarming gift that can keep someone else warm this winter. Staff say that this is a reminder that help is out there if you […] Women’s March braved cold weather, while focusing on getting people to vote ST. LOUIS – Thousands gathered in downtown St. Louis for the Women’s March. Organizers say this year’s theme is marching to the polls. Thousands braved the cold for the cause, wrapped up in pink gear and holding their signs high. They say their marching for a better world not only for women today but for the women of tomorrow. The crowd not only spanned generations but also gender. It’s a movement, they say can only be accomplished by coming together so […] Google to stop sharing some information with third parties ST. LOUIS – We’re learning more about the impact of a big announcement from Google in a step to better protect its users. Google plans to stop third parties from using cookies. So what does that really mean and what’s a cookie? “They track from a website perspective that you visit there, your name, maybe your last name, your IP address and that’s how it’s tracked for advertisement but also at the same time it’s who is visiting that website,” […] Homicide investigation in south St. Louis County; man found dead on porch ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Mo. – Detectives with the St. Louis County Police Department are investigating a homicide in an unincorporated area of south county. According to Sgt. Benjamin Granda, the murder occurred before 12:50 p.m. in the 7900 block of Hildesheim Avenue. Authorities found a man in his early 40s on the porch of a residence. He’d suffered an undisclosed physical injury and was pronounced dead at the scene. The investigation is being led by the St. Louis County Police […] Arrest made in 2 separate bomb threats in O’Fallon MO O’FALLON, MO – We’re learning more about the reasons behind false bomb threats made against multiple O’Fallon, Missouri businesses. The latest threat was made at Walmart and O’Charley’s last Wednesday. It forced employees and patrons to evacuate the buildings. “It had me running all over the neighborhood trying to figure out how to get my grandson here to work because we didn’t know what was going on at the time. We just knew they had all the entrances blocked,” said […] Road crews still clearing streets, as temperatures start slow rise to 60s later this week ST. LOUIS – Road crews are in cleanup mode after winter weather move through our region. Overall drivers seem to be pleased with the response. But that doesn’t mean that we’re in the clear, sidewalks, parking lots and the sides of the roads are still slick. The woes of winter, we haven’t seen much of yet this year. Because the cold weather is expected to stick around through Sunday, so is all the ice and the snow. Heavy rainfall causes minor flooding and concern for motorist as temperatures drop EUREKA, MO – Before the snow and ice moved into the region, heavy rain caused some flooding. There was a soggy start to Saturday, but the rain started late Friday night and didn’t let up for several hours. All that rain had to go somewhere, it turned the Eureka baseball fields into a swamp and the rivers and creeks are on the rise. Flash flooding was also a concern out on the roads. Eureka’s Mayor says the storm system eventually caught up. The rain […] Burglary, fire at Hillside Animal Hospital in south St. Louis ST. LOUIS – Three cats were rescued from a fire at an animal hospital in south St. Louis Wednesday morning. Investigators believe the fire was sparked by an attempted burglary. One of the employees said she had pulled in the parking lot in the 5300 block of Manchester Avenue but didn’t see the fire until someone from a nearby business came running up to tell her what was happening. Together, the pair ran into the business to rescue the cats. […] Man attempting to rob ATM technician shot outside credit union in north St. Louis County ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Mo. – A person was shot and killed Tuesday afternoon while trying to rob an ATM technician outside a credit union in unincorporated St. Louis County. According to Officer Tracy Panus, a spokeswoman for the St. Louis County Police Department, police received a call for a shooting just after 1:35 p.m. in the parking lot of Vantage Credit Union in the 600 block of Greenway Chase Drive. Panus said two people approached the ATM tech while the individual […] Kirkwood School Board approves school improvement plan to be put before voters KIRKWOOD, MO – It was a packed house at the Kirkwood School Board meeting where the community weighed in on the multi-million dollar expansion plans being considered. This comes as the superintendent announced her support for the $70 million-dollar school improvement plan which she says would not require a tax increase. It includes: Constructing an elementary school on the Lindeman site near Dougherty Ferry, a new gym and library at Tillman, adding classroom at the high school and Nipher Middle School, […] St. Louis FC announce new coach, as fan club host food drive FENTON, MO – It’s not quite soccer season, but St. Louis FC got together for a good cause along with a big announcement. Steve Trittschuh was named the new head coach of the STLFC for the 2020 season. It’s a homecoming of sorts for the Granite city native, “I’m loving the pressure type of thing. But I feel like the team that these guys have put together is going to excite you. Get behind this team. It’s going to be an […] First day of legal marijuana sales in Illinois; thousands spend hours in line waiting to buy COLLINSVILLE, Ill. – January 1 marks the first day of legalized recreational marijuana in Illinois. Between 2,000 and 3,000 people waited in the line outside Illinois Supply & Provisions in Collinsville, many for several hours. They’re coming from across the region and over state lines. But some are worried about such a turn out they could be turned away empty-handed. “It’s hard for me to say. As we run out of a certain product, we move on to another on […] Advertise With KPLR 11 Closed Captioning Info Get A Copy Of A Newscast KPLR 11 Jobs Speaking Engagement Request Station Sponsored Events

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512030

__label__wiki

Matthew I. Menchel 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1900 matthew.menchel@kobrekim.com A nationally recognized and highly regarded trial lawyer, Matthew Menchel focuses his practice on government enforcement defense and complex civil litigation. He often serves as lead counsel on high-profile matters. Mr. Menchel is widely renowned for his skill in the courtroom. Recognized as “an absolutely first-class trial practitioner” by Chambers USA, he is described as “truly gifted at cross-examinations and at communicating with a jury.” The Daily Business Review has twice chosen him as the "Most Effective Lawyer" in the criminal law category. The presiding judge on a highly publicized, eight-week-long Foreign Corrupt Practices Act trial commented about Mr. Menchel’s trial skills: “his cross-examination was about as textbook an example of a vigorous cross-examination as I’ve ever seen.” Outside the courtroom, Mr. Menchel oversees the firm’s Trial Advocacy program. In that capacity, he has brought together experienced trial lawyers to exchange ideas and best practices, as well as put on live demonstrations. Before joining Kobre & Kim, Mr. Menchel was a prosecutor at the U.S. Department of Justice (as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida), where he was also chief of the Criminal Division. He also served as a prosecutor in the New York County District Attorney’s Office, during which time he trained Assistant District Attorneys in trial advocacy as the director of legal training. Government Enforcement Defense Financial Products & Services Litigation Joint Venture & Partnership Disputes U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Trial Bar The City University of New York Law School at Queens College, JD The State University of New York at Binghamton, BA The Legal 500 United States, General Commercial Disputes Representation of DRW Investments LLC in a highly publicized case brought by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) over alleged market manipulation of interest rate swap futures. After a bench trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Court returned a verdict in favor of the defense and against the CFTC on all causes of action. Obtained landmark acquittal on behalf of Raoul Weil, former head of UBS Wealth Management and the highest-ranking Swiss banker to stand trial in the U.S., on allegations that he conspired with wealthy Americans to hide US $20 billion in secret offshore accounts. Kobre & Kim was brought in as special litigation counsel for the trial in Florida, where the firm’s aggressive cross-examinations of government witnesses and closing arguments played a key role in crippling the government’s case. Representation of 3Red Trading LLC and its owner and principal trader, Igor Oystacher, in connection with a potential enforcement action by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) concerning alleged "spoofing" and market manipulation. Representation of Pankesh Patel in the highly publicized, eight-week-long “Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) sting operation” in Washington DC. Mr. Menchel took the unusual and bold step of calling the government’s lead case agent on the defense’s case in chief and aggressively cross examined him to expose the many deficiencies in the implementation of the sting operation. This tactic was widely held to be the turning point in the trial and resulted in a mistrial as to the charges against Mr. Patel and, ultimately, the flaws exposed by Mr. Menchel led the government to voluntarily dismiss the charges against Mr. Patel rather than retry the case. Representation of Brian Hunter, the former head of energy trading at Amaranth Advisors LLC, a fund that had US $9 billion under management, in connection with market manipulation actions by the CFTC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), a pre-emptive suit against the FERC for overreaching the limits of its jurisdiction, and in the defense of several class and private civil suits. Kobre & Kim obtained complete dismissal of FERC case by a precedent-setting opinion of U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit that the FERC lacks jurisdiction over energy futures. Representation of a former Credit Suisse banker in prosecution of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida relating to alleged assistance to U.S. taxpayers in evading tax obligations. Representation of hedge fund analyst charged in the Southern District of New York with insider trading offenses related to the merger of two technology companies. Representation of several executives in an investigation into a precious metals commodity retailer being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, as well as in parallel proceedings before the CFTC. Representation of a director of a Florida bank owned by a major Portuguese financial group in responding to certain inquiries arising from an internal review of compliance matters conducted by the bank. Representation of the CEO of a large publicly traded healthcare company in an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) involving options backdating. Representation of a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Assistant U.S. Attorney in connection with a special prosecutor’s investigation into allegations of criminal contempt arising out of the prosecution and trial of Senator Theodore A. Stevens. Representation of a financial executive of a prominent international bank in connection with a pending indictment in the U.S. District for the Southern District of Florida regarding alleged involvement with unreported ratio-swap transactions. Commercial Litigation and Arbitration Obtained a US $30 million award on behalf of U.S. Airways Inc. against Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. before a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration panel in New York for alleged violations of securities laws and broker-dealer duties. Representation of the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball (MLB) in a lawsuit involving tortious interference with contract by persons and clinics distributing performance enhancing substances to MLB players. Representation of the widow of Dr. Atkins (the creator of the Atkins Diet), and beneficiary of an estate worth US $600 million+, in contest against trustees relating to permissible use of corpus of funds in proceedings in Surrogate's Court of the State of New York and Florida state courts. Representation of the trustee of a multimillion-dollar trust in defending against allegations of violations of fiduciary duties. Representation of Microsoft as trial counsel in a patent infringement dispute between Microsoft and DataTern, a patent holding company, over software patents relating to object-oriented programming codes. Successful dismissal of 21 suits filed in Florida against an investment capital fund and certain individuals, alleging claims of civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), fraud, breach of contract, unfair trade practices and civil conspiracy related to the financing of a real estate venture. Representation of a commodity futures trading firm in connection with litigation against several clearinghouses and futures and options merchants relating to US $100 million+ of disputed trades on the Intercontinental Exchange. Representation of a real estate investor who was defrauded out of US $70 million+ in a series of civil actions and as a creditor in a bankruptcy proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and related adversary proceedings. Healthcare Fraud Defense Representation of a Fortune 100 company in the pharmaceutical industry in defending against alleged Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations in a multidistrict litigation consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio relating to the opioid crisis. Representation of American Renal Associates, a publicly traded nationwide dialysis provider, in a suit by United Healthcare, the nation’s largest insurer, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida related to allegations of a fraudulent scheme to improperly enroll patients on United’s insurance policies and submit inflated bills for dialysis treatments provided in Florida and Ohio clinics. Representation of a large public hospital district in working closely with their general counsel to investigate alleged misconduct, including kickbacks and theft of government funds, in relation to an investigation being conducted by the DOJ. Representation of a prominent Florida doctor in a high-profile criminal case regarding an allegedly massive scheme to defraud the Medicare system. Mr. Menchel was brought in as special litigation counsel to lead the trial over the government’s claims that the client submitted fraudulent billings to Medicare. Representation of a chief operating officer of a healthcare facility related to violations of the anti-kickback statute and other healthcare-related violations in which the government has intervened in eight separate qui tam actions. Representation of an executive at a prosthetic orthopedic parts manufacturer, under investigation by the DOJ for violation of anti-kickback statute. Representation of executives of several healthcare companies in connection with investigations by the DOJ and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) relating to various violations of Medicare and Medicaid laws, including anti-kickback statutes and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) guidelines. Representation of two healthcare executives in negotiations and potential arbitration against one of the largest drug retailing corporations in the U.S., arising out of a potential settlement with the New York Attorney General’s Office related to Medicaid overpayments. Representation of an officer of a pharmaceutical company in connection with an internal investigation regarding possible off-label promotion of certain pharmaceuticals. Representation of a former director of a biopharmaceutical company as a witness in an investigation being conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York into allegations of kickbacks paid to pharmaceutical sales representatives, as well as in civil actions against the company. Kobre & Kim places in AmLaw’s “Litigators of the Week” after victory in DRW case Matt Menchel Dispels “Conventional Wisdom” Trial Lawyers Follow for Cross-Examination in Law 360 Matthew Menchel Discusses the Decline of Trials by Jury in Federal Courts Kobre & Kim Break the Traditional “Rules” of Direct Examination, in Law 360 Kobre & Kim Earns Top Rankings in Chambers USA 2017 Kobre & Kim Receives Top Honors from Legal 500 Kobre & Kim Trial Lawyers Explore How Proactive Strategies Can Minimize Discovery Costs Using Nonleading Questions On Cross-Examination: Our Trial Lawyers Explain in Law360 Kobre & Kim Earns Top Rankings in the 2016 Edition of Chambers & Partners The Legal 500 US Identifies Kobre & Kim as a Nationwide Leader in Commercial Litigation and White-Collar Criminal Defense Matthew Menchel Recognized as a Leading Trial Practitioner in Law 360 Kobre & Kim Partners Honored With American Lawyer Media Awards Matthew Menchel Presents at "A View From the Bench: Legends of the Courtroom" Legal 500 Recognizes Kobre & Kim as Leader in General Commercial Litigation and White-Collar Criminal Defense Kobre & Kim Receives Top Rankings in the 2015 Edition of Chambers & Partners Matthew Menchel Discusses U.S. Tax Enforcement at the OffshoreAlert Conference Matthew Menchel Discusses Offshore Tax Evasion and Related Law Enforcement Issues at the International Litigation, Arbitration & Transactions Conference Matthew Menchel to Discuss U.S. Tax Enforcement Across International Borders Matthew Menchel Named Litigator of the Week Kobre & Kim Achieves Landmark Acquittal for Raoul Weil, Former UBS Executive Accused of US $20 Billion Tax Evasion Kobre & Kim Receives Top Rankings in the 2014 Edition of Chambers Kobre & Kim Hosts Third Annual Center for Trial Advocacy Event Kobre & Kim’s Center for Trial Advocacy Presents: How to Cross Examine an Expert Witness Kobre & Kim Ranked Top in the Nation by Chambers USA Kobre & Kim Named Trial Firm of the Year Kobre & Kim Trial Lawyer Named Most Effective Lawyer in South Florida Kobre & Kim Hosts Second Annual Center for Trial Advocacy Event Featuring Nationally Recognized Trial Lawyers Roy Black and Matthew Menchel Kobre & Kim Plays Leading Role in Government Dropping Precedent-Setting FCPA Sting Prosecution Kobre & Kim Launches Center for Trial Advocacy Program with Demonstration by Notable Trial Attorneys Matthew Menchel and Benjamin Brafman National Institute for Trial Advocacy and the Cardozo School of Law's Intensive Trial Advocacy Program, Faculty Member University of Miami School of Law, Adjunct Professor in the Litigation Skills Program Guest Contributor, "The Conventional Wisdom That Trial Attorneys Must Avoid" (Law360, December 2018) Co-author, "Breaking the Rules: 3 Ways to 'Lead' a Direct Examination" (Law360, October 2018) Co-author, "How To Use Nonleading Questions On Cross-Examination" (Law360, September 2016) Co-author, "Minimizing Discovery Cost through Effective Trial Strategy" (Today's General Counsel, August 2016) Guest Contributor, "Trial Pros: Kobre & Kim's Matthew Menchel" (Law360, June 2016) Speaker, "A View from the Bench: Legends of the Courtroom" (Daily Business Review, Miami, June 2015) Speaker, "The New Era in FATCA Enforcement Trials: An Analysis of the Strategies and Tactics that Produced the Weil Victory" (STEP, Zurich, February 2015) Speaker, "U.S. Tax Enforcement Across International Borders With — A Discussion of the Raoul Weil Trial" (STEP, Bahamas, January 2015) Moderator, "How to Cross-Examine an Expert Witness" (Webinar, Chicago, September 2013) Panelist, "The FCPA Year In Review: Assessing the Biggest Cases of the Year and What Litigators Need to Take Away to Best Protect Their Clients" (American Conference Institute’s White Collar Crime Conference, New York, January 2013) Moderator, "Persuasive Closing Arguments: A Demonstration and Discussion of a Closing Argument in the Helio Castroneves Case" (Law.com, Webinar, April 2012) Moderator, "Cross Border Enforcement: The Role of Prosecutors, Regulators, and Defense Attorneys" (The Florida Bar 10th Annual International Litigation and Arbitration Conference, Miami, February 2012) Moderator, "Cross-Examination of a Cooperating Witness: A Demonstration and Discussion Session for Experienced Trial Lawyers" (Law.com, April 2011) Co-author, New York Criminal Law (West, 2001) A “fearless and relentless trial lawyer who can walk into a courtroom on any matter in any jurisdiction and command the issues." - Chambers

