"Doing Scrum our own way"
Last post 02:48 pm March 27, 2019
by Matt Riordan
Matt Riordan
06:03 pm March 25, 2019
Looking for a little direction, here.
I am curious to know how someone has successfully handled the "We do Scrum, but we make it so that it works for us."? This seems to be the most common thing that I hear from every organization that I have come into contact with. Most of these organizations are new to Scrum and much of this direction towards Scrum comes from leadership.
Couple examples I've come across:
Not doing reviews in each Sprint, rather waiting for a monthly review (2 week sprints)
"Scrum-fall" 1st Sprint = Requirements gathering, 2nd Sprint = Design, 3rd = Development, etc.
Stopping all development work to fix "fire drills" and effectively changing the cadence of the teams Sprint
"The Scrum Guide changes all the time, so therefore we only adapt SOME of the practices in it."
Advice I have given to these organizations is to have the teams do it "by the book" for a couple of Sprints and then Inspect and Adapt on how they can improve themselves, but meeting a TON of resistance. Any input, other resources, or different forum posts anyone can link me to would be greatly appreciated.
tl;dr - Organization says they want to implement Scrum, but only choose some of the events to practice or blatantly disregard Scrum Guide. Any tips on how to guide conversations to getting teams and organizations back to basics?
04:02 am March 26, 2019
Is it understood that Scrum is not being applied at all unless it is implemented in its entirety, and that the associated benefits are unlikely to accrue?
Changing the Scrum Framework “to suit the organization” avoids dealing with issues that would be exposed to scrutiny. What is being concealed here, and why? Are teams delivering valuable “Done” increments at least once every Sprint, for example, and are those increments being released into production?
Nikolaos Friligkos
Organisations are allowed to implement anything they want. However, if Scrum is not applied in its entirety, then please don't call it Scrum.
Andrew McKenzie
tl;dr - not all deviations are created equally; you've got to dig deeper and have ongoing conversations to understand what the "real" problems are and how to solve them.
I'm sure we've all seen this "custom Scrum" thinking at one point or another (or many ...).
I don't know that it's possible to solve this problem overnight, but here are some thoughts that occur to me and that may be helpful to you:
Build relationships and be honest.
It may sound obvious, but this is a primary example of where one needs to build relationships to gain influence and establish trust over time. Coming into an organization and taking on a posture of Scrum referee (however correct one may be) will of course push people away, especially if the habits are entrenched in the organization and now they're being told they're "doing it wrong."
That said, it's important to be honest, especially around the most egregious deviations. If people are using language like "design sprint," "test sprint," "release sprint," etc., it's fair to respond by saying, "It sounds like you're still doing waterfall, but just throwing in some Scrum terms here and there. Why do you think that is?" Or "I know a lot of organizations try to 'customize' Scrum by doing it the way you are. Do you think that approach ever results in increased agility or value?"
You may also need to have some heart-to-heart conversations with your leadership. "You brought me here to help you deliver value using Scrum, but as a professional Scrum Master I feel it's my duty to report some organizational obstacles that will make it difficult for me to do that." And then once you've said your piece, give it back to them: "So, how do you want me to proceed?" Basically, state your point of view while trying to turn the issues you see into shared problems.
Probe the origins of the deviations.
Be Socratic. Before pushing back on deviations, ask why the organization found itself doing something a certain way, how long it has done things that way, whose idea it was (and where are they now?), and what benefits it has achieved by doing things in that way.
If you ask the right questions, the underlying problems may even become self-evident to those standing up for the deviations and resisting change. Often, if you ask the right questions, they may admit that there was no underlying rationale for these deviations in the first place except, "It was just a lot easier ..." or "Our release management team said we had to do it this way ..." and so forth. This can help you better localize the root cause of what's going on.
Not all deviations are created equally. Be especially wary of vaguely defined or inconsistently followed deviations.
In rare cases, you may find a semi-decent reason for a deviation. (I'm not endorsing deviations; just saying that they aren't all created equally!) For example, if your organization has a separate test team for legal/regulatory reasons, that's at least a better justification than "Because we've always done it this way!" And, more importantly, your response and the path forward would look very different in each case.
I think it's critically important to understand if the deviations are at least clearly defined and consistently followed, or if, instead, the teams are simply deviating haphazardly whenever following the Guide is inconvenient/difficult. The former may be a case of faulty but well-intentioned reasoning and implementation, but the latter is plain old excuse-making and shows a deeper lack of discipline/leadership/inspiration. I see both commonly, but they are completely different scenarios which call for drastically different responses.
Be empirical, and stick to a very simple test.
If the organization is actively empirical, or open-minded, then there's plenty of hope. In that case, your recommendation of "let's try it by the book for a while" (great approach) makes a lot of sense. If the organization resists this, then you have to probe deeper on that point. What does the organization fear about being empirical? How does it make decisions if doesn't want to use evidence? Etc.
The ultimate question I would try to answer, and then repeat the same question to organization leadership, is this: is the organization able to consistently deliver valuable, working software on a regular basis of approximately one month?
If the answer is yes across the board, then you're in the realm of optimization, and there is less to worry about. Can we get our sprints down to a month? To two weeks? Can we ensure our designers are part of the Development Team? Etc. I wouldn't worry about deviations in this context.
If the answer is no but everyone agrees that the goal is yes, then you've pointed out the organization's problem head on and you can then point out why the deviations are getting in the way and why Scrum is the solution.
However, you may find that the real answer is no but that leadership will tell you that yes, the organization is delivering software at this rate. In that case, solving the problem probably starts with addressing the lack of transparency, perhaps complacency at some levels, and so forth.
Finally, if (as you will sometimes find), the answer is no and the organization says that that's fine because working software in thirty days or less is not a reasonable/valuable goal anyway, then you're in the realm of an organization which wanted to do "Scrum" or "Agile" because it was trendy but without a true understanding of the value proposition, the trade-offs, the change required, and so on.
Once again, asking the right questions, listening to the answers, and digging deeper to understand the root causes is your best bet to solving these issues.
This is very helpful, thank you!


A Florida teacher has been arrested for having sex with her 15-year-old student. She is also eight months pregnant.
Doral Police arrested a teacher at John I. Smith K-8 Center, 41-year-old Hairy Calvi, on Friday for having sex with her 15-year-old student.
And it was all caught on video.
Investigators had been aware of the inappropriate relationship since March 2021 after students reported to school staff that the victim was sharing a video on his phone with other students showing himself and Calvi having sexual intercourse.
They also found photos of Calvi and the victim nude together smoking marijuana.
In total, Calvi is charged with lewd and lascivious battery, offenses against students by authority figures, child neglect, possession of a firearm on school property, and contributing to the delinquency of a child, Miami-Dade jail records showed.
According to detectives, Calvi worked as the victim’s teacher.
After learning of the situation, police obtained permission from the victim’s mother to search through his phone and discovered photos of him naked with Calvi. Detectives said they also recovered text messages between the two expressing their love for one another.
It’s not clear why investigators took so long to arrest Calvi.
“When we spoke to him, he denied being a victim,” Doral police spokesman Rey Valdes told NBC Miami.
“He flat out told us he was not raped. But I want to point out under Florida law [that] a minor cannot give consent.”
“She knew how to explain stuff really well, it’s just . . . I can’t believe that,” student Luigi Lopresti told WSVN.
On March 7, at around 3 a.m., Doral Police initiated a traffic stop on Calvi, who was driving under the influence, according to her arrest report.
They discovered two other minors inside the vehicle, along with the victim.
The group had been celebrating a birthday party at a banquet hall.
Investigators said none of the children’s parents knew they were with Calvi.
“When I heard from my friends, I was in shock, and I was like, ‘Oh wow,’ and I told my friends, and they were all so shocked,” another student explained.
“We just – it was kind of like a shock, the entire thing. She was very nice, and it’s kind of crazy.”
Parents who later learned about the incident were also shocked.
“It’s mindblowing because you’re expecting the school to let you know that something like that is going on,” said Julio Alfonso.
“You’re not expecting that kind of treatment to your child,” another parent said.
Officials for Miami-Dade Public Schools confirmed that Calvi had not been working at the school since March after the allegations were brought to light.