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512034

__label__wiki

Top Five Favorite “MAD MEN” Season Two (2008) Episodes Below is a list of my top five favorite Season Two episodes of AMC’s “MAD MEN”: 1. (2.08) “A Night to Remember” – During this game-changing episode, copywriter Peggy Olson agrees to help a friendly priest named Father Gill create a promotion for a Church-sponsored dance. Office manager Joan Holloway helps Television Advertiser Harry Crane read new television scripts and discovers that she likes the job. Still reeling from comedian Jimmy Barrett’s revelation of Don Draper’s infidelity, Betty Draper helps her husband with an important business dinner, before she later confronts him about his affair with Bobbie Barrett. 2. (2.05) “The New Girl” – Don and Bobbie heads out of the city for a night together, before getting into a traffic accident. Don recruits Peggy to help him cover up the incident. Meanwhile, a new Sterling-Cooper secretary named Jane Siegel begins working for Don. 3. (2.04) “Three Sundays” – Over the Easter holidays, Don and Betty clash over the discipline of their son Bobby. Peggy meets the new family priest, Father Gill. And Head of Advertising Duck Phillips recruits the agency in an effort to win over American Airlines as a new client. 4. (2.07) “The Gold Violin” – Art director Sal Romano develops a case of unrequited attraction for Accounts man Ken Cosgrove. Joan and Jane clash over an incident regarding a new painting in owner Bert Cooper’s office. And Betty learns about Don’s affair with Bobbie Barrett at a media party, thanks to her husband Jimmy. 5. (2.09) “Six Month Leave” – Owner Roger Sterling leaves his wife for Jane Siegel. Senior copy Freddie Rumsen’s alcoholism spirals out of control. And the death of Marilyn Monroe has an impact upon the firm’s female employees. Filed under: Essay, History, Television | Tagged: art, bryan batt, christina hendricks, colin hanks, elisabeth moss, food, history, holidays, january jones, john getz, john slattery, jon hamm, mad men, mark moses, melinda mcgraw, mid 20th century, old hollywood, patrick fischler, politics, religion, robert morse, television, travel, vincent kartheiser | Leave a comment » Top Ten (10) Favorite “MAD MEN” Episodes – Seasons One to Three (2007-2009) Posted on March 1, 2014 by ladylavinia1932 Below is a list of my ten favorite episodes that have aired during Seasons One to Three on “MAD MEN”: 1. (2.08) “A Night to Remember” – The Draper marriage show signs of serious trouble when Betty confronts Don about his recent affair with Bobbie Barrett. Father McGill confronts Peggy Olson about her past, while working on a church project with her. And Harry Crane turns to the unlikely help of office manager Joan Holloway, when his department is overloaded with work. 2. (3.11) “The Gypsy and the Hobo” – Don’s past finally catches up with him when Betty confronts him about his identity theft. Roger Sterling meets a former client/lover who wishes to rekindle their affair. And Joan discovers that her husband, Greg Harris, has joined the Army after failing to start a medical career in New York. 3. (1.12) “Nixon vs. Kennedy” – On Election Night 1960, the Sterling-Cooper staff hold an all night party to view the election results. Pete Campbell uses his knowledge of Don’s past to blackmail him for a higher position. And Don recalls his moment of identity theft during the Korean War. 4. (2.05) “The New Girl” – Joan finds a new secretary for Don, while he is stuck in the middle of personal issues between TV comedian Jimmy Barrett and the latter’s wife, Bobbie. 5. (3.12) “The Grown Ups” – The assassination of President John Kennedy serves as the backdrop of the wedding for Roger’s daughter and the breakup of the Draper marriage. 6. (1.06) “Babylon” – Peggy proves to be more than a secretary when opportunities as a copywriter are opened to her. Roger and Joan’s affair is revealed. And client Rachel Mencken deals with her conflicting feelings for Don. 7. (3.07) “Seven Twenty-Three” – Don’s attempts to land the Conrad Hilton account leads to him being blackmailed by Bert Cooper to sign a three-year contract with Sterling Cooper. Peggy begins an affair with former Sterling-Cooper Accounts Head, Duck Phillips. And Betty expresses interest in the Governor’s aide, Henry Francis when she becomes involved in civic politics. 8. (2.04) “Three Sundays” – The Sterling-Cooper staff rally to save an attempt to win the American Airlines account. Don and Betty clash over the disciplining of their children. Peggy becomes acquainted with a young and attractive priest named Father McGill. 9. (1.03) “The Marriage of Figaro” – After his business relationship with Rachel Mencken takes an unforeseen turn; Don attends his daughter Sally’s birthday party, which further illuminates his increasing dissatisfaction with his present life. 10. (2.07) “The Gold Violin” – Art director Sal Romano develops an attraction toward Accounts man Ken Cosgrove and invites the latter over to Sunday dinner. Joan clashes with Don’s new secretary, Jane Siegel. And the Drapers are invited to attend a party for TV comedian Jimmy Barrett, who has some news for Betty. Filed under: Essay, History, Television | Tagged: abigail spencer, bryan batt, christina hendricks, christopher stanley, colin hanks, elisabeth moss, january jones, jared gilmore, jared harris, john slattery, jon hamm, korean war, kristin schaal, mad men, maggie siff, mark moses, melinda mcgraw, mid 20th century, patrick fischler, politics, religion, rosemarie dewitt, television, vietnam war, vincent kartheiser | Leave a comment » “KING KONG” (2005) Review Several years ago, producer-director Peter Jackson had stated in an interview that one of movies that had inspired him to become a filmmaker was Merian C. Cooper’s 1933 hit adventure film, “KING KONG”. Sixteen to eighteen years after his first directorial effort, Jackson was finally able to pay tribute to his inspiration with a remake of the 1933 film. Anyone familiar with Cooper’s film should know the story of King Kong. Set during the early years of the Great Depression, an overly ambitious movie producer coerces his cast and the crew of a freighter ship to travel to mysterious Skull Island, where they encounter Kong, a giant ape who becomes immediately smitten with the producer’s financially struggling leading lady. After using his leading lady to lure Kong into a trap, the producer ships Kong back to Manhattan to be displayed to the public as the Eighth Wonder of the World. Unfortunately, Kong escapes and inflicts chaos on the city streets in search for the leading lady. Jackson and his co-screenwriters, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens pretty much followed the 1933 movie. However, they made some changes. In the 1933 film, Carl Denham was a respected and successful filmmaker. He was a struggling filmmaker who resorted to stealing footage of his film from his financial backers in Jackson’s version. There is more backstory on the Ann Darrow character in the newer film and she is a vaudeville dancer/comedian, not simply a unemployed and starving woman. Ann remains frightened of Kong throughout the entire 1933 film (an emotion that actress Fay Wray did not share); whereas Naomi Watts’ Ann forms an emotional bond with him. The inhabitants of Skull Island are a lot more hostile in the 2005 film, and less human. Kong is portrayed as simply an animal and less of a monster. Jack Driscoll is a playwright hired as a screenwriter in this film, whereas in the ’33 film, he is the S.S. Venture’s first mate. And in Jackson’s film, the first mate is an African-American. The 2005 Captain Englehorn is at least fifteen to twenty years than his 1933 counterpart. Kong’s rampage across Manhattan was a lot more horrific than his rampage in the 2005 film. The character of actor Bruce Baxter was created as a homage to actor Bruce Cabot, one of the stars of the 1933 film. And it is he, along with Denham and some actress hired to impersonate Ann that ends up on the stage with Kong in Jackson’s film. In Cooper’s film, both Ann and Driscoll end up on stage with Denham and Kong. So, what did I think of Jackson’s “KING KONG”? Technically and visually, it is a beautiful film. One of the first things that impressed me was Grant Major’s production designs for the movie. His work, along with the art direction team led by Dan Hannah, Hannah and Simon Bright’s set decorations and Andrew Lesnine’s photography did an excellent job in re-creating Manhattan of the early 1930s. And what I found even more amazing about their work is that all of the Manhattan sequences were filmed in New Zealand . . . even the opening montage that introduced the movie’s time period and its leading female character. Terry Ryan’s costume designs for the movie were attractive to look at. But if I must be honest, they did not particularly blow my mind. I really cannot explain why. It seemed as if her costumes – especially for the female characters – failed to achieve that early 1930s look, one hundred percent. I was also impressed by work of both the art department and the visual effects team. Their work on the Skull Island sequences struck me as impressive. But honestly, I was more impressed by their work on the Manhattan scenes . . . especially the sequence featuring King Kong’s confrontation with the U.S. Army planes. And here are two samples of their work: My only quibble about the visual work in the Manhattan sequences featured the S.S. Venture’s depature from Manhattan. Frankly, it looked like the work of an amateur, circa 1929. Why on earth did Jackson allowed the ship to leave New York Harbor at double speed? It looked so tacky. Jackson, Walsh and Boyens did a pretty good job in re-creating Merian C. Cooper and Edgar Wallace’s story. In fact, I believe they had improved on some aspects of the 1933 film. One, the Ann Darrow character was given more of a background and more screen time before the S.S. Venture’s journey to Skull Island. I could say the same for the Carl Denham character, who proved to be a more ambiguous character than his 1933 counterpart. Due to the depth given to both Ann and Denham’s characters, the setup for the S.S. Venture’s departure from Manhattan seemed more detailed and far from rushed. The movie spent a good deal of time aboard the S.S. Venture, building up suspense to the ship’s arrival at Skull Island and allowing relationships and the characters to develop – especially Ann’s romance with playwright/screenwriter Jack Driscoll. I wonder if many moviegoers had complained about the length it took the Venture to reach Skull Island. I certainly did not. The longer the movie focused on the Venture sequences, the longer it took the movie to reach Skull Island. Because . . . honestly? I disliked the Skull Island sequences. I was able to bear it in the 1933 film. But I cannot say the same for Jackson’s film. There were some scenes in the Skull Island sequence that I liked. I enjoyed the chase sequence featured members of the Venture crew, Denham’s film production and a Venatosaurus saevidicus pack‘s hunt of Brontosaurus baxteri. I even tolerated Kong’s rescue of Ann from three Vastatosaurus rex. And I was impressed by the scene that featured Ann and Kong’s initial bonding. I found it both touching and slightly humorous. And I could see that the screenwriters, along with Naomi Watts and Fay Wray (who portrayed the original Ann) understood Kong’s feelings for the leading lady a lot better than Cooper and Wallace did. But I still disliked the Skull Island sequence – especially the scenes featuring Denham’s film crew’s encounter with the island’s natives and the visitors’ enounter with giant insects inside a large pit. The natives seemed more like Orc rejects from Middlearth with very little humanity. Despite the coconut bras and bone jewelry, the natives featured in the 1933 film struck me as a lot more human and less like savage stereotypes. As for the giant insect pit sequence . . . I usually press the fast-forward button for that scene. I not only dislike it, I find it repulsive. Fortunately, the movie returned to Manhattan. And I noticed that for the first minutes or so, Jackson re-created Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack’s introduction of Kong to the people of Manhattan. I was impressed. In fact, I found this second Manhattan sequence very impressive . . . but not as much as I did the earlier one. Granted, Bruce Baxter’s quick departure from the theater following Kong’s escape provided some laughs. And Jackson handled Kong’s rampage of Manhattan rather well. I was a little disappointed that Jackson did not re-create the elevated train sequence from the first film. I was stunned by the sight of Ann searching the streets of Manhattan for Kong wearing nothing but her costume from a stage musical in the middle of winter. Hell, I was amazed that she managed to not to get pnemonia from wandering around the city with no overcoat and no sleeves for her gown. And frankly, I found Ann and Kong’s reunion in Central Park something of a bore. I truly wish that Jackson had cut that scene. As for the Empire State Building sequence, once again, Naomi Watt’s Ann did not seemed to be affected by the cold weather, while wearing nothing but a costume gown. And I noticed that Jackson plagerized Gandalf’s death in “LORD OF THE RINGS: FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING” for Kong’s final death scene. I felt nothing but a little relief because the U.S. Army Air Corp’s attempt to kill Kong seemed to last forever. The cast of “KING KONG” seemed to fare very well, despite some of the mediocre lines written by Jackson, Walsh and Boyens. Thomas Kretschmann’s portrayal of the pragmatic and cynical Captain Englehorn struck me as very skillful and effective. Both Evan Parke and Jamie Bell provided some well-acted pathos as First Mate Ben Hayes and a young crewman named Jimmy, for whom Hayes seemed to act as mentor. Adrien Brody provided a nice balance of romance, heroics and cynicism in his portrayal of writer Jack Driscoll. Actually, I thought he made a more interesting leading man than Bruce Cabot. And Colin Hanks’ solid portrayal of Preston, Denham’s neurotic but honest personal assistant, proved to be the movie’s emotional backbone. But there were the performances that really stood out for me. Andy Serkis, who had impressed the world with his portrayal of Gollum in the “LORD OF THE RINGS” movies, proved to be equally impressive in his motion capture performance as Kong. Not only was he solid as the S.S. Venture cook, Lumpy; he did an excellent job in providing Kong with a great deal of emotional nuances. Kyle Chandler nearly stole the film with his hilarious portryal of movie actor Bruce Baxter. Not only was Chandler’s Baxter egotistical and self-involved, he also proved to be a surprisingly pragmatic character with a talent for self-preservation. He also provided, in my opinion, one of the film’s best quotes: “Hey, pal. Hey, wake up. Heroes don’t look like me – not in the real world. In th real world they got bad teeth, a bald spot, and a beer gut. I’m just an actor with a gun who’s lost his motivation. Be seeing you.” Jack Black gave a superb job as movie producer Carl Denham. In fact, I believe that Black’s Denham proved to be the film’s most ambiguous character. Even though his Denham seemed manipulative, greedy and exploitive; he also managed to bring out the character’s compassionate side and enthusiam for his profession. It seemed a pity that Black never received any acclaim for his performance. Many moviegoers and critics seemed disappointed that Naomi Watts did not receive a Golden Globes or Academy Awards nomination for her excellent portryal of out-of-luck vaudevillian Ann Darrow. Frankly, I think she deserved such nominations for her work. More than any other member of the cast, she had to develop an emotional bond and work with an animated figure and at the same time, develop her own character. And she did one hell of a job. Think Bob Hoskins in 1988’s “WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT?”. “KING KONG” has become a highly regarded film over the years. It made “Empire” magazine’s 2008 list of the 500 Greatest Movies of All Time. Do I agree with this assessment? Hmmm . . . no. Not really. It is a very entertaining film filled with plenty of action and adventure. It also featured some pretty damn good acting from a cast led by Naomi Watts, Jack Black and Andy Serkis. But the movie also possesses some pretty obvious flaws and I find it difficult to enjoy the Skull Island sequence. Like I said, Jackson created a pretty good movie. But I could never regard it as one of the greatest movies of all time. Filed under: Movies | Tagged: adrien brody, andy serkis, bob hoskins, colin hanks, disney, early 20th century, great depression, ian mckellen, j.r.r. tolkien, jack black, jamie bell, king kong, kyle chandler, movies, naomi watts, old hollywood, peter jackson, thomas kretschmann | Leave a comment »

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512035

__label__wiki

Lauth to Build Addition to New Western Maryland Regional Medical Center CUMBERLAND, MD (February 25, 2008) – Lauth and Western Maryland Health System today announced plans to begin construction this spring on a large new medical office building integrated with the Western Maryland Health System’s new regional medical center currently under construction in Cumberland. This facility will offer 120,000 square feet (SF) of outpatient services and medical office space. Lauth, one of the nation’s leading developers, expects the office building to open in conjunction with the medical center in the fall of 2009. “This medical office building will offer patients and physicians convenient access to state-of-the-art facilities connected to the area’s newest medical center,” said Andy Lawler, Vice President of Healthcare at Lauth. “We are delighted to partner with Western Maryland Health System on this exciting project.” Western Maryland Health System will locate outpatient dialysis, behavioral health, pharmacy, and pain management services in approximately one-third of the building. The remaining 90,000 SF will be available to physician practices seeking to be located on the hospital campus. The building will be connected to the new medical center on the second floor. “This dynamic project is a key initiative in our strategic plan to develop a new, comprehensive medical complex for patients in our region,” said Barry P. Ronan, President and CEO of the Western Maryland Health System. “We are pleased to be working with the team from Lauth, which brings tremendous expertise to the project.” This marks the latest announcement for Lauth, the 13th largest healthcare developer in the nation according to Modern Healthcare. Last fall the Indianapolis-based company celebrated the grand opening of the Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Southwest outside of Denver, Colorado. It also broke ground on Riverview Point, a six-building office park near Phoenix, and a healthcare facility for PinnacleHealth in Mechanicsburg, PA. Lauth currently has nearly two-dozen other healthcare facilities under construction or development nationwide. About Western Maryland Health System The Western Maryland Health System provides a comprehensive range of services to residents in Western Maryland and surrounding counties in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. The services provided currently by its two hospitals will be combined into one new facility in Fall 2009. Additional information about WMHS is available at www.wmhs.com. Since 1977, Lauth has been building facilities for clients to lease or own throughout the United States. Lauth’s years of solid experience, coupled with completed projects worth billions, make it a leading national development and construction firm. Lauth delivers virtually any type of facility including healthcare, industrial, office, and retail from offices in Indianapolis, Charlotte, Dallas, Denver, Orlando and Phoenix. Additional Lauth information is available at www.lauth.net. People. Trust. Experience. ®

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512036

__label__wiki

Justia › US Law › Case Law › Federal Courts › Courts of Appeals › Fourth Circuit › 1966 › Dewey Fanning, Appellant, v. United Fruit Company, Appellee Receive free daily summaries of new opinions from the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Dewey Fanning, Appellant, v. United Fruit Company, Appellee, 355 F.2d 147 (4th Cir. 1966) US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 355 F.2d 147 (4th Cir. 1966) Argued November 4, 1965 Decided January 4, 1966 C. Arthur Rutter, Jr., Norfolk, Va. (Gerald Rubinger and Amato, Babalas, Breit, Cohen, Rutter & Friedman, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for appellant. Charles R. Dalton, Jr., Norfolk, Va. (Seawell, McCoy, Winston & Dalton, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for appellee. Before SOBELOFF and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and MICHIE, District Judge. SOBELOFF, Circuit Judge: The question to be decided is whether for Jones Act venue purposes a corporate defendant's residence includes a judicial district in which the corporation is doing business as well as the district of its incorporation. Dewey Fanning, a seaman, instituted in the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia an action under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 688, against his employer-shipowner. The District Judge granted the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of proper venue, and this appeal was taken.1 The shipowner is incorporated under the laws of New Jersey and maintains its principal offices in Boston, Massachusetts. It concedes that it was doing business in the Eastern District of Virginia, but contended in the District Court and contends on this appeal that it may be sued only in Massachusetts or New Jersey. The parties are in agreement that the resolution of the issue between them depends on an interpretation of the following language of the Jones Act: "Jurisdiction in such actions shall be under the court of the district in which the defendant employer resides or in which his principal office is located." 46 U.S.C.A. § 688.2 The injured seaman contends that the term "resides" is not restricted to the district of incorporation but encompasses districts in which the employer is doing business, a definition of residence derived from the general venue statute, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1391(c), enacted in 1948.3 The shipowner's position is that the general venue statute does not apply to cases under the Jones Act because that Act contains its own special venue provision. The shipowner relies heavily upon the supposed analogy of Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 77 S. Ct. 787, 1 L. Ed. 2d 786 (1957), where the Supreme Court held that the general venue provisions of section 1391 (c) did not broaden the concept of corporate residence for purposes of the venue provision of the patent infringement statute.4 Since the 1957 Fourco decision two courts of appeals have passed on the question presented here. The Third Circuit, in Leith v. Oil Transport Co., 321 F.2d 591 (1963), held that Fourco compels a narrow reading of the Jones Act venue provision, unaffected by the liberal venue provisions of section 1391 (c). The Fifth Circuit, however, in Pure Oil Co. v. Suarez, 346 F.2d 890 (1965), petition for certiorari granted, 86 S. Ct. 549, refused to follow the Leith holding, applied the definition of residence contained in section 1391(c), and treated Fourco as limited to a construction of the venue provision of the patent infringement statute. When this case was before Judge Hoffman, he had before him only the Third Circuit's Leith opinion, the Fifth Circuit's case of Pure Oil Co. v. Suarez not having been decided then. After full consideration of the competing arguments we favor the Fifth Circuit's interpretation.5 From 1948, when the general venue statute was enacted, until 1957, when the Supreme Court decided Fourco, the lower federal courts were unanimously of the view that section 1391(c) broadened the concept of corporate residence for Jones Act venue purposes.6 After 1957, however, most courts, but not all, have applied the Fourco rationale to the Jones Act venue provision and limited corporate residence to the place of incorporation.7 As the Fifth Circuit points out, however, the special venue provision of the patent infringement statute, section 1400(b), was intended for reasons peculiar to patent infringement litigation to restrict venue in cases arising under that statute, and the Supreme Court in Fourco focused sharply on this congressional design. On the other hand, consistent with the remedial purpose of the Jones Act, injured seamen have been accorded the benefit of a liberal construction of venue requirements which has been denied litigants proceeding under the patent infringement statute.8 The Fourco decision does not hold that section 1391(c) must yield automatically in every instance. Rather, the Supreme Court, examining the purposes of the special venue provision contained in the patent infringement statute, determined that applying the general venue statute would not be consistent with the congressional purpose in enacting the special venue provision. In determining that section 1391(c) could not survive the conflict, the Supreme Court noted that it was following the reasoning of Stonite Products Co. v. Melvin Lloyd Co., 315 U.S. 561, 62 S. Ct. 780, 86 L. Ed. 1026 (1942). There the Court emphasized the problems respecting venue historically engendered by patent infringement actions and gave effect to the congressional aim in enacting a special venue provision for patent infringement suits of limiting "a prior, broader venue." 315 U.S. at 566, 62 S. Ct. 780. Those decisions of the lower federal courts after 1957, which applied the Fourco rationale to Jones Act venue, misconceived, we think, the thrust of that decision. Applying the Fourco doctrine in Jones Act cases results in an unwarranted withdrawal of a convenient forum previously (from 1948 to 1957) available to seamen for the prosecution of their Jones Act claims. We find nothing to compel an extension of Fourco to situations not in contemplation when that case was decided. When two statutes present an apparent conflict, the proper approach is to ascertain the purposes underlying both enactments, not to dispose of the problem by a mechanical rule. The special considerations which led the Supreme Court to hold that the patent infringement statute's restrictive venue provision must prevail are entirely absent here. The Jones Act with its venue provision has a history distinctly different from that of the patent infringement statute. Consistently, the Supreme Court has reiterated that the purpose of the Jones Act was to enlarge admiralty's protection of seamen and that its terms should be interpreted to benefit them. See Garrett v. Moore-McCormack Co., 317 U.S. 239, 63 S. Ct. 246, 87 L. Ed. 239 (1942); Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. Smith, 305 U.S. 424, 59 S. Ct. 262, 83 L. Ed. 265 (1939). It seems wholly opposed to the purposes of the Jones Act to construe its venue provision more narrowly than the general venue statute, and thus to afford the defendant-employer in a Jones Act suit a means of escape that would not be available to it in a diversity suit. To limit an injured seaman's access to the federal courts by a narrowing construction of the Jones Act venue provision would in this and many other cases work an emasculation of the statute, depriving its intended beneficiaries of the federal remedy made available to them by Congress. Viewing the situation as a whole, we perceive no unfairness or inconvenience in continuing, as before Fourco, to subject the defendant to suit in the district where it is doing business. There would be obvious unfairness in requiring the plaintiff to sue in the district of the defendant's incorporation or of its principal office. Usually neither of these places is as related to the events in dispute or as convenient for the trial as the place where the corporation is actually doing business.9 As this subject has been considered in depth in the Pure Oil case, and the relevant cases are there collected and discussed, this opinion need not traverse the same ground. We express our full agreement with the Fifth Circuit's reasoning and conclusions. The decision of the District Court is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings. Reversed and remanded. The opinion of the District Court is reported at 236 F. Supp. 680, sub nom. Rodriquez v. United Fruit Co Both parties properly assume that the term "jurisdiction" should be interpreted to mean "venue." Panama R. Co. v. Johnson, 264 U.S. 375, 44 S. Ct. 391, 68 L. Ed. 748 (1924) Section 1391(c) provides: "A corporation may be sued in any judicial district in which it is incorporated or licensed to do business or is doing business, and such judicial district shall be regarded as the residence of such corporation for venue purposes." The relevant provision reads: "Any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business." 28 U.S. C.A. § 1400(b). Reaching this conclusion, we find it unnecessary to pass on the additional contention of the plaintiff, rejected by the Fifth Circuit, that the enlarged venue provision of FELA, 45 U.S.C.A. § 56, applies also to Jones Act cases. Cf. Blanco v. Gulf Coast Transportation, Inc., 235 F. Supp. 197 (W.D. La. 1964) See the cases cited in Pure Oil Co. v. Suarez, 346 F.2d 890, 893 n. 6 (5th Cir. 1965) See the cases on both sides of the issue, cited at 894 nn. 7 and 8 of the Pure Oil decision, supra. The consent doctrine established in Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 308 U.S. 165, 60 S. Ct. 153, 84 L. Ed. 167 (1939), under which a designation, in conformity with a valid state statute, by a foreign corporation of an agent upon whom service of process may be made constitutes effective consent to be sued in the federal courts of that state, has been applied to corporate defendants in Jones Act suits but not in patent infringement litigation. See discussion and citations by the Fifth Circuit, 346 F.2d at 895-896 The record does not disclose whether United Fruit Company, which concededly is engaged in doing business in Virginia, has or has not appointed a statutory agent in the state. It is of interest to note that in a companion case, McPherson v. Barge Gerard, treated by the District Court in the same opinion as the case under review, venue was upheld on the admiralty side on the sole basis that the defendant corporation was doing business in the Eastern District of Virginia. 236 F. Supp. 680 of Fourth Circuit opinions.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512037

__label__cc

Tag Archives: closet Christians IS CENSORSHIP OF THE BIBLE NEXT? Posted on April 24, 2018 by Ron Edwards Excerpts from a great article by Dr Jennifer Oriel in The Australian April 23rd, 2018. She is a columnist with a PhD in political science. She writes a weekly column in The Australian. Dr Oriel’s academic work has been featured on the syllabus of Harvard University, the University of London, the University of Toronto, Amherst College, the University of Wisconsin and Columbia University. She has been cited by a broad range of organisations including the World Health Organisation and the United Nations Economic Commission of Africa. Picture: Israel Folau celebrates after scoring a try during the Rugby Championship match between the Australian Wallabies and the Argentina Pumas last year. “A perfect storm is brewing over religious freedom and Israel Folau has dived into the eye of that storm. The unfinished business of the Turnbull government is to legislate protection for religious freedom following the legalisation of same-sex marriage. While the census indicated Australians are losing their religion, the volume of submissions to the national Religious Freedom ­Review was unprecedented. More than 16,000 public submissions were received, forcing the government to postpone the reporting date to May. At the core of the debate is whether the state will use discrimination law to ­extend its authority over religious individuals and organisations, or strengthen provisions to protect religious freedom and belief. Criticisms of Folau as prejudiced or too outspoken fail the test of reason. He didn’t stop play and shout out “hell to gays” in the middle of a match. He responded to an explicit question about the word of God on the question of homosexuality. And he responded by referring to the Bible. If you ask what God’s plan is, be prepared for the answer. Those who oppose Folau’s right to cite scripture are advocating censorship of the Bible. It’s not quite as dramatic as book burning, but the principle is the same. Report from Pastor Jeffrey Daly, Founder/Director National Day of Repentance “California legislators now seek to BAN all reference material (books, tapes, CD’s and, ultimately, the very scripture itself) that challenge the LGBTQ+ perversion narrative. They claim it is over-hysteria from the so-called “Christian right” to claim that they really want to ban the Bible. However, isn’t the scripture the DIRECT SOURCE of all the teaching against sodomy and perversion? Of course it is. These new laws are just a ruse of the devil. Removing scripture AND Christians is Satan’s end game.” You might not believe in the Bible. You might not believe in God. You might think that Christians should praise God only in private and religious belief should be purged from public life. You might believe in queer ideology and refuse to brook criticism of it. But consider that a gay person’s right to love openly is no more important than a Christian’s right to love God openly. Question whether Christians should have to hide their love in the closet vacated by gays. Ask yourself whether the history of state atheism enforced by totalitarian regimes is the future you want for Australia.”

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512043

__label__wiki

The power-guzzling Indian steel genie The Parliamentary Consultative Committee to the Ministry of Steel and Mines has just met. Its chairperson, the Union Minister of Steel and Mines, Narendra Singh Tomar, has following the meeting made an announcement which, if even partly pursued, will alter hugely India’s energy use, our energy mix and our emissions of CO2. Its ecological impact can barely be guessed at. Tomar said that until 2014 India was the fourth largest producer of iron and steel in the world (after China, Japan and USA). The first five months of 2015, according to industry data, indicate that India will end the year one position higher. This possibility is seen as a triumphant landmark by the present government, for USA will then be relegated to fourth place. As the table alongside shows, India produced 81.3 million tons of steel in 2013 and 86.5 million tons in 2014 (data from the World Steel Association). The achievement that the minister is so proud about is the data for January to May 2015, during which time India produced 37.6 mt compared with the USA which produced 33.1 mt. On this basis, Tomar and the ministry and the country’s iron and steel industry see a bright future. Country-wise steel production. Table and data: World Steel Association So bright indeed that Tomar (having duly consulted the mandarins who are in the know of such things in the ministry) announced that as India’s per capita steel consumption is “quite low, 60 kilograms as against the world average of 216 kilograms, this low consumption no doubt indicates huge growth potential for Indian steel industry”. It hasn’t occurred to any inside the ministry or outside it apparently to wonder whether we would get by quite nicely with 60 kg per person per year or even 50 kg, now that so much has already been built using iron and steel. But no, Tomar has instead grandly announced to the members of the Parliamentary Consultative Committee that “India has fixed a target of 300 million tonnes production capacity by 2025 and steel ministry is working out action plan and strategies to achieve this target”! Where did this absurd ‘target’ come from? Does the Union Minister of Steel and Mines simply make numbers up as he wanders about gawking at blast furnaces and iron ore mines or are there advisers in this ministry, in the Ministry of Power (which includes coal and renewable energy), in the Ministry of Environment, in the Ministry of Rural Development and in particular in that ministry’s Department of Land Resources, who has given him these numbers? Or has this monstrous and foolish number come from the world’s iron and steel industry and in particular its Indian private sector heavyweights? The World Steel Association, which serves as the apex association of the metalmen, scarcely bothers to camouflauge what it wants – that the two big and neo-liberally growing Asian economies continue to feed their appetite for iron and steel. “Despite continued turbulence around the world in 2014, it has been another record year for the steel industry,” explained the Association in its 2014 statistical round-up. “Crude steel production totalled 1,665 million tonnes, an increase of 1% compared to 2013. 2014 also saw the emergence of a new phase in steel markets. For the past decade, the steel industry was dominated by events in China. The evidence is that the steel industry is now entering a period of pause before undoubtedly picking up again when markets other than China drive new demand.” That phase concerns India, the pause is the building of new steel-making capacity in India (and the staking out of new areas, many under dense old forest, to dig for iron ore and for coal), we are the market other than China (whose steel plants are working at 70% of capacity, if that, and whose consumption growth has stopped), and it is India, in this metallic calculation, that will drive new demand. That is the reason for Tomar’s announcement of per capita kilo-consumption of steel and the 300 million ton figure. It is scandalous that a minister in charge of a major ministry makes such an announcement without a moment’s thought given to what it means in terms of energy use and what it means in terms of raw material. It takes a great deal of energy to make a ton of steel. Industry engineers call it energy intensity and, including the wide range of methods used to make steel and the wide variety of raw materials used, this energy intensity varies from about 15 gigajoules (GJ) per ton to about 23 GJ per ton. Put another way, it takes as much energy as 22 average urban households in India use in a month (at about 250 units, or kilowatt hours, per month each) to make a ton of steel. This is the equivalence that ought to have been discussed by the Parliamentary Consultative Committee so that choices can be made that lead us to decisions that do not bury us under kilograms of steel while we suffocate from pollution and have no trees left to provide shade. The equivalence begins with the 86.5 million tons of steel India produced in 2014. This is 237,000 tons per day. India also generated some 1.2 million gigawatt hours of electricity in 2014-15. The two measures are not operands in the same equation because steelmaking also uses coking coal directly. What we do know is that the residential and industrial sectors consume about 40% and 30% respectively of energy generated, that the making of iron and steel is extremely energy-intensive (it is estimated to account for about 6.5% of India’s total emissions), and that this sector alone accounts for a quarter of India’s total industrial energy consumption. And this is at 86.5 million tons, whether we stand at third or fourth place on the world steelmaking victory podium. To make these many tons (for our regulation 60 kilos per year ration) it takes a gigantic quantity of raw material. A ton of steel produced in a basic oxygen furnace (which is how 42% of our steel is made) requires 0.96 ton of liquid hot metal (this in turn comes from 1.6 ton of iron ore and 0.6 ton of coking coal) and 0.2 ton of steel scrap. A ton of steel produced in an electric-arc furnace (58% of steel is made this way in India) requires around 0.85 tons of steel scrap and supplementary material amounting to about 0.3 tons (the coal having been burnt in the thermal power plant elsewhere). What justification can Minister Tomar and his associates provide for this mad project to enclose all Indians in choking suits of armour? it comes from the world’s foremost ironmongers, speaking through their association: “The impact of urbanisation will have a key role to play in the future. It is estimated that a little more than one billion people will move to towns and cities between now and 2030. This major flow will create substantial new demand for steel to be used in infrastructure developments such as water, energy and mass transit systems as well as major construction and housing programmes.” And there we have it – the urbanisation obsession of India translated into ever heavier per capita allotments of metal, and to hell with the trees and the hills. Posted in Ecology and environment, Economics and globalisation, Energy Tagged with carbon, China, coal, electricity, emission, India, iron, iron ore, power, steel « Mapping climate behaviour, ten days at a time Greece against a cast of contemptible characters »