However, her employment was reassigned to an alternate location.
Calvi is the most recent of numerous Miami-Dade County Public Schools teachers to be arrested for similar crimes, including teachers most recently at Renaissance Middle School and Hialeah Middle School.
Calvi worked with the MDCPS school system for 20 years and had no history of disciplinary actions, according to MDCPS officials.
Police confirmed she is eight months pregnant.
Calvi’s firearm charge stems from an October 8 traffic stop.
After conducting the stop, police found a loaded Glock 43 9 mm, loaded with a round in the chamber, inside of her vehicle.
Calvi told police the gun is always in her vehicle and belonged to her husband.
She had been working at the Miami-Dade Schools Northeast Transportation center when she brought the gun onto the property of MDCPS, according to the police report.
NOTHING NEW UNDER SUPERINTENDENT ALBERTO CARVALHO
Last week, a federal jury awarded the victim of an MDCPS high school teacher $6 million for raping her inside of his classroom.
“You took advantage that I was a lost girl,” the victim read in a statement.
“I quickly remind myself the only reality here is that you abused me, and it was premeditated.”
After the verdict, Miami-Dade Schools Superintendent Alberto Carvalho posted a photo of himself to Instagram celebrating with CBS Miami journalist Jim Berry.
Alberto Carvalho celebrates with CBS Miami journalist after jury awards $6 million to vctim raped by MDCPS high school teacher.
Critics say Carvalho’s cozy relationships with local journalists and law enforcement officials could be the reason he still has a job as the MDCPS superintendent.
Carvalho oversees school police at all MDCPS school grounds.
In 2017, a Florida jury awarded $49.3 million to a former high-school student who was raped by her former geometry teacher in his classroom, according to Daily Mail.
The same year, 2017, Miami-Dade Police arrested Bernardo Osorio, a decorated math teacher at Cutler Bay Senior High, for sexually abusing an underage student, according to the Miami New Times.
Yesterday, True Homestead published an eerily similar story about Brittiny Murray-Lopez, a Hialeah Middle School teacher who was arrested for having sex with her former student who was 14 at the time of the incident.
In fact, True Homestead has covered numerous stories detailing similar abuses by teachers working under Superintendent Alberto Carvalho.
Read them below.
https://truehomestead.com/2021/10/08/south-florida-middle-school-teacher-arrested-for-having-sex-w-14-year-old/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5091521/Teacher-pay-former-student-49-3-million.html
One thought on “Pregnant Florida Teacher Arrested for Sex with 15-Year-Old Student on Video”
Miami Superintendent Orders Training to Stop More Teachers from Raping Students - True Homestead says:
[…] of those teachers arrested last week was 41-year-old Hairy […]


Home / India News / Former PM Manmohan Singh’s health condition improving
Former PM Manmohan Singh’s health condition improving
“His condition is better and progressing well. He is responding to treatment and that is a good sign. He is being taken care of by a team of specialists,” said a senior staff member from the hospital, on condition of anonymity
Former prime minister Manmohan Singh. (PTI)
Updated on Oct 16, 2021 02:33 AM IST
ByHT Correspondent, Hindustan Times, New Delhi
The condition of former Prime minister Manmohan Singh, who is undergoing treatment at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) here, is stable, and he is recovering well, said people familiar with the development on Friday.
“His condition is better and progressing well. He is responding to treatment and that is a good sign. He is being taken care of by a team of specialists,” said a senior staff member from the hospital, on condition of anonymity.
The 89-year-old was on Wednesday evening admitted to New Delhi’s AIIMS after complains of fever, weakness and general uneasiness.
He was admitted into the hospital to be evaluated for high-grade fever.
The former prime minister is admitted in a private ward of hospital’s Cardiothoracic and Neurosciences Centre under the care of a team of specialists led by Dr Nitish Naik. Dr Naik is a professor in the department of cardiology, and has been former PM’s personal physician for many years now.
On Thursday, political leaders across spectrum sent their best wishes for his speedy recovery. Union health minister Mansukh Mandaviya and senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi visited the former PM in the hospital.
Singh has a history of cardiac ailments, and even underwent a revision heart bypass surgery at AIIMS in 2009.
Earlier in April this year, Singh was admitted to the hospital’s trauma centre (functioning as Covid care centre) after he tested positive for the cCoronavirus disease (Covid-19). Singh is also a member of the Rajya Sabha.
Family objects to photographers’ presence
Manmohan Singh’s daughter Daman Singh in a statement on Friday said that her mother, Gursharan Kaur had objected to the presence of a photographer when Mandaviya paid a visit to Singh in AIIMS but it was ignored. Photographs of Mandaviya in Manmohan’s cabin have surfaced on social media.
“My father is being treated for Dengue at AIIMS. His condition is stable but his immunity is low. We have restricted visitors due to the risk of infection. It was nice of the Health Minister to visit and express his concern. However, my parents were in no state to be photographed at the time,” the statement said.
The statement further said that her mother Gursharan Kaur had objected to the presence of a photographer when the minister paid a visit to Singh in AIIMS but her objection was ignored.
The Congress also demanded an apology from the Union health minister over the issue after Daman Singh’s objection.
“Everything is a ‘Photo Op’ for BJP. Shame on Health Minister, who made a visit to meet Former PM in AIIMS, a ugly ‘PR Stunt’ This is..Negation of every ethical norm, Breach of EX PM’s privacy, Insult of established tradition, Reflects absence of basic decency. Apologise Now!” said Congress chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala in a tweet.
Mandaviya wasn’t immediately available for a comment. There was no clarification from the health ministry but government officials said that the minister went to meet Singh out of his sense of responsibility.


City of Vancouver has shown national leadership on reconciliation
Former Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson showed leadership on reconciliation by the issue on the national agenda at the local level through the Big City Mayors' Caucus of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Kevin Griffin
Robert Joseph is a hereditary chief of the Gwawaenuk First Nation near Alert Bay and a co-founder of Reconciliation Canada. Photo by Handout /PNG
Numerous steps by the City of Vancouver have provided leadership in promoting reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people across the country, according to the co-founder of Reconciliation Canada .
Chief Robert Joseph attributed the city’s “real leadership role in this area” to the personal interests of former mayor Gregor Robertson.
He cited Robertson’s position as chair of the Big City Mayors’ Caucus of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities as being critically important in helping to put the issue on the national agenda.
“As the chair of the big city mayors, he had a lot of influence on national gatherings of municipalities,” said Joseph, Reconciliation Canada’s ambassador .
“It wasn’t long before other cities all across the country, big and small, were working hard at determining what reconciliation meant for them. The leadership of the City of Vancouver was really important.”
One of the most recent reconciliation initiatives in Vancouver was the creation by the park board of an Indigenous artist residency program in Stanley Park. A Frame Activation: Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-waututh Cultural Residency at Second Beach is designed to be an Indigenous space on unceded, traditional territory.
Chrystal Sparrow, a Musqueam artist, is the first artist named to the residency. In coming years, the residency will rotate among the three First Nations with traditional links to the land on which Vancouver is located.
Other reconciliation steps in Vancouver have included hiring a new manager of Aboriginal relations, renaming the north plaza at the Vancouver Art Gallery with two Indigenous names, hiring an Indigenous liaison in the engineering department and hiring a reconciliation planner at the park board.
“Since the Year of Reconciliation in 2013, Vancouver has developed into the world’s first City of Reconciliation,” a city report says .
Asked about the city’s claim of being a world leader in reconciliation, Joseph said: “I don’t know to what degree the claim is accurate, but I’ve been really impressed with the City of Vancouver.”
Joseph said he believes municipalities across the country which historically have had the least to do with Aboriginal people have responded better to reconciliation than the provincial and federal governments.
“They’re very interested now because they recognize that many exist where their Aboriginal neighbours are,” he said from Alert Bay. “They see the importance of growing a good relationship between each another.”
Joseph is one of the last speakers of Kwak’wala, the language of the Kwakwaka’wakw whose traditional territory is located at the northern end of Vancouver Island and the adjoining mainland. He’s a hereditary chief of the Gwawaenuk First Nations .