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512048

__label__wiki

Home > data science, guest post > Data science in the natural sciences Data science in the natural sciences November 13, 2012 Cathy O'Neil, mathbabe This is a guest post written by Chris Wiggins, crossposted from strata.oreilly.com. I find myself having conversations recently with people from increasingly diverse fields, both at Columbia and in local startups, about how their work is becoming “data-informed” or “data-driven,” and about the challenges posed by applied computational statistics or big data. A view from health and biology in the 1990s In discussions with, as examples, New York City journalists, physicists, or even former students now working in advertising or social media analytics, I’ve been struck by how many of the technical challenges and lessons learned are reminiscent of those faced in the health and biology communities over the last 15 years, when these fields experienced their own data-driven revolutions and wrestled with many of the problems now faced by people in other fields of research or industry. It was around then, as I was working on my PhD thesis, that sequencing technologies became sufficient to reveal the entire genomes of simple organisms and, not long thereafter, the first draft of the human genome. This advance in sequencing technologies made possible the “high throughput” quantification of, for example, the dynamic activity of all the genes in an organism; or the set of all protein-protein interactions in an organism; or even statistical comparative genomics revealing how small differences in genotype correlate with disease or other phenotypes. These advances required formation of multidisciplinary collaborations, multi-departmental initiatives, advances in technologies for dealing with massive datasets, and advances in statistical and mathematical methods for making sense of copious natural data. The fourth paradigm This shift wasn’t just a series of technological advances in biological research; the more important change was a realization that research in which data vastly outstrip our ability to posit models is qualitatively different. Much of science for the last three centuries advanced by deriving simple models from first principles — models whose predictions could then be compared with novel experiments. In modeling complex systems for which the underlying model is not yet known but for which data are abundant, however, as in systems biology or social network analysis, one may turn this process on its head by using the data to learn not only parameters of a single model but to select which among many or an infinite number of competing models is favored by the data. Just over a half-decade ago, the computer scientist Jim Gray described this as a “fourth paradigm” of science, after experimental, theoretical, and computational paradigms. Gray predicted that every sector of human endeavor will soon emulate biology’s example of identifying data-driven research and modeling as a distinct field. In the years since then we’ve seen just that. Examples include data-driven social sciences (often leveraging the massive data now available through social networks) and even data-driven astronomy (cf., Astronomy.net). I’ve personally enjoyed seeing many students from Columbia’s School of Engineering and Applied Science (SEAS), trained in applications of big data to biology, go on to develop and apply data-driven models in these fields. As one example, a recent SEAS PhD student spent a summer as a “hackNY Fellow” applying machine learning methods at the data-driven dating NYC startup OKCupid. [Disclosure: I’m co-founder and co-president of hackNY.] He’s now applying similar methods to population genetics as a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Chicago. These students, often with job titles like “data scientist,” are able to translate to other fields, or even to the “real world” of industry and technology-driven startups, methods needed in biology and health for making sense of abundant natural data. Data science: Combining engineering and natural sciences In my research group, our work balances “engineering” goals, e.g., developing models that can make accurate quantitative predictions, with “natural science” goals, meaning building models that are interpretable to our biology and clinical collaborators, and which suggest to them what novel experiments are most likely to reveal the workings of natural systems. For example: We’ve developed machine-learning methods for modeling the expression of genes — the “on-off” state of the tens of thousands of individual processes your cells execute — by combining sequence data with microarray expression data. These models reveal which genes control which other genes, via what important sequence elements. We’ve analyzed large biological protein networks and shown how statistical signatures reveal what evolutionary laws can give rise to such graphs. In collaboration with faculty at Columbia’s chemistry department and NYU’s medical school, we’ve developed hierarchical Bayesian inference methods that can automate the analysis of thousands of time series data from single molecules. These techniques can identify the best model from models of varying complexity, along with the kinetic and biophysical parameters of interest to the chemist and clinician. Our current projects include, in collaboration with experts at Columbia’s medical school in pathogenic viral genomics, using machine learning methods to reveal whether a novel viral sequence may be carcinogenic or may lead to a pandemic. This research requires an abundant corpus of training data as well as close collaboration with the domain experts to ensure that the models exploit — and are interpretable in light of — the decades of bench work that has revealed what we now know of viral pathogenic mechanisms. Throughout, our goals balance building models that are not only predictive but interpretable, e.g., revealing which sequence elements convey carcinogenicity or permit pandemic transmissibility. Data science in health More generally, we can apply big data approaches not only to biological examples as above but also to health data and health records. These approaches offer the possibility of, for example, revealing unknown lethal drug-drug interactions or forecasting future patient health problems; such models could have consequences for both public health policies and individual patent care. As one example, the Heritage Health Prize is a $3 million challenge ending in April 2013 “to identify patients who will be admitted to a hospital within the next year, using historical claims data.” Researchers at Columbia, both in SEAS and at Columbia’s medical school, are building the technologies needed for answering such big questions from big data. The need for skilled data scientists In 2011, the McKinsey Global Institute estimated that between 140,000 and 190,000 additional data scientistswill need to be trained by 2018 in order to meet the increased demand in academia and industry in the United States alone. The multidisciplinary skills required for data science applied to such fields as health and biology will include: the computational skills needed to work with large datasets usually shared online; the ability to format these data in a way amenable to mathematical modeling; the curiosity to explore these data to identify what features our models may be built on; the technical skills which apply, extend, and validate statistical and machine learning methods; and most importantly, the ability to visualize, interpret, and communicate the resulting insights in a way which advances science. (As the mathematician Richard Hamming said, “The purpose of computing is insight, not numbers.”) More than a decade ago the statistician William Cleveland, then at Bell Labs, coined the term “data science” for this multidisciplinary set of skills and envisioned a future in which these skills would be needed for more fields of technology. The term has had a recent explosion in usage as more and more fields — both in academia and in industry — are realizing precisely this future. Categories: data science, guest post Columbia Data Science course, week 14: Presentations « mathbabe Week 14: Student Presentations, Synthesis of Semester « Introduction to Data Science, Columbia University The ABC Conjecture has not been proved Anti-black Friday ideas? (#OWS)

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512052

__label__wiki

Archive for the ‘Temple Mount Faithful’ Category Former Israeli chief Rabbi to "Decider" Bush: "Don’t act against God’s will" “Decider” G. W. Bush’s god is talking to him. Former chief Rabbi to Bush: Don’t act against God’s will In a letter handed to US president, Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu warns him not to take action that would harm Jewish people. ‘The Jewish nation forever remembers those that inflict harm upon it’ Kobi Nahshoni Published: 01.10.08, 08:54 / Israel Jewish Scene In a letter handed to US President George Bush Thursday, former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu admonished the US president to avoid any course of action that would harm the Jewish nation. “The Jewish nation is eternal, and forever remembers those that have aided it throughout history, as well as those that have done it harm. Please let your name go down in history as a president who aided the Jewish nation, who worked alongside God and not against him,” wrote the rabbi. The Rabbi furthermore urged Bush in his letter to utilize his visit to strengthen and bolster the State of Israel. “You were granted the privilege of serving as US president. Make the best of the duties given you, and we will fulfill our task of remembering you as good and noble throughout the ages,” said the Rabbi. Rabbi Eliyahu began his letter with greetings for President Bush and praise for his efforts to bring peace to the region. With that, he then told the American president that “his agenda for peace goes against the will of God”. Granting the site of the Holy Temple to murderers of women and children who blaspheme God, wrote Rabbi Eliyahu, is an act against the Jewish people as well as God. “Ever since the Jews of Gush Katif were expelled from their homes, Sdeort was bombarded with hundreds of Qassam rockets by Hamas as well as other Palestinian organizations….Hundreds of thousands of additional people will live in similar danger if we were to abide by your peace plan, and then where would we end up?” asked the Rabbi. The Rabbi stressed that “he prays for peace, as does any individual who believes in God,” but that “anyone who accepts the bible as the word of God must keep in mind that God had promised the land of Israel to the Jewish people alone. The Ishmaelites have no part of this divine guarantee.” Noting that God’s promise to return the Jewish people to their homeland has been coming to full fruition during the last century, the rabbi then urged President Bush to act as a vessel carrying out the divine plan. “God’s pledge to the Jewish people is carried out through people who were created in God’s image, and it their duty to carry out the divine will.” In addition to Rabbi Eliyahu’s letter, various rabbis and right-wing activists composed an additional letter to President Bush, urging him to free Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, to support “Jewish settlement in Israel entire”, and to encourage Israeli Jews to make aliyah to Israel en masse. Written on parchment much like a Torah scroll, the aforementioned letter will be handed to the US president by a “very prominent figure” who is scheduled to meet him. Rabbi Adin Steinzaltz, Sanhedrin President, wrote the letter, which was then translated by Rabbi Chaim Richman. The letter was signed by members of the News Jewish Congress, the Sanhedrin, and the Temple Mount Faithful Movement, the “loyal representatives of the Jewish nation in God’s name”. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3492562,00.html Read about “elder brother” Rabbi Eliyahu’s association of Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with Haman from the book of Esther here: http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/09/amalek-haman-and-ahmadinejad.html Read about “elder brother” Rabbi Eliyahu’s decree that there is absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza here: http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/06/judeo-christian-tradition.html Posted in Adin Steinsaltz, aliyah, Decider, George Bush, Jonathan Pollard, Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, Sanhedrin, Temple Mount Faithful, Zionism | Leave a Comment » You are currently browsing the archives for the Temple Mount Faithful category.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512053

__label__wiki

SubscribeSupport Us – All – Art Meets Science Limb Regeneration Organ Regeneration Regenerative Biology Spinal Cord Regeneration Seeing Science Fiction Become Reality HomeNews“Breaking Through” Blog Identifying the Cellular Pathways Responsible for Extending Healthy Lifespan Scientists at the MDI Biological Laboratory, in collaboration with scientists from the Buck Institute for Research on Aging in Novato, Calif., and Nanjing University in China, have identified synergistic cellular pathways for longevity that amplify lifespan fivefold in C. elegans, a nematode worm used as a model in aging research. The increase in lifespan would… Aging, Other Course Spotlight >> The Colby INBRE Course: Taking the Cookie Cutter Out of STEM Education It happens frequently in INBRE short courses: the students ask questions like “Is this the right answer?” or “Is this the result you were expecting?” only to be told that we don’t know the “right” answer until we do the experiment – that an unexpected answer, or an answer that reveals a hypothesis to be… This Is Why: Supporting What We Believe In Supporting MDIBL’s infrastructure in a way that also helps the environment was an easy decision to make. As scientists, we are always looking for the next innovation. It is important to me that we think beyond ourselves and to the future; we need to be ahead of the curve. An electronic vehicle charging station may… Environment, Other Alumni Spotlight: Katharine Bancroft Katharine Bancroft is a physics major at Haverford College. While she has always had an interest in biology, her true passion is studying soft matter as with a focus on applications. Her long term goal is to pursue a Ph.D. in physics and innovative work in in a field such as prosthetic design or battery… A Legacy A Lifetime In The Making "Adding MDIBL as a beneficiary for a portion of my retirement fund was really easy. It took less than a minute to do and it's a great way to support an organization that my family and I care deeply about." - Mark Hanscome, Director of Facilities, MDIBL Attracting Students from Around the Globe Scientists have long used cell and animal models to study human disease because of the practical, ethical and financial challenges of using human models. But as the failure to translate effective therapies from cell and mouse models into humans has demonstrated, the need remains for models that more closely replicate human tissue. That need is… Education, Organ Regeneration, Organoids Restoring the Ability to Repair and Regenerate As We Age “If everything regenerated, there would be no death.” Richard J. Goss, Ph.D.Principles of Regeneration Richard J. Goss, Ph.D., author of Principles of Regeneration, was a visiting scientist at the MDI Biological Laboratory in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. But is the statement that there would be no death if everything regenerated correct? The zebrafish,… Aging, Education, Regenerative Biology Alumni Spotlight: A Conversation with Rose Earlier this year Rose Besen-McNally graduated from College of the Atlantic with a degree in human ecology. During her freshman year, Rose applied for a student research fellowship at the MDI Biological Laboratory through the IDeA Network of Biomedical Research (INBRE). Although Rose had not previously considered a career in research, after spending just a… Alumni, Education, Organ Regeneration, Other, Regenerative Biology, This Is Why, Wound Healing

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512054

__label__wiki

HomeNewsPress Releases Improving Healthcare with High-Tech Connectivity at the MDI Science Café Rafael Grossmann, M.D., a general and trauma surgeon at the Eastern Maine Medical Center in Bangor, will talk about the power of new technology to improve connections between medical providers and patients, especially in a rural state like Maine, at the Science Café to be held at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 5 at McKays Public House in Bar Harbor. Science Cafés Begin with the Future of Frenchman Bay Jane Disney, Ph.D., and Charles Wray, Ph.D., scientists at the MDI Biological Laboratory, will address the question “Is there a sustainable future for Frenchman Bay?” at the first of the winter series of science cafés sponsored by the MDI Biological Laboratory. Watch Voot Yin’s TEDx Talk “I am a regeneration scientist, and I believe in a world where we can dramatically enhance our ability to heal.” Watch Voot Yin’s TEDxDirigo talk to learn what research at the MDI Biological Laboratory means for human health. MDI Biological Laboratory Receives $13 Million Grant for Center of Biomedical Research Excellence U.S. Senator Susan Collins and Representative Mike Michaud announced today that the MDI Biological Laboratory will receive a grant totaling nearly $13 million from the National Institutes of Health to support research to enhance tissue repair and regeneration and extend healthy lifespan. MDI Biological Laboratory Scientist Receives Prestigious Award to Study Aging Aric Rogers, Ph.D., assistant professor at the MDI Biological Laboratory, has received a New Scholar in Aging Award from the Ellison Medical Foundation. The award will provide $400,000 to support research in his lab over the next four years. Scientists Looking for Culprit in Eelgrass Disappearance Scientists at the Mount Desert Island Biological Laboratory are trying to find out if an invasive species of green crabs is behind the recent loss of eelgrass in Frenchman Bay. They are also asking for the public’s help in finding out where eelgrass is still growing along the coast of the Gulf of Maine. Artists and Scientists Discuss Their Common Path at July 1 Science Café Two Mt. Desert Island artists and two scientists from the MDI Biological Laboratory will talk about the similarities between art and science at the MDI Science Café at the Asticou Inn in Northeast Harbor on Monday, July 1, at 5 p.m. Tracking Wildlife with DNA at the MDI Science Café Karen James, Ph.D., a scientist at the MDI Biological Laboratory who leads the “BioTrails” project linking citizen scientists with new genetic tools, will lead the first of the summer MDI Science Cafés in Northeast Harbor. “Code of the Wild: DNA Barcoding for Research and Conservation” will be held at the Asticou Inn on Monday, June 17 at 5 p.m. The MDI Biological Laboratory Mourns Passing of Kathryn W. Davis “We at the MDI Biological Laboratory join with all those mourning the loss of Kathryn W. Davis,” says Kevin Strange, Ph.D., director of the Mount Desert Island Biological Laboratory. “Her great generosity, coupled with her enthusiasm for MDIBL’s mission, launched the Davis Center for Regenerative Biology and Medicine and made it possible for us to expand our research into the causes of healing and aging.” Research Discovery Leads to New Private Company Research at the MDI Biological Laboratory has led to the launching of a new company to investigate the therapeutic potential of drugs that speed tissue healing and stimulate regeneration of lost and damaged body parts.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512055

__label__cc

How to organize an unbelievable marriage The Terms and Conditions (“Terms”) describe how this website (“Site,” “we,” and “our”) regulates your use of this website (the “Site”). Please read the following information carefully to understand our practices regarding your use of the .The Site may change the Terms at any time. The Site may inform you of the changes to the Terms using the available means of communication. The Site recommends you to check the frequently to see the actual version of the Terms and their previous versions. If you represent a legal entity, you certify that you entitled by such a legal entity to conclude the Terms as the legal entity you represent. Our Privacy Policy is available on a separate page. Our Privacy Policy explains to you how we process information about you. You shall understand that through your use of the you acknowledge the processing of this information shall be undertaken in accordance with the Privacy Policy. The allows you to use Services available on the . You shall not use the services for the illegal aims. We may, at our sole discretion, set fees for using the for you. All prices are published separately on relevant pages on the . We may, at our sole discretion, at any time change any fees. We may use certified payment systems which also may have their commissions. Such commissions may be implied on you when you choose a particular payment system. Detailed information about commissions of such payment systems may be found on their webs.. The may include links to other s, applications, and platforms (hereinafter the “Linked s“). The Site does not control the Linked s, and shall not be responsible for the content and other materials of the Linked s. The Site makes these links available to you for providing the functionality or services on the . PROHIBITED USES AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY The Site grants you a non-transferable, non-exclusive, revocable license to access and use the from one device in accordance with the Terms. You shall not use the for unlawful or prohibited purpose. You may not use the in a way that may disable, damage, or interfere in the . All content present on the includes text, code, graphics, logos, images, compilation, software used on the (hereinafter and hereinbefore the “Content“). The Content is the property of the Site or its contractors and protected by intellectual property laws that protect such rights. You agree to use all copyright and other proprietary notices or restrictions contained in the Content and you are prohibited from changing the Content. You may not publish, transmit, modify, reverse engineer, participate in the transfer, or create and sell derivative works, or in any way use any of the Content. Your enjoyment of the shall not entitle you to make any illegal and disallowed use of the Content, and in particular you shall not change proprietary rights or notices in the Content. You shall use the Content only for your personal and non-commercial use. The Site does not grant you any licenses to the intellectual property of the Site. DISCLAIMER OF CERTAIN LIABILITIES The information available via the may include typographical errors or inaccuracies. The Site shall not be liable for these inaccuracies and errors. The Site makes no representations about the availability, accuracy, reliability, suitability, and timeliness of the Content contained on and services available on the . To the maximum extent allowed by the applicable law, all such Content and services are provided on the “as is” basis. The Site disclaims all warranties and conditions regarding this Content and services, including warranties and provisions of merchantability, fitness for a certain purpose. To the maximum extent permitted by the applicable law, in no event shall the Site be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, special, punitive damages including, but not limited to, damages for loss of enjoyment, data or profits, in the connection with the enjoyment or execution of the in the context of the inability or delay to enjoy the or its services, or for any Content of the , or otherwise arising out of the enjoyment of the , based on contract and non-contract liability or other reason. If the exclusion or limitation of liability for damages, whether consequential or incidental, are prohibited in a particular case, the exclusion or limitation of liability shall not apply to you. You agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Site, its managers, directors, employees, agents, and third parties, for any costs, losses, expenses (including attorneys’ fees), liabilities regarding or arising out of your enjoyment of or inability to enjoy the or its services and Site’s services and products, your violation of the Terms or your violation of any rights of third parties, or your violation of the applicable law. The may assume the exclusive defence and you shall cooperate with the Site in asserting any available defences. TERMINATION AND ACCESS RESTRICTION The Site may terminate your access to the “Site” and its related services or any part at any time, without notice, in case of your violation of the Terms. The governing law of the Terms shall be the substantive laws of the country where the Site is set up, except the conflict of laws rules. You shall not use the in jurisdictions that do not give effect to all provisions of the Terms. No joint venture, partnership, employment, or agency relationship shall be implied between you and the Site as a result of the Terms or use of the . Nothing in the Terms shall be a derogation of the Site’s right to comply with governmental, court, police, and law enforcement requests or requirements regarding your enjoyment of the . If any part of the Terms is determined to be void or unenforceable in accordance with applicable law then the void or unenforceable clauses will be deemed superseded by valid and enforceable clauses shall be similar to the original version of the Terms and other parts and sections of the Terms shall be applicable to you and the Site. The Terms constitute the entire agreement between you and the Site regarding the enjoyment of the and the Terms supersede all prior or communications and offers, whether electronic, oral or written, between you and the Site. The Site and its affiliates shall not be liable for a failure or delay to fulfill its obligations where the failure or delay results from any cause beyond Site’s reasonable control, including technical failures, natural disasters, blockages, embargoes, riots, acts, regulation, legislation, or orders of government, terroristic acts, war, or any other force outside of Site’s control. In case of controversies, demands, claims, disputes, or causes of action between the Site and you relating to the or other related issues, or the Terms, you and the Site agree to attempt to resolve such controversies, demands, claims, disputes, or causes of action by good faith negotiation, and in case of failure of such negotiation, exclusively through the courts of the country where the Site is set up. We are committed to resolve any complaints about our collection or use of your personal data. If you would like to make a complaint regarding this Terms or our practices in relation to your personal data, please contact us using the Contact Page . We will reply to your complaint as soon as we can and in any event, within 30 days. We hope to resolve any complaint brought to our attention, however if you feel that your complaint has not been adequately resolved, you reserve the right to contact your local data protection supervisory authority We welcome your comments or questions about this Terms. You may contact us using the Contact page. Seven Sets of Documents You Need For Your Divorce Best Picks For Valentines’ Day Presents For Your Wife Wife Smarter Than Husband? Parental Consent The Benefits Of A Golf Club

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512058

__label__cc

Marshall and the Movies "[Bloggers] like you have greatly improved my outlook." – Roger Ebert Reviews (by letter grade) Reviews (by stars) F.I.L.M. of the Week Netflix Guide About Marshall REVIEW: Broken Embraces The cinematic embrace provided by Pedro Almodóvar’s “Broken Embraces” eludes description. It has its moments of tragedy, so it can’t really be called a warm embrace. Yet it has such beautiful, soaring moments that it can’t exactly be called a bittersweet embrace. The only thing certain about “Broken Embraces” is that its embrace will absolutely envelop you. From the moment we encounter the blind filmmaker Mateo Blanco, now under the Americanized pseudonym Harry Caine, working through his disability, it’s impossible not to get hooked into the drama. It dabbles in the occasional melodrama, but Almodóvar handles it with such skill that it can really only be noticed when looking back at the movie in retrospect. I’m not sure that I would say that the writing floored me quite like a “Volver” or “Talk to Her;” nonetheless, I want to be careful not to reveal too much about the delicate plot. Almodóvar develops a fairly intricate story, but it never feels like work for an audience to put it together. Here’s what you should know: this is a movie about “sex, secrets, and cinema,” as the back of the DVD case so eloquently puts it. Penelope Cruz may be the movie’s poster child, but her character Lena is hardly the focus. Sure, she sets the plot in motion; however, this is Mateo’s movie. Before he became blind, he made a movie called “Chicas y Maletas” (“Girls and Suitcases,” for you non-Spanish speakers out there) in which he cast Lena. But she came with some baggage of her own: an obsessed lover, Ernesto Martel, who insists on producing the film and having his homosexual son document the production. What follows? I’m not saying. Cruz is hauntingly beautiful as Lena, and it’s another role that she knocks out of the park. None of her co-stars outshine her – but her director does. Almodóvar commands this movie (as all directors should), and his passion for cinema exudes from the film. Everything in the movie just seemed so orderly, from the beautiful sets to the bright colors to the precision of the acting, and “Broken Embraces” explodes off the screen. B+ / Tags: Broken Embraces, Pedro Almodovar, Penelope Cruz Categories : Movie Reviews Random Factoid #146 As I sit here waiting for my screening to begin, I give thanks to the Angelika Film Center for having lots of movie-themed postcards out to grab. I was able to save four seats using my “An Education” and “Broken Embraces” postcards. I grab these postcards whenever I can at movies. I’ve only sent one, and it was “Milk” themed. I have a few sitting in my desk Tags: An Education, Angelika Film Center, Broken Embraces, Postcard, Random Factoid Categories : Random Factoids What To Look Forward To In … November 2009 The holiday movie season begins to kick into high gear in the month of November, as does exciting Oscar season. Accordingly, this post is longer than the previous monthly preview posts. Brace yourself for movie mania coming your way in a few weeks. Sit back, relax, and let Marshall guide you through the coming attractions. From the mainstream movie perspective, the hot movie of this weekend will be Robert Zemeckis’ adaptation of “A Christmas Carol.” Shot with the same motion capture technology that Zemeckis used to make “The Polar Express,” the movie will cash in on premium ticket prices from 3D and IMAX 3D screenings. My main concern about the quality of the movie itself lies with its principal actor, Jim Carrey, who will act as Scrooge and all three ghosts. I doubt Zemeckis will permit it, but I fear that Carrey will make a mockery of Dickens’ classic novel much in the fashion of Mike Meyers with “The Cat in the Hat.” Regardless of what critics say, I will probably end up seeing this with the family for some good old-fashioned family fun at the movies. “The Men Who Stare at Goats” is the first movie of the holiday season to which George Clooney lends his talents. Here, he plays a a military man in charge of a secret unit that attempts to use psychic powers for military purpose. One such activity is to attempt to kill goats just by staring at them. The movie also stars Ewan MacGregor as the reporter who discovers it all; the cast also includes Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey. The movie is directed and adapted by Grant Heslov, previously nominated for an Academy Award for his work on “Good Night, and Good Luck.” The trailer seems to show Heslov’s approach as similar to the Coen Brothers who usually provide a fun-filled romp. Maybe the film will be a bona-fide indie hit, and Overture Films will be able to claim their first movie to gross over $50 million. But we’ll have to see. I’ve already written about the Oscar favorite, “Precious,” in a previous Oscar Moment. I’ll post the trailer here just for the sake of promoting it, but if you want to hear my thoughts, read the post. Two thrilling movies also open this week. First, “The Box” with Cameron Diaz and James Marsden, seems to have an intriguing premise: if you push the button on the box, you will get a million dollars, but someone you don’t know will die. However, it looks to be more interested in cheap thrills than exploring moral issues. The other, “The Fourth Kind,” looks downright scary. If horror is your thing, this looks like the movie for you. I saw the trailer at “District 9,” and even if you don’t want to see it, you have to ponder the validity of the “true story” behind the movie. Disaster porn reaches its pinnacle this weekend. “2012,” Roland Emmerich’s apocalyptic film, will have some of the biggest destruction and explosions the world has ever seen. The trailer was so mind-blowing that I am willing to overlook all vices in the plot to see the world’s greatest landmarks get wiped off the earth. My only comment is that if John Cusack somehow finds a way to stop the end of the world, I will be enraged. The other major wide release of the week is “Pirate Radio,” a movie that Focus Features so desperately wants you to see that they changed the title from “The Boat that Rocked” just a few weeks ago to appeal to you. Are you flattered? You shouldn’t be. The movie seems like comedic Oscar Bait, but it didn’t do well Britain, the country of production. Focus scrambled to change their focus from awards movie to popular movie. So whenever this pops into a theater near you, be armed with the knowledge that “Pirate Radio” is merely a washed-up Oscars wannabe. But make the decision to see it for yourself. New York and Los Angeles get the treat of watching Wes Anderson’s adaptation Roald Dahl’s “Fantastic Mr. Fox.” I have the utmost respect for Anderson for not conforming to the growing trend to do all animation through computers. Anderson’s film uses the stop motion technique, moving an object gradually to give the illusion that it is moving. Even more exciting that Anderson’s eccentric style in an eccentric medium is the voice cast. Clooney voices the titular character, the cunning Mr. Fox. The cast also features Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Owen Wilson, and Bill Murray. What’s not to like? (NOTE: The movie expands on November 20 and enters wide release on November 25.) For those who like very obscure indies, “That Evening Sun” with 87-year-old Oscar bridesmaid Hal Halbrook has his latest shot at the gold. Tags: 2012, A Christmas Carol, Academy Awards, Bill Murray, Broken Embraces, Cameron Diaz, Cormac McCarthy, Ewan MacGregor, Fantastic Mr. Fox, George Clooney, Grant Heslov, Hal Holbrook, James Marsden, Jason Schwartzman, Jeff Bridges, Jim Carrey, John Cusack, John Travolta, Judi Dench, Kevin Spacey, Meryl Streep, Old Dogs, Oscars, Owen Wilson, Pedro Almodovar, Penelope Cruz, Pirate Radio, Planet 51, Precious, Roald Dahl, Robert Zemeckis, Robin Williams, Roland Emmerich, That Evening Sun, The Blind Side, The Box, The Fourth Kind, The Men Who Stare at Goats, Viggo Mortensen, Wes Anderson Categories : What To Look Forward To What’s Going On at Marshall and the Movies Subscribe to "Marshall and the Movies" Want to get updated on "Marshall and the Movies?" Enter your e-mail address here! Yes! I want updates! I’m A Member of the Large Association of Movie Blogs (LAMB)! 10 for '10 (10) Fincherfest (7) Hitchcocked (4) Marshall & Julie (14) Nolan Marathon (7) The Origins Project (30) Auteur Hour (1) Listful Thinking (26) Weekend Update (8) Cannes 2012 (19) Full Frame 2015 (4) Telluride 2014 (17) Marshall and the Movies (142) Movie Reviews (1,583) Classics Corner (18) F.I.L.M. of the Week (246) Save Yourself! (8) Oscar Moment (110) 2009 – Oscar Moment (22) Know Your Nominees (5) 2011 – Oscar Moment (8) Random Factoids (580) Shameless Advertisements (26) What To Look Forward To (30) The Large Associatio… on “Baby Mama” and… Keith on Top 10 of 2018 (My 10th Top… Keith on REVIEW: Leave No Trace Brittani on REVIEWS: RBG and Won’t Y… Spider-Man: Homecomi… on REVIEW: Spider-Man: Homecoming "The Beginning" (My First Post) Bloggers Like Me Cut the Crap Movie Reviews Dan The Man Movie Reviews Digital Shortbread Jason Watches Movies JJames Reviews Man I Love Films Movies with Madeline Nevermind Pop Film Paragraph Film Reviews Reviews by Tom Clift Ross v Ross The Dark of the Matinee Thy Critic Man Film Reference CriticWire The Playlist (IndieWire)

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512059

__label__wiki

Marty Green Properties 34 Wards Lane, Northbridge, MA 01534 Select a page Home Our Agents Search Homes Featured Properties Our Blog Schools/Community Market Analysis Mortgage Calculator Buying/Selling Tips Contact Us Uxbridge, MA Town Information Single Family homes for sale in Uxbridge, MA Multi Family homes for sale in Uxbridge, MA Condos for sale Uxbridge, MA Rentals for sale in Uxbridge, MA Land for sale in Uxbridge, MA Commercial Properties for sale in Uxbridge, MA Foreclosures for sale in Uxbridge, MA Open Houses in Uxbridge, MA Uxbridge, MA Community Info Uxbridge is a town in Worcester County, Massachusetts first settled in 1662, incorporated in 1727, originally part of Suffolk County, and Mendon, and named for the Earl of Uxbridge. The town, (population 13,560, estimate 2012) is located 36 mi (58 km) southwest of Boston and 15 mi (24 km) south-southeast of Worcester, at the midpoint of the Blackstone Valley Heritage Corridor. Two Uxbridge Quakers served as national leaders in the anti-slavery movement. Uxbridge "weaves a tapestry of early America". The town is 30.4 square miles (79 km2), of which 0.8 square miles (2.1 km2), or 2.73%, is water. It is situated 39.77 miles (64.00 km) southwest of Boston, 16 miles (26 km) southeast of Worcester, and 20 miles (32 km) northwest of Providence. Elevations range from 200 feet (61 m) to 577 feet (176 m) above sea level. It borders Douglas, Mendon, Millville, Northbridge, and Sutton, Massachusetts, plus the Rhode Island towns of Burrillville and North Smithfield. The 2010 United States Census population was 13,457, representing a growth rate of 20.6%, with 5,056 households, a density rate of 166.31 units per square mile. Population density was 442.66 people/ mile2 (170.77/km²). Per capita income was $24,540, and 4.7% fell below the poverty line. The number of registered voters was 9,959 for 2010 34 Wards Lane • Northbridge, MA 01534 Direct: 508-320-7786 • Fax: 508-266-0649