Joseph attributes the support from big cities to the affect on people of hearing stories told at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission about the abuse experienced by Aboriginal students in Indian residential schools. The hearings, spread over almost four years, ended in 2014.
“Suddenly, people who hadn’t known very much about Aboriginals discovered in shock and dismay that our society had treated Aboriginal people very badly,” he said.
“I think it created a conscious shift in the minds of a lot of people who live in big cities.”
An estimated 150,000 Aboriginal children were forced to attend residential schools. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission describes reconciliation as a collective effort to revitalize the relationship between Indigenous people and Canadian society.
Joseph, who was an honorary witness at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, said while he’s encouraged by the social recognition of reconciliation by cities such as Vancouver, other more systemic challenges such as changing legislation and combatting intolerance is happening at a slower pace.
“One of the things I like to tell people when I talk to gatherings that while we’re all waiting for the big home run reconciliation initiatives, I suspect it will be the tiny little steps we take here and there that will be a key to all the transformation that we’re seeking,” he said.
“There won’t always be cameras or news reporters there, but people in their neighbourhoods will look at each other eye to eye and change opinions of each other and respect our differences and diversity. I suspect that’s where reconciliation will take us.”
kevingriffin@postmedia.com
Is there more to this story? We’d like to hear from you about this or any other stories you think we should know about. Email vantips@postmedia.com.


Obama more popular on foreign policy issues
By CHB
News, White House
President Barack Obama (AP/Evan Vucci)
President Barack Obama’s approval ratings for handling foreign policy issues generally top his ratings for most domestic issues, including the economy and health care, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll. But the poll also suggests a majority of Americans want the president to pull troops out of Afghanistan faster than he’s doing, and many are skeptical about a tentative nuclear deal with Iran.
The poll found that 57 percent now say going to war in Afghanistan after the 2001 terror attacks was probably the “wrong thing to do.” And 53 percent say the pace of the planned withdrawal is too slow, 34 percent said the pace was just about right and 10 percent said it was too fast. All combat troops are scheduled to leave by the end of 2014.
Meanwhile, six in 10 Americans approve of the preliminary deal between Iran and six global powers to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions. But that support is soft and many doubt it will lead to concrete results.
Even though he garners more disapproval than approval on the handling of Afghanistan and Iran, Obama generally gets better ratings on foreign policy than on domestic issues.
Nearly half (49 percent) approve of his handling of U.S. relations with other countries while 50 percent disapprove. In contrast, just 40 percent approve of his handling of the economy, while 59 percent disapprove. And on health care, the approval rating stands at 39 percent, with 61 percent disapproving. His overall job approval is at 42 percent, with 58 disapproving.
The slightly higher ratings on foreign policy generally make sense, suggested Philip Salathe, 70, of Indianapolis, who participated in the poll.
Salathe said Obama in 2008 ran against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who during the campaign joked about dropping bombs on Iran. “I figure we could fix the economy if it gets ruined and we can repeal any bad laws that get passed,” Salathe said, but a military confrontation with Iran or other foreign policy crisis could have more disastrous consequences.
Salathe approves of the job Obama is doing overall but still thinks things are headed in the wrong direction. “We’re not doing anything about the major problems facing humanity. Basically, we have a number of disparate goals that are at odds with each other,” such as protecting the environment while promoting growth and urban development. He said Obama is the first Democrat he’s voted for as president. He said he tends to favor Republicans.
Just 16 percent of those polled said they expected the situation in Afghanistan to “get better” over the next year; 32 percent said they expected it to “get worse” while about half said they expected the situation to “stay about the same.”
Jennifer Reese, 28, of Burnsville, Minn., considers herself a Democrat and says she voted for Obama. But she questions whether he’s the cause for the economy getting better.
“I think the economy is getting better, but I don’t think it’s necessarily because of what Obama’s doing,” she said. “That’s the way things work. When things go down so far, then they’re going to go back up.”
She said she also believes both parties could do an equally good job protecting the country and that the pace of allied troop withdrawal from Afghanistan is “about right.” She favors a continued presence of allied troops in the country to train and assist Afghan troops. “My family was in the military. My father was over there for a while and he says they’re doing good things.”
As for negotiations with Iran on curbing its nuclear program, Reese says she is pleased Iran is at the bargaining table. “Let’s negotiate this, see what we can do,” she said.
The poll showed Americans broadly approve of a tentative deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program. Fifty-nine percent approved, 38 percent disapproved.
But that support was tentative, with more than 4 in 10 (44 percent) also saying it’s unlikely the agreement will keep Iran from seeking to build its own nuclear weapon. Just 11 percent think that outcome is extremely or very likely.
Mark Dabney, 54, of Cartersville, Ga., who describes himself as a political independent who supports the tea party movement, disapproves of Obama’s performance on both domestic and foreign policy fronts.
As for Iraq and Afghanistan, “I just believe that we shouldn’t go meddling in other countries’ internal affairs,” he said.
The AP-GfK poll was conducted Dec. 5-9 using KnowledgePanel, GfK’s probability-based online panel. For results based on all 1,367 adults, the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
KnowledgePanel is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. Respondents were first selected randomly using phone or mail survey methods, and later, completed this survey online. People selected for KnowledgePanel who didn’t otherwise have Internet access were provided with access at no cost.
Associated Press Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta and AP News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this report.
AP-GfK poll: http://www.ap.gfkpoll.com
Follow Tom Raum on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/tomraum
Copyright © 2013 Capitol Hill Blue
Copyright © 2013 The Associated Press All Rights Reserved.


Some of the following are more historically accurate than others, but I suppose it’s more about entertainment than authenticity. I include affiliate links to Amazon in my reviews and other posts. Those links will take the reader to Amazon.com and I do receive a small percentage of each purchase. Before you buy, do check to make sure you are buying the dvd that works for your part of the world (PAL, NTSC, etc) in order to avoid disappointment.
1612 (2011): starring Pyotr Kislov, Artur Smolyaninov, Michal Zebrowski.
A Field in England (2013): starring Julian Barratt.
A Little Chaos (2015): Starring Kate Winslet, Alan Rickman, Matthias Schoenaerts. Read the SCL Review.
Admiral: Command and Conquer (2015): starring Charles Dance, Rutger Hauer.
Against All Flags (1952): starring Errol Flynn and Maureen O’Hara.
Angelique (1964): starring Michele Mercier, Jean Rochefort, Robert Hossein.
Angelique (2013): starring Nora Arnezeder, Gérard Lanvin, Tomer Sisley.
Bathory: Countess of Blood (2011): starring Anna Friel and Hans Matheson.
Battle of Vienna (2012): starring F. Murray Abraham, Enrico Lo Verso, Alicja Bachleda.
Black Corsair, The (1976): starring Mel Ferrer and Kabir Bedi.
Black Field (2009): starring Sofia Georgovassili, Hristos Passalis, Despina Bebedelli.
By the Sword Divided (1983): starring Julian Glover.
Captain Alatriste: The Spanish Musketeer (2006): starring Viggo Mortensen.
Captain Blood (1935): starring Errol Flynn and Olivia de Haviland.
Caravaggio (1986): starring Nigel Terry, Sean Bean, Tilda Swinton, Mark Tildesley, Michael Gough.
Charles II: The Power and the Passion starring Rufus Sewell
Countess, The (2009): starring Julie Delpy and William Hurt.
Cromwell (1970): starring Richard Harris and Alec Guinness.
The Crucible (1996): starring Daniel Day Lewis and Winona Ryder.
Cyrano de Bergerac (1990): starring Gérard Depardieu, Vincent Perez, Anne Brochet.
Day of Wrath (1943): starring Thorkild Roose, Lisbeth Movin, Sigrid Neiiendam.
D’Artagnan’s Daughter (1994): starring Sophie Marceau.
The Devils (1971): starring Vanessa Redgrave and Oliver Reed.
The Devil’s Whore (2008): starring Andrea Riseborough, Michael Fassbender. Read the SCL review.
The Draughtsman’s Contract (1982): starring Anthony Higgins.
Don Juan (1998): starring Emmanuelle Béart and Penélope Cruz.