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512060

__label__wiki

Chad Anderson Clinical Assistant Professor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Paden Angelo Maja Artandi, MD Clinical Associate Professor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Steven Asch Professor of Medicine (Primary Care and Population Health) Current Research and Scholarly Interests Describe your current research interest and activities Rebecca Aslakson Associate Professor of Medicine (Primary Care and Population Health) and of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine at the Stanford University Medical Center Bio Dr. Rebecca A. Aslakson is an Associate Professor at Stanford University with appointments in both the Department of Primary Care & Population Health in the Palliative Care Section and the Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine where she serves as Division Chief of Critical Care Anesthesia. With a Summa Cum Laude B.A. from Washington University in St. Louis, an MD from Harvard Medical School?MIT, and an MSci degree with Distinction from the University of Ulster in Northern Ireland, Dr. Aslakson completed anesthesia residency at Massachusetts General Hospital and surgical critical care fellowship at The Johns Hopkins Hospital, where she was on faculty from 2008-2017. In 2013, Dr. Aslakson obtained her PhD in Clinical Investigations from The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with her dissertation concerning integration of palliative care in intensive care units. Triple boarded in anesthesia, surgical critical care, and palliative medicine, Dr. Aslakson is an active researcher and clinician; her goal is to improve delivery of effective and equitable palliative care, particularly to perioperative and critically ill populations. She has published over 80 peer-reviewed papers, invited editorials, and book chapters and received competitive funding from funders such as AHRQ, PCORI, the Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research, and the National Palliative Care Research Society. Dr. Aslakson serves on national committees for professional societies including the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM), the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM). Dr. Aslakson has received national awards including the 2015 AAHPM Early Career Investigator Award and the 2014 ASA Presidential Scholar Award. Dr. Aslakson clinically attends at the Stanford University Medical Center in the M4 and E2 Intensive Care Units and on the inpatient palliative care clinical service. She lives in Palo Alto, CA with her husband and two sons. Mehrdad Ayati Adjunct Clinical Assistant Professor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Bio Dr. Ayati completed his residency at UC Davis and his fellowship at Stanford University. During his residency at UC Davis, Dr. Ayati received the Award of Excellence in Clinical Teaching. Dr. Ayati worked at hospitals such as Lodi Memorial Hospital in Lodi, California, and as an Emergency Medicine Attending at Veteran Affairs in Palo Alto, California. Dr. Ayati worked as a Stanford Medical Director at Los Altos and Palo Alto Sub acute and Rehabilitation centers. Dr. Ayati has a broad spectrum of practice and knowledge of general medicine and primary care in various settings, from office to Emergency room and acute and Sub-acute cares. Dr. Ayati?s main areas of research and clinical focus are in the physiology of aging and on finding practical and yet innovative ways of addressing the wellbeing and needs of the population in any age category. Dr. Ayati is an advocate of his patient?s physical and mental health at any age in addition to disease management and prevention. Dr. Ayati is currently the Editor in Chief of the journal of General Medicine, Open Access. Dr. Ayati is the author of ?Paths to Healthy Aging?. Dr. Ayati is also a guest educational speaker on several radio stations such as National Public Radio (NPR) and San Francisco?s KQED and international and national conferences. Dr. Ayati strives to provide reliable information, effective strategies, and simple guidelines for patients of all ages to avoid or manage chronic diseases and to have a significantly better quality of life. Rika Bajra Alan Barkin Emeritus Adjunct Clinical Associate Professor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Michele Barry, MD, FACP Drs. Ben & A. Jess Shenson Professor, Senior Associate Dean, Global Health, Director, Center for Innovation in Global Health, Professor of Medicine & Senior Fellow at the Woods Institute and at the Freeman Spogli Institute Current Research and Scholarly Interests Areas of research Ethical Aspects of research conducted overseas Clinical Tropical Diseases Globalization's Impact upon Health Disparities Hemorrhagic Viruses Preetha Basaviah, M.D. Clinical Professor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Current Research and Scholarly Interests Medical education, preparation for clerkship curricula and hospital medicine. Ali Bassiri Adjunct Clinical Associate Professor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Eran Bendavid Associate Professor of Medicine (Primary Care and Population Health), Senior Fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment and Associate Professor, by courtesy, of Health Research and Policy Current Research and Scholarly Interests Effect of global health policies on health of individuals in developing countries, global health, HIV and TB. Bruce Allan Benedick Adjunct Clinical Instructor, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Susan Benedick Eliza Gaenger Bennitt Bio Eliza Bennitt is an Internal Medicine physician. She attended medical school at Stanford University and completed internship and residency at Stanford University Hospital. She is board certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine. She has been working at Menlo Clinic since 2006. In her spare time, Dr. Bennitt enjoys spending time with her husband and three children, running, and cooking. Ankur Bharija Current Research and Scholarly Interests Personal and Professional (Clinical, research, and teaching) interests include promoting health and wellbeing for the frail elders and the seriously ill -- through innovation in High-value healthcare delivery systems, Public health-education, Health Information-technology and Social entrepreneurship. Gordon Bloom Lecturer, Medicine - Primary Care and Population Health Bio Gordon founded the Social Entrepreneurship Collaboratory (SE Labs) at Stanford, Harvard and Princeton. He teaches about the design, development and leadership of innovative social ventures in global health and environmental sustainability. At Stanford, Gordon is director of the Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation Lab (SE Lab)- Human & Planetary Health and is a faculty fellow of the Center for Innovation in Global Health. He is a Lecturer in the School of Medicine, Division of Primary Care and Population Health/Dept. of Medicine, an affiliate at the Center for Health Policy and the Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and a mentor in the Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program. At Harvard, Gordon taught jointly on the faculties of the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health (Health Policy & Management) and the Harvard Kennedy School (Management, Leadership & Decision Sciences) and served as an Expert-in-Residence (EiR) at the Harvard Innovation Lab (i-Lab), and affiliated faculty at the Center for Primary Care, Harvard Medical School (HMS). He was faculty director of the Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation Lab (SE Lab) for US & Global Health, an incubator course taught in a new interdisciplinary, collaborative model based at the i-Lab. He has also served as an Entrepreneur-in-Residence (2013-2014) at Harvard Business School in the Rock Center for Entrepreneurship, on the Faculty of Arts & Sciences in the Sociology Department, at the Harvard Kennedy School, on the Leadership & Management faculty, and as a principal of the Hauser Center for Non-Profit Organizations (2004-2007). Gordon served as one of the founding faculty of the $10 million Reynolds Fellows Program in Social Entrepreneurship, a Center for Public Leadership and Harvard President?s interdisciplinary fellowship initiative that paid full tuition and stipend for graduate students from the Harvard Kennedy School, School of Public Health and Graduate School of Education. At Princeton, Gordon served as Dean?s Visiting Professor in Entrepreneurship in 2009-2010. Working together with the School of Engineering & Applied Science, the Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs, and the Faculty of Arts & Sciences, he launched a new set of programs and prizes in social innovation and entrepreneurship in collaboration with students, faculty and alumni. At Stanford in 2001-2002, Gordon created the SE Lab, a Silicon Valley and technology?influenced, interdisciplinary incubator for social ventures and global problem solving. Gordon taught on the Public Policy Program and Urban Studies faculties (School of Humanities & Sciences) and served as a faculty affiliate at the Center for Social Innovation at Stanford Graduate School of Business, and a Program Officer at Stanford?s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Many of the talented students and fellows in Gordon?s SE Labs have won the top awards of prestigious idea and business plan competitions, including those at Stanford, Harvard, Princeton and MIT. Gordon is an author in the edited volume Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change (A. Nicholls, ed., Yunus, Drayton et. al., Oxford University Press, 2006/2008) and served as a founding member of the Oxford/Ashoka led University Network for Social Entrepreneurship. His interest in entrepreneurship is informed by work in both the private and nonprofit sectors in the U.S. (New York, Cambridge, Palo Alto), Europe (London, Paris) and Asia (Hong Kong), as CEO of a medical technology company and in international strategy consulting. Gordon is married to Sara Singer- they on occasion teach together at Stanford, have a daughter Audrey (20) and son Jason (17), and live in the residential section of campus. Jennifer Bollyky Samuel C. Bonar

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512062

__label__wiki

MedicAlert Foundation Canada and Alzheimer Society of Canada announce Good Samaritan Award Toronto, Ontario, November 7, 2016 – To mark National Senior Safety Week, the MedicAlert Foundation Canada and the Alzheimer Society of Canada have launched a Good Samaritan Award to foster greater community support for people living with dementia. The award is designed to recognize members of the community who are willing to go out of their way to assist people with dementia, who may have become lost or gone missing, so that they can return home safely. This year’s recipient was an individual from Vancouver, B.C., who after spotting a 60-year-old man running erratically in her neighbourhood, did not hesitate to help. She walked him to her home and immediately called the 24/7 Emergency Hotline engraved on the MedicAlert® Safely Home® bracelet he was wearing. The 60 year-old man had early onset dementia and was quickly reunited with his brother-in-law after MedicAlert staff checked his emergency contact list. “Emergency responders and police aren’t the only people who play critical roles in helping individuals with dementia. Ordinary Canadians also have a role to play. In fact, about 26 percent of calls we’ve received so far this year have come from Good Samaritans,” says Robert Ridge, President and CEO of MedicAlert Foundation Canada. Good Samaritans not only help bring more attention to a disease that will continue to affect increasing numbers of Canadians, but they can also make a huge difference in the lives of people with dementia by taking these steps: Approach the person from the front, state their name and reassure the person they’re safe Look for a MedicAlert medical ID. A nationally recognized blue emblem with the recognized name MedicAlert will signify the person has dementia. Read the engraved info on the back of the bracelet Call the emergency hotline to connect with a live MedicAlert operator who will contact the person’s caregiver or family. To learn more about the MedicAlert® Safely Home® program, visit medicalert.ca/safely-home. About Alzheimer Society of Canada The Alzheimer Society is the leading nationwide health charity for people living with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. Active in communities across Canada, the Society offers help for today through our programs and services, and hope for tomorrow by funding research into the cause, prevention and a cure. About MedicAlert Foundation Canada MedicAlert Foundation Canada (MAFCA) is the largest membership-based registered charity in Canada and it is the leading provider of emergency medical information services. For over 55 years, MedicAlert's mission is to save lives and it has protected more than one million Canadians since 1961. Learn more about MedicAlert, how it works, and how you or a loved one can sign up to a service plan www.MedicAlert.ca or by calling 1.855.581.3796. Tracey Tang Manager, Marketing, Donations and Media Relations ttang@medicalert.ca Rosanne Meandro Alzheimer Society of Canada rmeandro@alzheimer.ca

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512063

__label__cc

The theft of La belle Hollandaise Bizarrely, Picasso’s Weeping Woman was not the first of his paintings to have been stolen from an Australian state art gallery to make a point. In 1967 Picasso’s La belle Hollandaise (The beautiful Dutch woman) was stolen from the Queensland Art Gallery. At the time the painting was valued at $200,000 (the equivalent of $2,367,132 today). Picasso had painted it in 1905 on cardboard mounted on wood, 77.1 × 65.8 centimetres, in gouache, a water-based poster-paint. La belle Hollandaise depicts a young woman wearing nothing but a traditional Dutch lacy-cloth cap. It was painted when Picasso was between his early ‘Blue period’, when he painted sad, downbeat subjects, and his ‘Rose period,’ when he focused on pleasant scenes in a primarily pinky hue. The eccentric multi-millionaire grazier Major Harold De Vahl Rubin had purchased La belle Hollandaise for £6,000 in 1940 (about $477,882 today). In 1959 he wanted to know its current value, so he put it up for auction and bought it again, setting a record for the highest price paid for a living artist. Satisfied that he knew its value, he then donated his entire collection of modern European art to the Queensland Art Gallery: a Degas, a Renoir, a Toulouse-Lautrec, a Vlaminck, and three works by Picasso, including La belle Hollandaise. In the middle of the night, on Monday 5 June, Robert Ferguson climbed up some scaffolding on the outside of the gothic brick building on Gregory Terrace in Bowen Hills, Brisbane. The building is now known as the Old Museum Building, but back in 1967 it was the Queensland Art Gallery. Ferguson forced open a top floor window with a screwdriver and entered the Gallery. Fortunately for Ferguson, there was no burglar alarm in that part of the Gallery. Little is known about the 22-year-old New Zealander who had been working as a labourer, but his father confirmed to reporters that his son did have a passion for art and was a frequent visitor to art galleries. Ferguson later claimed to have been motivated by a strange idealism. He was aware that the Gallery was considering the sale of La belle Hollandaise to raise money for a new building to be built on the southern bank of the Brisbane River. So he decided to steal the painting, later telling the police, “I was satisfied the public did not appreciate the painting, so I decided to steal it.” Once he had stolen the painting, Ferguson’s main problem was where to keep it. He claims that for five days he hid it wrapped in blankets in the bush on the slopes of Mt Coot-tha. How the painting survived two rainy days and nights in such conditions is one of the many mysteries surrounding this theft. Ferguson then decided to return the painting to Mrs Julie Rubin, the widow of the original Australian owner, Major Harold Rubin. Mrs Rubin was frightened by the sudden appearance of this strange young man at her mansion, ‘Toorak House’, in the inner-northern suburb of Hamilton, Brisbane on Sunday 11 June. However, as he was carrying a familiar Picasso, she let him in. Ferguson wanted her to reconsider her late husband’s gift and begged her to keep the painting for a month before reporting it to the police. Mrs Rubin agreed to this and the young man left. The very next day the police arrived with a search warrant and found La belle Hollandaise in a spare bedroom. It was very embarrassing for Mrs Rubins, who then refused to give the police any information about the young man, except to say that she didn’t know him. This is odd because, who other than Mrs Rubin and Ferguson could have informed the police about the location of the painting? Ferguson was not arrested until Saturday 24 June. Somehow the police were able to track him down. When they did they found a loaded pistol in his possession. He confessed to the theft, pleaded guilty to the firearms charges and was jailed for a month for possession of the loaded pistol. La belle Hollandaise still hangs in the Queensland Art Gallery. This entry was posted on Monday, June 11th, 2018 at 9:34 AM and tagged with art theft, Major Harold De Vahl Rubin, Picasso, Queensland Art Gallery and posted in Art History. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. « The Intervention 10 Years On Buff After Reading – the art of buffing » 13 responses to “The theft of La belle Hollandaise” Thanks Mark! Fascinating story! Yes, there has to be more to it. Cher Docteur Enn, did you know about this? Monsieur Beh Bernard Caleo Cardigan Comics 61 3 9497 8098 site cardigancomics.com draw bernardcaleo.tumblr.com Ack! Sorry, Mark: I was meaning to forward it on to an art mate in the US of A…. I’ll try that again… PS If you’d like a peek at my recent trip to Japan, look here: http://www.katasuburi.tumblr.com Jateousa My friends father is Robert Ferguson lol July 6th, 2018 at 12:19 PM Had to be a few. Is is he from NZ? Did he work in Brisbane? My father is robert ferguson Thank you for contacting me. I have many questions that I will send in an email. And i read the story its not exactly true but theres more to it and i know every about it. My friend did comment on the 4th july and he is from NZ and he did work in Brisbane he even told me about it and the gallery knows my father as well Wow, I just thought that your friends comment was a laugh because it is a relatively common name. My father is still alive as well he’s 73 I was assuming that, given that you were writing about him in the present tense and because he was only a young man at the time. Leave a Reply to cthulu Cancel reply

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512065

__label__wiki

Republican Presidential Candidate Trump Visits Mexico September 1, 2016 General Washington, – Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is making a surprise visit to Mexico on Wednesday, a country he has harshly criticized, ahead of a major speech Wednesday night on his controversial immigration policy. Trump will meet with Mexican President Enrique Pe?a Nieto hours before he flies back to Arizona to deliver the speech. Nieto had invited both Trump and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. Trump has repeatedly said he would build a giant wall on the U.S.-Mexican border to keep Mexicans out, and that he would get Mexico to pay for it. He also has vowed to deport about 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S., a position he is expected to soften in his speech Wednesday night. Clinton has so far decline Nieto’s invitation and her campaign blasted Trump’s decision to go. “From the first days of his campaign, Donald Trump has painted Mexicans as ‘rapists’ and criminals and has promised to deport 16 million people, including children and U.S. citizens, said Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri said in a statement. “He has said we should force Mexico to pay for his giant border wall. He has said we should ban remittances to families in Mexico if Mexico doesn’t pay up.” Nieto tweeted that he wants the discussion to “promote the interests of Mexico in the world and, principally, to protect Mexicans wherever they are.” Despite the gesture, Trump could face considerable protests from Mexicans, who have been angered by his comments, and security is expected to be increased for the visit.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512067

__label__cc

Archive for Graham E. Fuller A Journey Out of Islamophobic Darkness Posted in Anti-Loons, Feature with tags Act! for America, Bosch Fawstin, Charles Johnson, Citizen Warrior, CriticalDragon, Culturism, Dawah Films, FrontPageMag, Graham E. Fuller, Jihad Watch, Pamela Geller, Religion of Peace, Robert Spencer, Rush Limbaugh, Stealth Jihad on April 23, 2012 by loonwatch Leaving the Islamophobia nightmare The Islamophobia propaganda machine has its roots in years of concerted online, media and marketing campaigns. This well oiled machine of hate has attracted many followers, and they can be broken up into several groups (there may be considerable overlap): 1.) Those who were ripe for the picking. These individuals already had a hate for Islam and Muslims or Arabs, they were already racist in one way or another, and easily attached themselves to Islamophobia. 2.) Opportunists. These individuals are always looking for a way to make a buck, to line their pockets. Real, honest work doesn’t suit their tastes and so they’ve devoted themselves to that centuries old money-maker, hate. 3.) True believers. They may come from various ends of the ideological spectrum, most of them are very afraid, fear courses through their every waking moment, they are made even more afraid by modern interpretations of say Biblical prophecies, or fears about the existential threat of the end of Western society. 4.) The gullible or the naive. These individuals read and believe the Islamophobic propaganda because they perceive the arguments as objective, factual, honest, and fitting with their worldview, or answering their confusion and incomprehension of world events or history. There may be a few other groups not identified here, but those in the last category, the “gullible or the naive,” are usually individuals who later become enlightened and realize the true nature of Islamophobia. They start to question the poor “analysis,” the skewing of “facts,” the blindly subjective and hateful methodology employed by those they once respected as honest brokers on the issues of Islam and Muslims. One such individual is Charles Johnson. Loonwatch documented his groundbreaking and public quarrel with his former allies, JihadWatch’s Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller of AtlasShrugs. For Johnson it was their too easy comfort and alliance with fascists like Geert Wilders that broke the proverbial camel’s back, and ever since, he has been outspoken in his criticism of Islamophobes. Their have been many like Johnson, some who have changed their minds because of our site or their own introspection. One such individual is regular Loonwatch commenter and tipster CriticalDragon. CriticalDragon was quite involved with right-wing anti-Muslim sites, respected the leading lights of Islamophobia, and even commented (under a different screen name) on Jihad Watch amongst other blogs. We asked CriticalDragon to tell us about how he at one time embraced Islamophobia, and how and why he eventually left the quagmire of hate: LW: What first attracted you to the “counter-jihadists?” CD: Prior to 9/11, I was naive and had an overly simplistic and overly positive view of my country and the world. It’s not that I thought that America had done no wrong, but I believed that in every war since World War II, its intentions were noble. I always considered myself an anti-bigot, which was ironic since I would become a bigot myself. Although I wasn’t as bad as some of the Islamophobes out there, I said and supported some things that I’m now really ashamed of. One of the reasons why I fell for the “counter jihadists” may have been in part because prior to 9/11, I didn’t hear much about anti-Muslim bigotry. I did however have a very black and white view of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. I got most of my information on that from people like Rush Limbaugh. Although I wouldn’t call Rush an Islamophobe, he always portrayed the Palestinian side as evil. However, he did not make a connection between the conflict and Islam. Right after 9/11 occurred, I wanted to find out why we were attacked. What had America done to deserve such an attack in their eyes, and why were they so willing to die to hurt us? I knew about suicide bombers in Israel, but I really knew that I didn’t understand what motivated them either, but I didn’t think much about it, because I was not involved in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. It didn’t affect me much, or anyone I knew, but now I felt that my country was in danger of being attacked again at any moment. I became aware shortly after the event of the fact that the 9/11 hijackers were Muslims, but I did not connect the two until later. Searching for answers I came across the “counter Jihad blogs.” I can’t remember if the first one I came across was Jihad Watch or another one, but at some point I reached Jihad Watch. I read it and some other relatively moderate “Counter Jihad” blogs and basically believed everything I read without doing enough research to determine if they were true or not. For a while I assumed that what they were saying did not apply to most Muslims, and tried, but not hard enough, to find some peaceful liberal Muslims who denounced terrorism. Even after visiting those sites I probably wouldn’t have bought into the Stealth Jihad or Population Jihad conspiracies if not for two events. First, I assumed that after we overthrew the Taliban, the government in Afghanistan would be a genuine liberal democracy with religious freedom. At the time, and even though I believed people like Spencer in regards to what they presented as the “teachings of Islam” (death to the infidels, lying to the infidels, oppressive theocracy), I assumed most Muslims did not follow such “teachings.” But after the war was over, I remember an Afghan man who was set to be put to death for converting from Islam to Christianity, and it not only disappointed me, it kind of shocked me. I literally believed what George W. Bush said about people wanting to live in freedom, and the Afghan people had chosen to install a government without freedom of religion, even after living under a brutal theocracy, and it seemed to me that we had even encouraged it to some degree. Second was the cartoon riots, which really scared me, because it looked like large numbers of Muslims around the world spontaneously erupted over harmless cartoons, and I saw what looked like Western governments caving-in to their demands. LW: Which Islamophobic blogs did you frequent? CD: Mostly The Infidel Blogger’s Alliance, Bosch Fawstin, Citizen Warrior, FrontpageMag, Culturism, and Religion of Peace, which is the worst of them all. It literally scared me, every time I visited it. They’re really deceptive in how they cherry pick news stories and post hundreds of terrifying stories about Islam and Muslims to support their agenda. I might suggest that Loonwatch take the “Religion of Peace” website to task more often, except most of the stuff on there isn’t written by them. Most of it is just links to articles on other websites. Although I read at least two of Robert Spencer’s books I did not spend a lot of time at Jihad Watch. I may have admired him at the time but I didn’t spend much time on his blog. The same is true for Pamela Geller and her Atlas Shrugs blog. One of the reasons why I didn’t realize how nuts she was may well have been because I didn’t spend much time there. If you are going to take on one of the Islamophobic bloggers whose blog I used to follow I would recommend laying the smack down on Citizen Warrior. He’s kind of like Robert Spencer, but maybe a bit more sophisticated, although he hasn’t written any books that I’m aware of. You might also want to take on John Kenneth Press (AKA Culturist John) who wrote the book Culturism, and runs the blog by the same name, and eviscerate some of his arguments, although he usually doesn’t deal with Islam or Muslims. LW: You’ve mentioned in your comments that you truly believed in the threat of “stealth jihad.” Were there any other major themes that seemed to make sense to you at the time? CD: I’m really embarrassed to say this, but after reading Marks Steyn‘s America Alone, I actually became convinced that Muslims in Europe were having far more children than non-Muslims, and given enough time, they would become the majority. I believed they would most likely turn those countries into Islamic theocracies, because at the time, that’s what I thought most of them wanted, or they wouldn’t be willing to resist when the fanatics started taking over. I thought it might take centuries but still it scared me, the idea that these people with such an alien worldview might destroy Western culture and eventually replace it with Sharia’. I know its stupid, but I wasn’t thinking too hard at the time unfortunately. Note that I never saw this in racial terms, always cultural terms. I was Islamophobic, but I was not a racist. I believed that Muslims in the West were raising their children in such a way that they would not share our values. It was not something genetic, but rather how I thought they were raising their children. I also believed that the West was at war with Islam, yet simultaneously did not believe that all Muslims were evil, or even our enemies. I know that’s a contradiction, but I didn’t think about it too much at the time. On the occasions when other people would bring that up, I just rationalized it away. However, the fact that I realized that not all Muslims could be evil, would eventually help bring me out of the Islamophobic nightmare. LW: For how long were you a regular visitor to the “counter-jihadist” blogs? CD: Sadly, I was a follower and supporter of “counter jihad” blogs for about ten years following 9/11. I only really stopped being an Islamophobe some time in late September of 2011, and even then it would be another month or two before I completely rejected all their nonsense. For example I was still somewhat suspicious of CAIR until I realized that just about every blog that suspected them of being connected to terrorist groups like Hamas, recommended Jihad Watch and by that time I had come to see Robert Spencer as the bigot and liar that he really is. LW: About Ten Years? Why did it take you so long to see the light? CD: I got scared and I did not do a very good job of questioning what I was told. I was terrified, and I wanted to stop Jihadists from destroying our freedom. It seemed so obvious to me, because I was getting such a distorted picture of reality. Early on when I joined the counter jihad movement, most of the information I was getting on what was going on in the world involving Islam and Muslims was incredibly biased to say the least, and I did not try very hard to critique it, because all the evidence seemed so overwhelming at the time. Most of the blogs I frequented outside of the “Counter Jihad Movement” rarely mentioned Islam or Muslims. I occasionally, though rarely, visited left wing political blogs. One of the few exceptions was American United for the Separation Of Church and State, but I don’t even think they talked about Islam until people in the states started trying to pass anti-Shariah legislation. I spent the vast majority of my time on right-wing Islamophobic blogs, and my preferred news channel was Fox News, which rarely debunked Islamophobes. For those reasons, I almost always saw what left wing bloggers wrote refuting Islamophobic claims through the eyes of Islamophobes, and I rarely heard about Muslims protesting evil done in the name of their faith. However, if I had been willing to do a bit more research to see what groups like Act For America really based their opposition on, outside of the Islamophobic blogs I frequented I would have seen just how wrong they were. In addition I was too quick to dismiss arguments against their positions. There were some skeptical science blogs and YouTube channels that I really enjoyed, and they tended to be rather left wing, but they rarely mentioned Islam, that is until the idea of Everybody Draw Muhammad day and the issue of the “Ground Zero Mosque” came up, which was years after 9/11 and the cartoon riots. Even then, too often, I tended to just dismiss them unless I already agreed with them. I got to the point where I really did not want to admit I was wrong. Maybe I didn’t want to admit I was being a bigot. Case in point, when atheist YouTuber and foe of creationists everywhere, “Thunderf00t” came out in support for Everybody Draw Muhammad day, and made at least one anti “Ground Zero Mosque” video, I tended to dismiss the arguments that other, better, Youtuber skeptics made against him. I admired “ThunderF00t,” for his strong stance for science and reason and against the “backwardness of Islam.” Ironically I would eventually come to respect and admire the people on YouTube who opposed him like Coughlin 666 (now Coughlin 616 and Coughlin 000) and Ujames1978 (now Ujames1978Forever and Pirus The God Slayer). I was a horrible skeptic to say the least. For a long time I fell for just about every single prominent Loon. I believed most of the things that they said, and it seemed like there were just so many “former Muslims” out there talking about how “evil” Islam is, and how the West was destined to be Islamized if we did not do anything to stop it, because there were just so many fanatical Muslims out there determined to force us to convert or submit. I used to really admire Wafa Sultan and, although I thought Walid Shoebat‘s fundamentalist Christian beliefs were a bit nonsensical to say the least, I never doubted that he really was a “former Muslim terrorist” until much later. I had managed to entrap myself in my own nightmarish digital web of Islamophobia. LW: What effect, if any did self-proclaimed Muslim supporters of Robert Spencer, such as Zuhdi Jasser have on you? CD: They actually encouraged me to support the “counter jihad movement” early on and likely contributed to my own Islamophobia, but ironically and counter-intuitively they also were one of the factors that prevented me from seeing all Muslims as the enemy. By doing the things that he did, such as being the host of the Clarion Fund‘s anti-Muslim propaganda film, “The Third Jihad,”Jasser likely convinced a lot of people that there really was a conspiracy among American Muslims to “Islamize” the country. Some Islamophobic websites link to his organization, the “American Islamic Forum for Democracy,” and they use it as a way of claiming that they’re not really bigoted against Muslims because some Muslims support them and vice versa. This certainly reinforced all of my fears, but at the same time, since I couldn’t come up with what I thought would be a good reason for him to be lying about this, it encouraged me to think that not all Muslims were bad. In fact, he was one of the few Muslims that I was certain was not lying to me. Ironically, I didn’t lose respect for Jasser even while other anti-Muslim bigots tried to convince me that he was really a Stealth Jihadist as well. The only thing that made me completely lose respect for him was something he did after I left the “anti-jihad” movement, when he made a video defending Lowes at the moment they gave into intimidation and pressure from anti-Muslim bigots to drop support for the show “All American Muslim.” I was no longer an Islamophobe at that point and was in fact trying to fight anti-Muslim bigotry. I’m not sure if Jasser is a “self hating Muslim” for lack of a better term, but he may be a useful idiot for Islamophobes. I have come across multiple instances where Islamophobes accused him of being a Stealth Jihadist as well, just because he’s a Muslim, they think he is lying to them and that he really supports groups like AlQaeda. What he and his organization are doing is perpetuating baseless conspiracy theories about Muslims, and he won’t convince Islamophobes who are already convinced that he’s the enemy that he’s a friend. In fact, if he ever comes to see how baseless the Stealth Jihad conspiracy really is, and turns around and stops supporting “counter jihadists,” then a bunch of people who used to support him will become convinced that he really was a stealth Jihadist all along. LW: What changed your mind? Was it a single event or a process over time? CD: It was a process, but there were some definite events. I recall these events not in any particular order: Even before 9/11, I considered myself a conservative, but I had some views that were not stereotypical of a conservative. For one thing I was a supporter of the separation of Church and State. I considered myself a secularist and a skeptic. I may have rightfully rejected things like scientific creationism, but a good skeptic would never have fallen for someone like Spencer or Geller, or if they had, they would have had too many doubts as soon as they started talking about things like the Stealth Jihad, or learned that they had their “scholarly” work published in the same series of books that promoted creationism and other forms of pseudoscience. When I learned that Spencer’s, “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades,” had been published by the same people who published “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Creationism and Intelligent Design,” it should have set off some red flags, but I had allowed myself to become too convinced that he was correct by then, and that he was a “real scholar.” I was shocked when secularist groups like American’s United For the Separation of Church and State actually came out against the anti-Sharia’ legislation. I assumed they would support such laws, because in my mind it was fighting for secularism. The problem was that since I believed in those nonsensical anti-Muslim conspiracy theories, I actually believed that Muslim fanatics were a greater threat to our freedom than the religious right. Like all bigots I was closed minded, but maybe not as closed minded as some. Part of the problem was that I was getting most of my information on Islam and Muslims from right-wing sources and they were incredibly biased. It made it look like there was a large number of Muslims out to take over the world. While I’m certain there are some blogs out there run by genuine right wing anti-loons, I didn’t come across too many. When I happened to come across a video debunking the claim that Muslims were likely to become the majority through immigration I began to doubt it for the first time. Earlier, I came across another more “moderate critic” of Islam who went by the user name, “Klingschor.” He started out as a supporter of Robert Spencer and at one time had favorited the ridiculous “Three Things You Probably Don’t Know About Islam” video on his YouTube channel. However, as Klingschor got more educated, he eventually turned against Spencer. He created a video supporting the “Ground Zero Mosque,” and Imam Rauf, where he viciously attacked Spencer and Geller for being bigots. (The video is no longer on his channel, although now I wish he’d repost the original or remake it). I admired Spencer and Geller and I was convinced that Rauf was a “stealth jihadist,” so this shocked me, since I admired Klingschor as well and he didn’t seem pro-Islam to me. I wondered why he wasn’t convinced as I was that Rauf was up to no good and why he had suddenly turned on Spencer and Geller. I had trouble explaining it. In addition, I began to realize that if things did not change, a lot of innocent people were going to get hurt, and not by Muslim jihadists. I knew that not all Muslims were our enemies, and I would sometimes get into arguments with other people who held worse views than I did; people who wanted to nuke Mecca and kill every single Muslim on the planet. Even when I pointed out to them how innocent people would be killed, it did not phase them. These nuke Mecca/kill all Muslims people were so bad that I saw them as anti-Muslim bigots even when I was an anti-Muslim bigot. That’s how bad they were. Then something else happened, something that was somewhat of a watershed moment. Most people in the “counter Jihad movement” assumed Anders Breivik was a Muslim when news of his rampage first came out. I was not really that shocked by the fact that he was not a Muslim, since I knew non-Muslim terrorists existed, but I was shocked by his motive. He went on his rampage and murdered innocent people including many children, believing it was necessary to stop the Islamization of Europe. Of course excuses were made for Spencer and Geller not being responsible, and I bought into them at first, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that their rhetoric did nothing to discourage a Breivik. Even if Breivik got his beliefs from somewhere else, he idolized Spencer and Geller and was an avid supporter, not to mention other prominent figures in the “counter Jihad Movement.” If anything, they encouraged his behavior even if they did not specifically tell him to commit violent acts. It was also about this time that I found out that a couple of the lesser known Islamophobes that I admired were racists. No one you’ve probably heard of, just a couple of nobodies really, but I had admired them and thought they were smarter than they actually were. This was another shock to my system because I had really respected them, and I had always regarded racism as abhorrent and stupid. I instantly lost respect for them. Plus I saw a video by Coughlin 616, called “Pamela Geller Busted.” Although at the time I thought he was wrong to oppose Geller and believed he was far too concerned with neo-Nazis as compared to Jihadists, I decided to watch the video. After watching it, and checking Coughlin’s sources, I realized that he had proven that Geller was a liar. What’s more she might have been covering for Breivik or someone like him. I suddenly had a lot more respect for Coughlin and a lot less respect for Geller. In the meantime, I saw more videos by Klingscor, and another Youtube atheist critic of Islam, CEMBadmins, that actually debunked some common Islamophobic claims. One of them was taqiya, both of them made videos on the subject thoroughly debunking the claim that taqiya is lying for Islam and that Muslims are more likely to lie than non Muslims. CEMBadmins really made it hard for me to continue to believe in the taqiya conspiracy since he was not only a critic of Islam, but an ex-Muslim. In his video, he talked about a poll taken of members of the Council of Ex-Muslims (his organization) and it turned out that most of them had never even heard of taqiya, and those that had regarded it as a defensive mechanism to protect themselves from persecution, not lying to promote Islam like I had been taught by others in the “counter jihad movement.” I thought to myself, “Why would ex-Muslims lie for Islam?” It slowly began to hit me just how wrong people like Spencer were on the subject. Soon, I saw a couple of videos on Muslims who helped save Jews during the Holocaust. At least one of them I came across on Loonwatch. Although I always knew there were at least some rare instances when Muslims helped non Muslims, I had no idea that so many Muslims had done so much at one time to help a large group of non-Muslims. I was slowly realizing just how much the evil done by Muslims to non Muslims like myself in the name of Islam was exaggerated by people in the “counter jihad movement,” and how much they ignored the good done by Muslims in the name of Islam. The final nail in the coffin for my support for those “counter jihad” blogs and Spencer and Geller was when I realized that Islam has not traditionally endorsed terrorism. When I found Loonwatch and looked at the actual statistics for the first time I realized that very few terrorists in the United States and Europe were even Muslims. I came to realize just how wrong I was, and I felt an odd combination of happiness and relief as well as guilt and shame, simultaneously. LW: Why do you spend so much time trying to help fight anti-Muslim bigotry now? CD: For one thing, ever since I allowed myself to see the light, I have come to realize just how wrong I was. I’ve come to see that the people I once admired and supported like Geert Wilders are actually a greater threat to our freedom than the threat they claim to be fighting. Since Stealth Jihad and Islamization are myths, there’s no need for any legislation to fight them. If anything, a lot of innocent people are going to be hurt by “counter jihadists” including innocent Muslims and non-Muslims alike, and for what? To fight imaginary conspiracy theories? Also, the Christian religious right is more likely to turn America into a theocracy. With Muslims at less than one percent of the American population, they don’t have the numbers to do so, even if they all wanted to. In fact, I now understand that as someone who normally wouldn’t support the religious right, by trying so hard to fight the imaginary threat of Islamization, I made myself a useful idiot of the religious right. The same is true for any secularist who supports them out of fear of Jihadists taking over and turning the West into an Islamic theocracy. Finally, I want to make up for the mistake of supporting the “counter jihadists.” The only way I can clear my conscious now is to actively oppose the people and organizations I once endorsed. I feel a lot of guilt, I did and said a lot of things that I regret now. LW: Do you have any suggestions for those who still admire bloggers like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller? CD: If you want to hear people criticize Islam, look for people who are not bigots, and do not believe in nonsensical conspiracy theories, like “the stealth Jihad.” Make sure they reject the idea that Islam teaches Muslims to lie to promote their faith and that Muslims are more likely to lie than non Muslims. Find people who are at least trying to be objective and who avoid making sweeping generalizations about Muslims. Also listen to what Muslims have to say about themselves, their politics, their philosophy and their faith. In many cases it will be completely counter to the negative stereotypes. Let me use someone who appears on Loonwatch from time to time as an example. When I first saw “Dawah Films” respond to “Thunderf00t,” I saw it only through the eyes of “Thunderf00t.” I thought he was threatening to kill him for criticizing his religion, but when I actually watched other videos he made, and talked to him about it, years later, I realized how radically different his motives actually were. Contrary to the way “Thunderf00t” portrayed him, he supported free speech and he even defended another YouTuber, “ZOMGitscriss,” against death threats from genuine Muslim extremists, when she made some minor criticisms of Islam. In addition to listening to Muslims and moderate, rational critics of Islam, you should also take an Islamic Studies course at an accredited university, if you have the time. I’m hoping to do that, since contrary to what I used to believe, I don’t know much about Islam, and if I’m going to fight anti-Muslim bigotry, I’m going to have to know more about Islam and its history. If you can’t do that, or even if you can do that, in addition, try to find a few books about Islam written by genuine scholars who studied Islam within academia. LW: How did you find Loonwatch? CD: I believe I first heard about Loonwatch on a conservative blog that I used to visit from time to time. The person behind the blog wrote a story critiquing something you wrote, but I don’t remember if I read it or not, but either way, I didn’t check his sources, so I didn’t find out what Loonwatch was until much later, after I left the “counter Jihad” movement. After I stopped being an Islamophobe, I wanted to fight anti-Muslim bigotry and I started looking around and I came across Loonwatch and its sister site, SpencerWatch. However, I did notice that “Dawah Films” recommends you guys on his channel, but I can’t remember if I clicked on his link before or after I did a Google search. LW: Do you regularly visit any other anti-bigotry sites, and if so, which ones? CD: I really think the Southern Poverty Law Center is an excellent resource, especially if you include their blog “HateWatch.” The anti-Defamation League is also generally a good anti-bigotry organization. I know the American Civil Liberties Union does not specialize in fighting bigotry, but they do a very good job of protecting civil liberties including the civil liberties of minorities. More recently I started exploring Sheila Musaji’s “The American Muslim,” which also does a good job debunking anti Muslim myths as well. I’d also recommend more than a few Youtube channels that have done a lot to fight irrational hatred and bigotry. I’ve already mentioned Coughlan and Ujames1978Forever’s channels, and would like to add EvoGenVideos and HannibaltheVictor13. EvoGenVideos is a genetics student who sometimes uses his scientific knowledge to debunk racists. HannibaltheVictor13 is an anthropologist who has also debunked racists. LW: Is there any meaning behind your nickname, Critical Dragon1177, that you’d like to share? CD: When I realized how wrong I was to support the “counter Jihad” movement, I also realized that I had said some incredibly stupid and often bigoted things that I was ashamed of. Plus I wanted to disassociate from those bigoted anti-Muslim blogs that I used to visit. In order to do what I wanted to do, I needed a new user name. I made a new years resolution to be a better skeptic. I realized that the biggest reason that I fell for what Islamophobes were telling me, and continued to believe them for so long, despite the overwhelming evidence against what they were saying was my lack of critical thinking on the matter. My story is really about the danger of not thinking critically, and of giving into your emotions. That’s where the first part of my user name comes from. I added ‘Dragon’ because I like fantasy, and I love fantasy creatures. The numbers were added just in case someone else had that name. LW: In conclusion is there anything else you would like to share with the LW audience? CD: I’ve read a book called A World Without Islam that I highly recommend. It’s by Graham E. Fuller. According to his biography over at Amazon.com, “Graham E. Fuller is a former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council at the CIA, a former senior political scientist at RAND, and a current adjunct professor of history at Simon Fraser University. He is the author of numerous books about the Middle East, including The Future of Political Islam. He has lived and worked in the Muslim world for nearly two decades.” In his book, “A World without Islam,” Fuller goes a long way to debunk the claim that we are at war with Islam, and that Islam is the cause of terrorism and our problems involving Muslims and Muslim majority societies. I haven’t read any of his other books, but based on this one, he’s largely anti Robert Spencer, and he has far better credentials than him. In fact if I had read something like this book just after 9/11 instead of going to all those bigoted “counter jihad” sites, I don’t think I would have taken people like Spencer seriously at all. It was recommended to me by my friend, Klingschor, along with another book by Tamim Ansary called “Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes,” which I’ve started reading as well. I also have a friend on Youtube that I would like to introduce, he goes by the user name, Ramio1983. He’s made at least one video fighting anti-Muslim bigotry, and I think he’s working on another one, maybe someone here could help him. LW: Thank you, CriticalDragon, for sharing your story here on Loonwatch, and for joining the fight against bigotry. CD: You’re Welcome. I’m pleased to be able to share my story. My hope is that it will help someone else to see the truth.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512069