Don Quixote (2001): starring John Lithgow and Amelia Warner.
El Greco (2007): starring Nick Ashdon.
The First Churchills (1967) starring John Neville.
Forever Amber (1947): starring Linda Darnell and Cornel Wilde.
The Four Musketeers (1974): starring Richard Chamberlain, Oliver Reed.
Frenchman’s Creek (1944): starring Joan Fontaine and Basil Rathbone.
Frenchman’s Creek (1998): starring Tara Fitzgerald.
Girl With A Pearl Earring (2003): Scarlett Johansson, Colin Firth, Tom Wilkinson, Cillian Murphy.
The Great Fire (2014): starring Andrew Buchan, Jack Huston, Rose Leslie, and Charles Dance.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot (2004): Robert Carlyle, Michael Fassbender, Clemence Poesy.
Harakiri (1962): starring Tatsuya Nakadai.
Hara-Kiri – Death of a Samarai: starring Koji Yakusho.
Henry Purcell – England, My England (1995): starring Simon Callow and Michael Ball.
I, Worst of All (1990): starring Assumpta Serna, Dominique Sanda, Héctor Alterio.
King’s Whore, The (1990): starring Timothy Dalton, Valeria Golino. Read the SCL review.
L’allée du Roi: starring Dominique Blanc, Didier Sandre.
La Femme Musketeer (2004): starring Natassja Kinski and Michael York.
Le Bossu (1997): starring Daniel Auteuil, Fabrice Luchini, Vincent Perez.
Le Roi Danse (2000): starring Benoît Magimel and Boris Terral.
Lorna Doone (1976): starring Emily Richards.
Lorna Doone (1992): starring Sean Bean, Clive Owen, and Polly Walker.
Lorna Doone (2000): starring Amelia Warner, Aiden Gillen.
Man of La Mancha (1972): starring Peter O’Toole and Sophia Loren.
Marquise (1997): starring Sophie Marceau.
Moliere (2007): starring Romain Duris, Laura Morante, and Fabrice Luchini.
Morgan, The Pirate (1960).
Mother Joan of the Angels (1961): starring Lucyna Winnicka.
Musketeers, The (2014): starring Luke Pasqualino, Tom Burke, Santiago Cabrera, Howard Charles, Peter Capaldi.
New Worlds (2014): starring Jamie Dornan and Jeremy Northam.
Nightwatching (2007): starring Martin Freeman and Jodhi May.
Pilgrim’s Progress (1978): starring Peter Thomas, Liam Neeson.
Pirates of Tortuga (1961): starring Ken Scott.
Plymouth Adventure (1952): starring Spencer Tracy, Gene Tierney.
Pocahontas (1996): featuring voices by Irene Bedard, Mel Gibson, Christian Bale.
Pocahontas II: Journey to a New World (2001).
Queen Christina (1933): starring Greta Garbo, John Gilbert.
Rembrandt (1936): starring Charles Laughton.
Restoration (1995): starring Robert Downey Jr, Sam Neill, Meg Ryan.
Rise of Louis XIV, The (1966).
Salem (2014-): starring Tamzin Merchant.
The Scarlet Blade (1963): starring Oliver Reed.
Scarlet Letter, The (1994): starring Gary Oldman and Demi Moore.
Serpent’s Kiss, The (1997): starring Ewan McGregor, Greta Scaachi, Richard E. Grant.
Shogun (1980): starring Richard Chamberlain.
Stage Beauty (2004): starring Claire Danes, Billy Crudup, Rupert Everett, and Hugh Bonneville.
The Iron Mask (1928): starring Douglas Fairbanks.
The Lady and the Highwayman (1989): starring Hugh Grant, Emma Samms, Oliver Reed. Read the SCL review.
The Libertine (2004): starring Johnny Depp, John Malkovich, Samantha Morton, & Rosamund Pike.
The Man in the Iron Mask (1998): starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich.
The Man in the Iron Mask (1976): starring Richard Chamberlain and Jenny Agutter.
The Moonraker (1958): starring George Baker, Sylvia Syms, Marius Goring.
The Musketeer (2001): starring Justin Chambers, Catherine Deneuve, Mena Suvari.
The New World (2005): starring Colin Farrell, Q’orianka Kilcher, Christopher Plummer.
The Three Musketeers (1939): starring Don Ameche.
The Three Musketeers (1948): starring Gene Kelly, Lana Turner, and Angela Lansbury.
The Three Musketeers (1973): starring Richard Chamberlain, Raquel Welch, Oliver Reed.
The Three Musketeers (1993): starring Kiefer Sutherland, Tim Curry, and Chris O’Donnell.
The Three Musketeers (2011): starring Logan Lerman, Orlando Bloom, Matthew MacFadyen.
Three Musketeers (1966): starring Brian Blessed and Jeremy Brett.
To Kill a King (2003): starring Dougray Scott, Tim Roth, Rupert Everett.
Tous les Matins du Monde (1991): starring Guillaume Depardieu, Anne Brochet.
Vatel (2000): starring Uma Thurman, Gerard Depardieu, and Julian Sands.
Winstanley (1976): starring Miles Halliwell, Jerome Willis, Terry Higgins.
Wicked Lady, The (1945): starring Margaret Lockwood and James Mason.
Witchfinder General (1968): starring Vincent Price.
17th-century plays and operas
Cadmus & Hermione, tragédie lyrique de Lully et Quinault (2008). Le Poème Harmonique.
Il Sant’ Alessio by Stefano Landi (2008): Philippe Jaroussky, Max Emanuel Cencic, Damien Guillon, Xavier Sabata, William Christie.
L’Incoronazione Di Poppea by Monteverdi (2012): William Christie/Philippe Jaroussky/Danielle De Niese/Anna Bonitatibus/Max Emanuel Cencic/Les Arts Florissants.
Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme (2011). Comédie Ballet de Molière. Musique de Jean-Baptiste Lully / Le Poème Harmonique, dir. Vincent Dumestre
Documentaries/History programmes
Brother Against Brother: The English Civil War (2007)
Discover the Great Masters of Art – Caravaggio (2011)
The English Civil War – A People Divided (2002)
Vermeer and Music
Versailles, le Reve d’un Roi
Still from the beautiful film “Moliere.”


GEO TV’s latest production Aye Musht-e-Khaak has only been on the air for few weeks, yet it has already established itself as one of the most popular and well-liked drama series on television.Exquisitely penned down by Maha Malik, the drama chronicles the journey of two entirely different people as they explore the topics of faith, love, and deception.
The drama is an amazing directorial masterpiece of Aehsun Talish and under the dynamic creator’s duo Abdullah Kadwani and Asad Qureshi, 7th Sky Entertainment has reunited the fan-favorite combination of Feroze Khan and Sana Javed for the third time.
Fans are going gaga over their jori and here we jot down 5 reasons why we love Dua and Mustajab.
1. Mustajab’s Go-Getter Attitude:
Mustajab is a nice young man who believes in planning and has a reasonable attitude on life. His lack of faith in his fate, as well as his can-do attitude, set him apart from his peers.
2. Dua is an Independent Girl:
Dua is a sweet young lady who believes in fate and predestination. Her strong ideals and values help her to be confident and resolute in her life choices.
3. Amazing On-Screen Chemistry
Both Dua and Mustajab complement each other well. Despite their opposite personalities; they look like that cute couple together who you want to see in real life around too.
4. Hidden Love
Despite all the differences between them, With Mustajab’s stubborn and agitating nature and Dua’s firm persona; they both have underlying feelings for each other, and unintentionally care for each other. For instance, Dua manages to cover Mustajab’s anger in front of others. Mustajab ate street food just for the sake of Dua.
5. Accepting the flaws of each other
Although Dua and Mustajab are poles apart in terms of personalities, but the best thing about them in this drama is, they accept each other’s flaws whole-heartedly.
All in all, Dua and Mustajab characters are so real that you can easily relate them into real life characters around. We couldn’t wait for next week episode to be on-aired.
DOBARA EP 12: AFFAN IS GIVING MEHRUNISSA A TOUGH TIME
Drama serial Dobara is getting interesting with every passing episode as it brings one twist after another. The drama has a refreshing story that highlights some important issues that young widows face when they start thinking about getting remarrying....