__label__wiki

Southwest Begins Day of Upsets With 3-2 Win Over Ferguson Written by Glenn Sattell on May 8th, 2019 Southwest celebrates its 3-2 win over Ferguson in a district semifinals playoff game Tuesday at Columbus High School. It was a day of upsets in the 9A-15 semifinals on Tuesday at Columbus High. Southwest started the day by holding off the Ferguson Falcons, ranked No. 6 in the Miami-Dade Power Rankings. That preceded the shocker of the night. Braddock, which finished the regular season at 2-6 in district play and 10-11 overall, defeated tournament host and district top-seed Columbus (21-4), which came into the night ranked No. 1 in the Miami-Dade Power Rankings. Both games ended with identical 3-2 scores. The No. 3 seed Southwest (14-9) will take on No. 4 seed Braddock (11-11) for the 9A-15 championship scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Thursday at Columbus High School. “We’re a young group, we grinded it out, our guys came through and it was the young guys that got it done,” said Southwest manager Mandy Pelaez. Southwest closer Amaury Villalba made his first start a memorable one. The junior left-hander threw a complete game on Tuesday and the Eagles, ranked No. 15 in the Miami-Dade Power Randings, gave him just enough offense for a hotly-contested victory. Pelaez talked about his decision to start Villalba in the playoff game. “We went with a change, Amaury has been consistent all year long, throwing a lot of strikes, so we decided to start him. He wanted the rock. He’s been telling me he can go seven. He’s been telling me all week.” Ferguson starter Carlos Rodriguez delivers in the early innings on Tuesday. The Eagles broke a 2-2 tie in the seventh to reward Villalba’s effort. Freshman Matthew Fernandez delivered a clutch RBI single, his second hit of the game. Villalba scattered six hits and struck out two en route to his complete-game victory. “I have a lot of confidence and we’re just going to keep on moving forward,” Villalba said through an interpreter, adding that the grind was not taxing on him. “I felt good throughout the whole game. I felt consistent. I’m not used to it, but I got adjusted to it.” The 94-pitch effort was far beyond anything Villalba had accomplished prior to Tuesday’s outing. “I’m a horse,” he said. But there were other heroes on this night for the Eagles, and it took all of them to pull together the hard-fought win. Eddie Sierra gave the Eagles a 1-0 lead with a towering home run in the fourth inning. The no-doubter was just the second hit given up by Rodriguez, who went six-and-two-third innings for the Falcons, striking out 12. Southwest’s Eddie Sierra is greeted after his home run put the Eagles ahead 1-0. “I was sitting on a fastball and he left it up,” Sierra said. “I just drove it. I saw it fly off the bat and knew it was gone from the minute I hit it.” The teams traded runs from there, with Ferguson tying it 1-1 in the fifth when Jose Hernandez singled and scored. The Falcons were paced offensively by Justin Chapman, who singled in the third and fifth innings. Christopher Alvarez gave the Eagles a 2-1 lead in the sixth when he walked and scored on a sacrifice fly by Jordan Worley. The Falcons tied it again in the bottom of the inning when Anthony Lopez was hit by a pitch, moved up on a single by Carlos Rodriguez, and scored on an error. That set the stage for the seventh-inning dramatics. “It was a dog-fight,” Sierra said. “Even when we made a mistake that tied it up, we fought and we just came back and we did it. That’s what the boys are about, it’s family.”

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512072

__label__cc

Cuardaigh... Italian (IT) French (fr) Croatian (hr) German (DE) Dutch (nl) Flemish (be) Irish (ga-IE) English (UK) About MILESTONE Facts & FiguresConsortium MembersCoordinator & ManagementPatients & Public InvolvementWhat about Ethics?PUBLICATIONS For young people & Relatives The Milestone StudyYoung PeopleRelativesMental DisordersDOWNLOADS Background & ObjectivesOur Challenge Detailed Work PackagesAdvisory Board (SCEAB)What has MILESTONE achieved so far? Evaluating a new transitional care model What do we mean by ‘transition’? This is a term that is often used to describe the process of moving from one service to another. When we are thinking about mental health services, it is often used to refer to the move between mental health services for children and young people (sometimes called CAMHS – child and adolescent mental health services) and adult mental health services (AMHS). The age at which a young person might make a transition between mental health services varies from country to country; quite often, the transition age boundary is 18 years of age though in some places, transition may happen at 16 or 17. Why is transition important? As an adolescent or young adult, you may be experiencing substantial changes in many areas of your life, including school, relationships and work. You might, for example, be leaving home to attend college or university or to start another professional training. If, in addition to this, you are living with a mental health problem and you need to move from CAMHS to AMHS, then helping you through this move – making sure that your views are heard as to what help you need, and planning with you which service may be the closest or most appropriate for you to go to – is very important. Understandably, the prospect of transition can seem daunting, especially if you have built up a good relationship with your current mental health team - this is why it is crucial that young people feel supported all the way through such a transition. If you are about to transition, please find here a resource sheet as well as a list of helpful questions developed by the MILESTONE Young Project Advisors. Why do we need research about young people and mental health transitions? Existing research about young people and transition between different mental health services, in particular the move from CAMHS to AMHS, highlights that often young people experience poor or disjointed care. This can lead to some patients falling into a "gap" between services and being left unsupported at a critical time. For these reasons, we need to find out much more about what does work in order to improve the transition for any young people who are moving from CAMHS to AMHS. The MILESTONE study is unique in that it is a five-year pan-European research project which offers the opportunity to learn from different countries about how they currently support young people in transition, what works well or not. The main focus is young people who need to move to AMHS because of ongoing mental health problems but alongside this, MILESTONE also aims to identify those young people who can safely be discharged from specialist mental health services. Approval for our research has been granted from different Research Ethics Committees in each of the eight countries involved in MILESTONE. A steering committee and a special board of independent experts - the Scientific Clinical and Ethical Advisory Board (SCEAB) are in place to oversee how the study is being run. How young people have been involved in MILESTONE The MILESTONE researchers recognize that young people who have used CAMHS are the experts regarding the care, support and treatment offered in the transition period and actual transition; understanding young people’s views and experiences is vital in helping the researchers to identify and improve the links between different services. Our start point has been to work closely with different CAMHS in the eight partner countries to identify young people approaching the transition phase of care, and then to provide them with detailed information about MILESTONE and the information we hope to collect. At the start of MILESTONE, we were also very careful to test out all data collection tools with our Young Project Advisors to check whether they made sense and did not take too long to complete. Any young people expressing interest in taking part in MILESTONE also received information about the different times the research team would need to contact them, and also how to keep in touch with the researchers if they had any questions or needed to change arrangements for completing the MILESTONE research questionnaires. By the start of this year (2018) over 1,000 young people are taking part in the MILESTONE study providing very valuable information about their mental health and their experiences of transition. Most of the young people have completed the study questionnaires at three time points. The aim is to complete the fourth and final set of follow-up questionnaires by 31 December 2018. Priontáil The Milestone Study Coordinator & Management Patients & Public Involvement What about Ethics? Young people & Relatives Background & Objectives Detailed Work Packages Advisory Board (SCEAB) What has MILESTONE achieved so far? © 2017 MILESTONE This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 602442. This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Until you give your consent, only those cookies necessary to maintain the website's functionality are active. When you choose "OK", so called third-party non-functional cookies (e.g. GDPR-conform Google Analytics) may also become active. Please be aware that the website's functionality may be restricted if you choose "DECLINE". You can revoke your choice at any time by clearing your browser cache/history and updating your selection. Please also view our privacy policy.

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512075

__label__wiki

ARCHIVED - 4th to 15th December, visit the galleon Andalucía in the port of Cartagena A 55-metre replica of the galleons which sailed the Atlantic and helped shape modern history The galleon Andalucía, a replica of the ships which made the Spanish fleet a world power in the days of the Empire in South America, is docking in Puerto de Mazarrón until 1st December, after which she will be open to visitors alongside the marina in the port of Cartagena from 4th to 15th December. The Andalucía is 55 metres long and is built of iroko and pine wood. Its four masts carry seven sails with an area of 930 square metres, making her a floating museum of Spain’s maritime heritage, and she is currently engaged in a tour of ports in Spain, France, the Netherlands and Germany. In 2010 the Andalucía, which is owned by the Nao Victoria Foundation, sailed from Sevilla to the Expo Shanghai exhibition, and in 2013 she crossed the Atlantic to spend 4 years in the Americas, visiting Santo Domingo, Puerto Rico and cities such as New York, Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, Miami, San Juan (Puerto Rico), Toronto and Quebec. This has made it possible for thousands upon thousands of people to learn about the role this kind of ship played shaping modern history, and what life was like on board. While in Cartagena the Andalucía will be open to members of the public and will also be hosting school visits. Opening times are from 10.00 to 18.30 with admission priced at 7 euros for adults and 4 euros for children aged 5 to 10. Discounts are available for family groups and under 5s are welcomed free of charge. Tickets are available in the port or online at www.fundacionnaovictoria.org, while groups wishing to visit should contact comunicacion@fundacionnaovictoria.org or call 954 090956. For more local events, news and other information go to the Cartagena section of Murcia Today. Join the Mar Menor group on Facebook for info about Los Alcázares, San Javier, San Pedro del Pinatar, Torre Pacheco, La Unión and Cartagena and keep up to date with all the latest news and events in the Mar Menor: https://www.facebook.com/groups/MarMenorNewsAndEvents/

cc/2020-05/en_head_0053.json.gz/line1512076