News & Production Director/ Weekend On-Air
Contact Rob Langer
About Rob Langer
Radio... it's in my blood! As long as I can remember, I wanted to work in radio. Growing up in New York, I would listen to all of the famous "disc jockeys" (if you are under 25, ask your parents what a disc jockey is!). I was fortunate to break into the business, working at the number 1 station on Long Island (WALK-FM) as their overnight announcer (even hosting an all request show at 2 am!). In 1990, I became their traffic reporter. My family and I moved to Atlanta in 2000, where I continued to report on traffic conditions for radio (including here with Paige when we were J93.3) and TV (11Alive).
God was preparing me for a more significant role in this ministry. Ther were a couple of opportunities for me to work here, but it wasn't the right time. The door finally opened in 2010, when I began doing weekends on the air. Then, in October of 2011, God blessed me with the opportunity to join The JOY FM in a full-time capacity. Now, I have the pleasure of working with three remarkable people, Dave, Bill, and Carmen, producing The Morning Cruise weekdays on The JOY FM. Plus, I am part of the news team with Jules.
Serving in the community is also an important part of my faith journey. I currently serve as worship leader at Unity Baptist Church in Newnan, and will lead music ocassionally at Peachtree City SDA Church in Sharpsburg .
Family: wife Nancy, daughters Emma, and Maddie
Favorite Bible Verse - Don’t let any evil talk come out of your mouths. Say only what will help to build others up and meet their needs. Then what you say will help those who listen.- Ephesians 4:29 (NIRV)
Favorite Christian Artists - Matt Maher, Matthew West, Amy Grant, Needtobreathe, Josh Wilson, Rend Collective, Pat Barrett, Elevation Worship... and the list goes on... I love them all!
Other musical likes - Barry Manilow, Michael Buble, Billy Joel, Johnny Mathis, Al Jarreau, music from the 50's and 60's
Teams - Huge Atlanta United fan, but because of my New York roots, I still proudly support the Mets (will root for the Yankees, too!), Jets (support the Giants as well- need to keep my wife happy...), Islanders. Favorite college football team- Notre Dame,
Favorite foods - Pizza (New York style, of course!), lasagna (especially Nancy’s lasagna!), spinach and artichoke dip, coffee (not technically a food, yet part of my food groups!)
Favorite TV Shows - Fraiser, M*A*S*H*, The Odd Couple, The West Wing, The Honeymooners, Emergency, Quincy (love the old shows). Love the home shows on DIY and HGTV (but don't ask me to lift a hammer or saw...)
Favorite Books (other than the Bible) - "Comeback" and "When You Can't Comeback" (both by Dave Dravecky), "Fair Ball" by Bob Costas
Favorite Movies - "Pride of The Yankees" (yes, unusual for a Mets' fan, but I love Lou Gehrig's story), "Mr. Holland's Opus", "The Four Seasons," "The Odd Couple," "The Lego Batman Movie."
Always wanted to be a game show host!
Jerry Williams and I worked together on Long Island!
Wore ties and carried a briefcase in high school and college (ask Nancy about that!)
Had the lead in Godspell in my senior year in high school (the best role anyone could play!)
Survived an emergency landing while flying over Long Island reporting on the traffic! Landed on a high school football field and hit a fence! (Missed the field goal... wide left)


Tag: S.RES.26
United States Government’s Reactions to U.S.-Cuba Reconciliation
After looking at international and Cuban reactions to the December 17th announcement of U.S.-Cuba reconciliation, we now examine the reactions by the U.S. Government’s Executive Branch and Congress. A subsequent post will look at the reactions of the American people.
I. Executive Branch.
Led by President Barack Obama, the Executive Branch engaged in 18 months of secret negotiations with Cuba that resulted in the December 17th announcement of an accord between the two countries involving immediate release of certain prisoners, promised liberalization of U.S. regulations regarding U.S. exports to the island and U.S. citizens travel to Cuba, promised U.S. review of its designation of Cuba as a “State Sponsor of Terrorism” and further negotiations for reestablishment of normal diplomatic relations and for resolution of a long list of issues or disputes.
The U.S. Department of State immediately commenced review of the “terrorism’ designation and the Treasury and Commerce Departments in January announced the new and more liberal regulations regarding exports and travel.
The U.S., represented by Assistant Secretary of State Roberta Jacobson, participated in the first round of further negotiations with Cuba in Havana in January, and the second round will be this month in Washington, D.C.
In addition, as we will see in the discussion of reactions in the U.S. House of Representatives, bills have been introduced to end the U.S. embargo of the island.
In short, the U.S. is doing everything it can to further the progress toward normalization of relations and reconciliation of the two countries.
II. U.S. Congress
The following analysis of the positions of senators and representatives on reconciliation obviously is incomplete since I was not able to conduct exhaustive research on all 100 senators and all 435 representatives. I also used my judgment to assign pending bills as favoring or opposing reconciliation and assumed, absent specific information to the contrary, that being a sponsor or cosponsor of a bill in one category would preclude that individual’s voting for some or all of the bills in the other category. Moreover, the named individual legislators may change their minds if and when any of these measures reach the chambers’ floors for votes. I earnestly entreat readers to provide comments with other information to correct or supplement this analysis.
A. U.S. Senate
Of the 100 Senators, 25 so far appear to support reconciliation while 27 do not. The other 48 Senators apparently have not yet taken positions on this major issue.
1. Favoring reconciliation
As of February 10, I was surprised to discover that the Senate does not have a bill to abolish the U.S. embargo of Cuba. Minnesota’s Senator Amy Klobuchar clearly has stated her intent to offer and support such a bill, but has not done so to date because she believes that the Senate first should vote on confirmation of an ambassador to Cuba, who has not yet been nominated by the President. Moreover, Cuba’s President Castro has made noises that abolishing the embargo should come before restoration of normal diplomatic relations. As a result, Klobuchar’s legislative strategy may have to be revised.
In any event, as of February 10, the Senate had only two measures on its agenda that are at least tangentially favorable to the recent U.S.-Cuba accord.
The first is S.299 (Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act of 2015) offered by Senator Jeff Flake (Rep., AZ) with 13 cosponsors [1] It was referred to the Foreign Relations Committee.
The other is a proposed resolution (S.RES.26: Commending Pope Francis for his leadership in helping to secure the release of Alan Gross and for working with the Governments of the United States and Cuba to achieve a more positive relationship). It was offered by Senator Richard Durbin (Dem., IL) with 10 cosponsors, four of whom were not cosponsors of S.299 [2] The proposed resolution was referred to the Foreign Relations Committee.
In addition to these 18 senators, the following seven (for a total of 25) can also be regarded as supporters of reconciliation based upon statements on their official websites or other comments or actions mentioned in the press: Tammy Baldwin (Dem., WI), Chris Coons (Dem., DE), Al Franken (Dem., MN), Chris Murphy (Dem., CT), Rand Paul (Rep., KY), Pat Roberts (Rep., KS) and Harry Reid (Dem., NV).
Thus, at least 25 Senators are on record apparently supporting reconciliation with Cuba
2. Opposing reconciliation
As of February 10, the Senate had on its agenda one substantive bill relating to Cuba that can be seen as indirectly opposed to reconciliation.
S.165 (Detaining Terrorists To Protect America Act of 2015) would extend and enhance prohibitions and limitations with respect to the transfer or release of individuals detained at the U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.This bill was referred to the Armed Services Committee. It was offered by Senator Kelly Ayotte (Rep., NH) with 26 Republican cosponsors [3] One of the cosponsors, however, is Senator Jerry Moran, who was a cosponsor of S.299 and who spoke in favor of ending the embargo at the launch of the United States Agricultural Coalition for Cuba. Thus, I believe that only 25 of these cosponsors can be counted in the anti-reconciliation camp.
At least one other Senator belongs in this camp. Senator Robert Menendez (Dem., NJ), who is a Cuban-American, is vehemently opposed to reconciliation as are the other two Cuban-American Senators–Ted Cruz (Rep., TX) and Marco Rubio (Rep., FL), both of whom are cosponsors of S.165.
Thus, at least 27 Senators are on record apparently opposing reconciliation.
B. U.S. House of Representatives
There are at least 43 representatives favoring reconciliation while 52 do not. That leaves the other 340 representatives not accounted for.
As of February 10, the House had eight pending bills favorable to reconciliation with Cuba.
The following three seek to end the U.S. embargo of Cuba.
The leading one seems to be H.R.403 (Free Trade with Cuba Act) that was introduced by Representative Charles Rangel (Dem., NY) with 27 Democratic cosponsors [4] It has been referred for consideration to the House Foreign Affairs and six other committees.[5] The bill would end the embargo, and its section 2 would have Congress find that “Cuba is no longer a threat to the [U.S.] or Western Hemisphere;” the U.S. ” is using economic, cultural, academic, and scientific engagement to support its policy of promoting democratic and human rights reforms [in other Communist regimes];” and the U.S. “can best support democratic change in Cuba by promoting trade and commerce, travel, communications, and cultural, academic, and scientific exchanges.”
The other two similar bills to end the embargo are H.R.274 (United States-Cuba Normalization Act, 2015) by Rep. Bobby Rush (Dem., IL) without any cosponsors, and H.R.735 (To lift the trade embargo on Cuba, and for other purposes) by Rep. Jose Serrano (Dem., NY) with Rep. Rangel as a cosponsor, both of whom are on the record as supporters of of H.R.403. These bills too were referred to the same seven committees for consideration.
Rep. Rangel on February 2nd also introduced H.R.635 (Promoting American Agricultural and Medical Exports to Cuba Act of 2015) to facilitate the export of U.S. agricultural products to Cuba, to remove impediments to the export to Cuba of medical devices and medicines, to allow travel to Cuba by U.S. legal residents, to establish an agricultural export promotion program with respect to Cuba. With 25 of the same Democratic cosponsors, the bill was referred to the Foreign Affairs and four other committees.
There are two bills to expand U.S. residents ability to travel to Cuba. Rep. Rangel on February 2nd introduced H.R.634 (Export Freedom to Cuba Act of 2015) with 25 of the same Democratic cosponsors of H.R.403 plus John Garamendi (Dem., CA) and Mark Pocan (Dem., WI). It has provisions for freedom to travel to Cuba for U.S. citizens and legal residents.It was referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee. A similar bill to expand U.S. citizens travel to Cuba (H.R.664: Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act of 2015) was offered on February 2nd by Rep. Mark Sanford (Rep., SC) with 12 cosponsors.[6] It also was referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee.
A more limited travel bill was introduced by Representative Jose Serrano (Dem., NY). It is H.R.738: To waive certain prohibitions with respect to nationals of Cuba coming to the United States to play organized professional baseball. Its sole cosponsor is Representative Rangel and was referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee.
On January 27th Minnesota’s Representative Betty McCollum introduced H.R.570 (Stop Wasting Taxpayer Money on Cuba Broadcasting Act) to stop Radio Marti and Television Marti broadcasts to Cuba. McCollum was a cosponsor of H.R.403 while HR. 570 has no cosponsors. It was referred to the Foreign Affairs and Judiciary Committees.
I am proud to say that all five Democratic Representatives from Minnesota by offering or cosponsoring bills appear to be in favor of this reconciliation. In addition, two of Minnesota’s three Republican Representatives have made statements indicating at least receptivity to favoring the reconciliation, and this analysis counts them as undecided. [7]
Our newest Representative Tom Emmer said, “By all accounts the Cuban people are worse off today than when [the embargo] started. So clearly that’s not working. And I’m supportive of engaging in diplomacy, starting to re-engage in diplomatic relations with Cuba, to begin that process to hopefully someday getting to normalize that relationship. But it’s two separate things. One, it’s diplomacy, and down the road is normalization.” In addition, as a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Emmer focused on three issues in questioning Administration witnesses: reparations for Cubans who have been persecuted by the Castro regime, payments for U.S. interests that lost property to the regime and safe harbor of U.S. fugitives within Cuba. Emmer also said or suggested if certain conditions are met he could support ending the embargo.
Another Minnesota Republican Representative, Rep. Erik Paulsen, said, “We should be looking at opportunities to open up trade between the United States and Cuba so we can export more American goods and services. However, the President should have engaged Congress before making concessions to the Cuban government.” (Id.) It may also be significant that his district includes the headquarters of Cargill Incorporated, the leader of the United States Agricultural Coalition for Cuba
Thus, there are at least 40 Representatives who appear to be in favor of this reconciliation with differing levels of commitment.
There are two pending bills, both relating to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba that can be seen as opposing reconciliation, as of February 10.
The first is H.R.654 (Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Protection Act). It was introduced by David Jolly (Rep., FL) with 36 Republican cosponsors, none of whom is from Minnesota. [8] It was referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee.
The other bill (H.R.401: Detaining Terrorists to Protect America Act of 2015) which would prohibit the release or transfer of certain Guantanamo Bay detainees and the construction or modification of any other facility to house such detainees. It was offered by Representative Jackie Walkorski (Rep., IN) with 29 Republican cosponsors, of whom 17 were not cosponsors of H.R.654. [9] It was referred to the Armed Services Committee.
Accordingly there are at least 54 Representatives on the record against reconciliation. Three of them are Cuban-Americans (Carlos Curbello, Mario Diaz–Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen) with the latter two being the most vocal in their persistent criticism of reconciliation. Another Cuban-American Representative (Albio Sires (Dem., NJ)) has not been an author or cosponsor of any of these bills, but his website includes a rejection of the President’s decisions to seek reconciliation with Cuba. [10]
As a supporter of reconciliation, I am anxious that this year both houses of Congress abolish the embargo and support other measures to promote that reconciliation. Therefore, I urge all supporters to say thank you to those legislators who already are on our side, to identify the “undecided” legislators and seek to persuade them to become supporters and to inform our fellow citizens of the important issues in this controversy and to seek to persuade them to be supporters.
[1] The 13 cosponsors of S.299 are the following: John Boozman (Rep., AR), Barbara Boxer (Dem, CA), Thomas Carper (Dem., DE), Susan Collins (Rep., ME), Richard Durbin (Dem., IL) ), Michael Enzi (Rep., WY), Amy Klobuchar (Dem., MN), Patrick Leahy (Dem., VT), Jerry Moran (Rep., KS), Jack Reed (Dem., RI), Debbie Stabenow (Dem., MI), Tom Udall (Dem., NM) and Sheldon Whitehouse (Dem., RI). Senator Moran also spoke in favor of ending the embargo at the launch of the United States Agricultural Coalition for Cuba.
[2] The four cosponsors of S.RES.26 who were not cosponsors of S.299 are the following: Sherrod Brown (Dem., OH), Benjamin Cardin (Dem., MD), Tim Kaine (Dem., VA) and Barbara Mikulski (Dem., MD).
[3] The 26 Republican cosponsors of S.165 are the following: John Barrasso (WY), Roy Blunt (MO), John Boozman (AR), Richard Burr (NC). John Cornyn (TX), Tom Cotton (AR), Ted Cruz (TX), Joni Ernst (IA), Deb Fischer (NE), Lindsey Graham (SC), Orrin Hatch (UT), James Inhofe (OK), Johnny Isakson (GA), Ron Johnson (WI), Mark Kirk (IL), James Lankford (OK), Mike Lee ((UT), John McCain (AZ), Jerry Moran (KS), Pat Roberts (KS), Mike Rounds (SD), Jeff Sessions (AL), Dan Sullivan (AK), Thom Tillis (NC), Pat Toomey (PA) and Roger Wicker (MS).
[4] The 27 Democratic Representative cosponsors of H.R.403 are Karen Bass (CA), William Clay (Mo), Steve Cohen (TN), John Conyers, Jr. (MI), Keith Ellison (MN), Sam Farr (CA), Chaka Fattah (PA), Raul Griaiva (AZ), Jared Huffman (CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (TX), Eddie Johnson (TX), Henry Johnson (GA), Barbara Lee (CA), Betty McCollum (MN), Jim McDermott (WA), Gregory Meeks (NY), Gwen Moore (WI), Rick Nolan (MN), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Collin Peterson (MN), Jared Polis (CO), Janice Schakowsky (IL), Bennie Thompson (MS), Tim Walz (MN) and Maxine Waters (CA).
[5] A prior post listed the members of the seven House committees that have jurisdiction over different portions of the three bills to end the embargo.
[6] The 12 cosponsors of H.R.664 are Kathy Astor (Rep., FL), Jason Chaffetz (Rep., UT), Kevin Cramer (Rep., ND), Rosa DeLauro (Rep., CT), Sam Farr (Dem., CA), Barbara Lee (Dem., CA), Thomas Massie (Rep., KY), James McGovern (Dem., MA), Charles Rangel (Dem., NY), Chris Van Hollen, (Rep., MD), Nydia Velazquez (Dem., NY) and Peter Welch (Dem, VT).) Of this group, eight were not sponsors or cosponsors of H.R.403 (Chaffetz, Cramer, DeLauro, Massie, McGovern, Van Hollen, Velazquez and Welch). Cramer also announced his support for ending the embargo at the launch of the U.S. Agricultural Coalition for Cuba.
[7] Henry, Emmer on Cuba embargo: ‘Clearly that’s not working, MINNPOST (Feb. 6, 2015). The third Minnesota Republican Representative, John Kline, appeared to be less receptive to ending the embargo. He said he’s “not confident the Administration will follow through on its promises to hold the Castro dictatorship regime accountable, and I’m concerned about revisiting relations with Cuba until all Cubans enjoy a free democracy.”
[8] The 36 Republican cosponsors of H.R.654 are Gus Bilirakis (FL), Michael Burgess (TX), Bradley Byrne (AL), Jason Chaffetz (UT), Mike Coffman (CO), Carlos Curbello (FL), Rodney Davis (IL), Ron DeSantis (FL), Mario Diaz-Balert (FL), Bill Flores (TX), Trent Franks (AZ), Louie Gohmert (TX), Trey Gowdy (TN), Andy Harris (MD), Richard Hudson (NC), Duncan Hunter (CA), Darrell Issa (CA), Bill Johnson (OH), Jeff Miller (FL), Alexander Mooney (WV), Richard Nugent (FL), Gary Palmer (AL), Robert Pittenger (NC), Bill Posey (FL), Reid Ribble (WI), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL), Keith Rothfus (PA), Matt Salmon (AZ), Austin Scott (GA), Marlin Stutzman (IN), Jackie Walorski (IN), Randy Weber (TX), Roger Williams (TX), Joe Wilson (SC), Ted Yoho (FL) and Ryan Zinke (MT). Diaz-Balert and Ros-Lehtinen are Cuban-Americans who have been and are most vocal in their criticism of reconciliation. Rodney Davis, however, spoke in favor of ending the embargo at the launch of the United States Agricultural Coalition for Cuba and should not be viewed as completely hostile to reconciliation.
[9] The 29 Republican cosponsors of H.R.401 are Andy Barr (KY), Susan Brooks (IN), Bradley Byrne (AL), Mike Coffman (CO), Paul Cook (CA), Ander Crenshaw (FL), Trent Franks (AZ), Andy Harris (MD), Jaime Herrera Beutier (WA), Duncan Hunter (CA), Darrell Issa (CA). Sam Johnson (TX), Doug Lamborn (CO), Robert Latta (OH), Luke Messer (IN), Mick Mulvaney (IN), Richard Nugent (FL), Steven Pearce (NM), Robert Pittenger (NC), Ted Poe (TX), Mike Pompeo (KS), Todd Rokita (IN), Aaron Schock (IL), Austin Scott (GA), Christopher Smith (NJ), Brad Wenstrup (OH), Joe Wilson (SC), Robert Wittman (VA) and Ryan Zinke (MT). Of these cosponsors, 16 (Barr, Brooks, Herrera, Sam Johnson, Lamborn, Latta, Messer, Mulvaney, Pearce, Poe, Pompeo, Rokita, Schock, Smith, Wenstrup and Wittman) were not cosponsors of H.R.654.
[10] Hook, Exile Haunts Cuba-American Lawmakers, W.S.J. (Dec. 20-21, 2014).
Posted on February 11, 2015 February 18, 2015 Categories History, Law, Other countries, PoliticsTags Al Franken, Albio Sires, Amy Klobuchar, Carlos Curbello, Chjarles Rangel, Chris Coons, Chris Murphy, Cuba, David Jolly, Erik Paulsen, Guantanamo Bay Cuba, H.R. 274, H.R. 403, H.R. 570, H.R. 635, H.R.401, H.R.634, H.R.654, H.R.664, H.R.735, H.r.738, Harry Reid, Jackie Walkorski, Jose Serrano, Kelly Ayotte, Marco Rubio, Mark Sanford, Pat Robertson, President Barack Obama, President Raul Castro, Radio Marti, Rand Paul, reconciliation, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart., Representative Betty McCollum, Representative Bobby Rush, Roberta S. Jacobson, S.165, S.299, S.RES.26, Senator Jeff Flake, Senator Jerry Moran, Senator Richard Durbin, Senator Robert Menendez, Tammy Baldwin, Ted Cruz, Television Marti, Tom Emmer, U.S. designation of Cuba as "State Sponsor of Terrorism", U.S. embargo of Cuba, U.S. exports to Cuba, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. regulations, U.S. Senate, U.S. travel to Cuba, United States of American (USA)4 Comments on United States Government’s Reactions to U.S.-Cuba Reconciliation


Heterosexual privilege
By Erin Hortle
24.Feb.17
I recently became engaged and what’s surprised me the most, in and amongst the chaos of emotions I’ve experienced since the ‘engagement moment’, is how profoundly sad I feel about it. This is best encapsulated in the moment when I told my family. My father was so happy for my partner and I that tears glazed his eyes. But my own vision wobbled because I felt sad for my brother, sitting across the table from me, grinning selflessly as he toasted my happiness and future – a happiness and future that the state denies him. The realisation of precisely what an engagement means and what it feels like brought with it a true awareness for me of what is being denied to others.
For me, marriage equality has always been more of a political than personal issue. This, despite the fact I have several close friends in non-heterosexual relationships. But perhaps this was the root of the problem: I’d approached the inequality intellectually and whenever I needed to personalise it, I always did so by way of my discriminated-against friends. I was that self-righteous heterosexual: I care because I have gay friends. I thought I was empathising but, as I can now recognise, I was doing a rubbish job of it. I was approaching the issue abstractly and impersonally because I hadn’t yet imagined how marriage could be personal for me, and thus relatedly, hadn’t imagined precisely how personal the lack is for others. My empathy was hollow – politically nuanced and well intentioned, but hollow. It became a personal issue when my partner and I were bushwalking and he fashioned me a button-grass ring and we both nearly cried because of how shockingly new and intense everything was in that moment.
Marriage is an institution many heterosexuals take for granted, as an idealised and attainable white-wedding dream, as an easy excuse for a loved-up party, or merely as a convenient way to formally mark an intention to commit. According to the ABS, 113,595 couples asked each other the marriage question in 2015; averaged out, this works out to be 311 couples every day of the year. Perhaps more. Probably, there were some that never made it to their chosen alter because their relationship fell apart or because they decided that actually, marriage wasn’t for them. And really, that’s the crux of it. When contemplating a life together, heterosexuals enjoy the privilege of choosing to marry or not.
This was the privilege my partner and I were exercising the day that we got engaged. We decided we would get married just as other people in heterosexual relationships choose not to, and the state doesn’t really care either way. It only cares that gay people do not. ‘They’ are free to not marry, and be happy with that choice. As Senator Abetz so kindly reminded the nation last year, Dolce and Gabbana are gay and they don’t want to get married. As so many conservatives rationalise, ‘they’ can choose to spend the rest of their lives with their loved ones, ‘they’ don’t have to get married to do that. But this option, even when characterised by nothing but love and commitment, is always negatively restricted – necessarily decided, if only in small part, in reference to what the state disallows.
The day my partner and I got engaged, traipsing through the south-west of Tasmania, all I could think was that, not only would the words we said have been different if he were a woman or I a man, the emotional atmosphere would have also been different. Our moment wouldn’t have been characterised by unchecked optimism and nervous euphoria, or at least, not wholly; it would have been marred, in part, by an awareness of an inequality, and an inequality that has a violent history and present. Take, for example, the context of Tasmania, where homosexuality was not decriminalised until 1997.
In 1994 the United Nations Human Rights Committee condemned Tasmanian laws, sparking a national debate as to whether or not the federal government had the power to override discriminatory state statutes. Jump forward to the twenty-first century and the opposite is occurring: the government has been pressuring states and territories to conform to its image of marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. When, in 2013, the ACT passed an act legalising same-sex marriage, the Commonwealth, headed by freshly minted PM Tony Abbott, appealed against the legislation in the High Court. The Court decided that the ACT’s Marriage Equality Act was inconsistent with the federal Marriage Act, stating in its summary of judgements: ‘The Court held that the Federal Parliament has power under the Australian Constitution to legislate with respect to same-sex marriage, and that under the Constitution and federal law as it now stands, whether same-sex marriage should be provided for by law is a matter for the Federal Parliament.’ The thirty-one couples who wedded in the brief period same-sex marriage was legal in the ACT subsequently had their marriage nullified.
This judgement was facilitated, in no small part, by John Howard’s Marriage Amendment Bill of 2004, which included, for the first time, a definition of marriage as the ‘voluntarily entered-into union of a man and woman to the exclusion of all others’. Howard’s agenda in amending the Marriage Act was blatant; in a press conference held at the time, he told reporters: ‘We’ve decided to insert this into the Marriage Act to make it very plain that that is our view of marriage and to also make it very plain that the definition of a marriage is something that should rest in the hands, ultimately, of the parliament of the nation.’
My partner and I were privileged because in the moment when we murmured our love to one another and contemplated whether or not we should celebrate that love with marriage, the spectres of John Howard, Tony Abbott, Eric Abetz, Cory Bernardi –whose newly formed Conservative Party is, in large part, devoted to opposing marriage equality – and the rest of their posse were nowhere in sight. There was no-one lurking in the wings, hissing: no, you can’t have what we have because your love is worth less than ours. We were free to make a choice. We were privileged to be able to enjoy the aftermath of that moment: to tell our families, to witness their joy. What we were exercising was both sides of heterosexual privilege: the privilege to be able to love the person you love and to have that love recognised, to have that ‘engagement moment’, which brings with it a mix of anxiety, joy, contentment and, most of all, optimism. It’s a right that is possessively guarded and granted only to a select group.
Since becoming engaged, I’ve realised that marriage equality isn’t just about non-heterosexual marriages; it’s about all marriages, which is, of course, a concern that drives the conservative campaign. They worry about what gay marriage will do to the institution of marriage. For me, the persisting inequality is tarnishing it right now. It’s only a matter of time until marriage equality is realised. Public support is swelling every day and rumour has it the Turnbull Government is now contemplating a free vote on the issue in parliament – this was one of the reasons Bernardi decided to defect. Many politicians are married; I only hope that, if allowed a free vote, they think back to the moment they made that decision, they remember how they felt, and they realise that they have the power to allow thousands of their constituents to experience that same euphoric nervousness, that same optimism unchecked. Should the government press ahead with their plans for a plebiscite, I hope that the millions of Australian heterosexuals are able to do the same. Whether married or not, I hope that Australian heterosexuals are able to understand the depth of their privilege, and help to dismantle its exclusivity for the sake of those systematically discriminated against, and for the sake of all marriages.
Erin Hortle is a writer of fiction and creative nonfiction. Recently, her work has been published in Kill Your Darlings and Island. She is partway through a Creative Writing PhD at the University of Tasmania.
More by Erin Hortle
From Hannah on 26 February 2017 at 10.19 am
Another thing that comes with heterosexual privledge is the idea that plebiscite is a good thing. This could, and most likely will, backlash on the LGBTQI community.
If Howard’s government could so easily amend the marriage act and if it “…should rest in the hands, ultimately, of the parliament of the nation” Why is it that our present government is not capable of doing the same?
A plebiscite will encourage homophobic groups to protest against marriage equality and create anti-equality propaganda. Some may argue that everyone has the right to their opinion. But, if these group’s discriminatory ideas reach just one fragile LGBTQI teenager or even adult, and they take their life, that is one life too many. All because Australia’s government is, somehow, incapable of making the right decision for Australia and for humanity.
It is a hetrosexual privilege to have the right to vote on a marriage law that does not effect their community. It’s our government’s responsibility to set the standard for our country and choose marriage equality.
From Lauren on 28 February 2017 at 2.47 pm
Thanks for this piece. My male partner and I got engaged in November, but are not going to get married as a political statement until the legislation changes and gay people can also access this privilege. I’m not suggesting you and your partner should necessarily do this, but if you feel strongly about the issue it’s a position worth considering.
From Cynthia on 3 March 2017 at 3.30 pm
Re: Lauren. But you are still making a choice, in this case, not to get married. By taking this stance all you are doing is showcasing (publicising, flaunting) your CHOICE. Can’t you see that as a slap in the face of those who don’t have any choice, one way or the other? I can’t see how it helps. Isn’t it that we all want everyone to be able to do what makes them happy with their partner, to want for them to get married. So get married. Be happy. That’s what we all want for you and for those who as yet cannot get married but we hope someday will, isn’t it?
From Lauren Sanders on 5 March 2017 at 9.29 am
For us, the decision is absolutely not about flaunting choice at all. It’s one of solidarity and protest and, to that end, we are writing to politicians to urge them to support changes to current legislation preventing marriage equality (which we hope will indeed help the cause). I am also a bisexual woman so feel uncomfortable accessing a privilege available to me only because my current partner happens to be a man. It is more important to us to fight for equality and if that means never getting married than we accept that. It doesn’t make us any less happy in our relationship and we look forward to celebrating it when all people can.


Doctor Who The First Question
Posted bytimewarrior1 December 1, 2020 November 22, 2020 Posted inAce Sophie Aldred, Dalek, Doctor Who, Tardis, The Time Warriors, The Time Warriors VenomTags:colin baker, matt smith, patrick troughton, sylvester mccoy, tom baker
By Owen Quinn author o the Time Warriors and Zombie Blues
It’s been fifty years coming! Tonight we may or may not discover the Doctor’s name and his greatest secret but did you know it’s been done before? Owen looks back twenty five years to the seventh Doctor’s battle with Nazis, Cybermen and the Lady Peinforte, a witch that knows his greatest secret, the secret that must never be told, Doctor Who?
It is the question that has been asked from the very first episode. Even then, the Doctor didn’t know or at least seemed not to. Ian Chesterton calls him Doctor Foreman and the Doctor mutters to himself, ‘Eh? Doctor Who?’. Whilst we learned that he was a Time Lord from Gallifrey who had stolen a magic box who was on the run from his own people, it seemed that was it. Now the question has become legend and is the first question, the oldest question in the universe and one that must never be answered. The answer terrifies the Silence who never want it revealed, so the Doctor must die before he reaches the Fields of Trenzalore where the question will be asked at the fall of the eleventh.
It seems a relatively new concept to most viewers but the question was tackled before. During the seventh Doctor’s era at the time of the 25th anniversary, Silver Nemesis saw the introduction of one Lady Peinforte played by Fiona Walker, a sorceress from the 17th century (see video below). It was revealed that she knew the Doctor’s secret and who he really was. In a battle that saw the Cybermen, Peinforte and Nazis race to possess the Nemesis, an ancient weapon of mass destruction from Gallifrey, the Doctor was almost revealed as he came face to face with the witch. She had previously encountered the second Doctor in an unseen adventure in which, somehow, she learned who he was. When they came face to face at the climax of the story, the question was asked: “Doctor Who? Have you never wondered where he came from, who he is?” Ace (Sophie Aldred) replies, “Nobody knows who the Doctor is.” Peinforte grins and answers slyly: “Except me.”
All of this was part of the Andrew Cartmel grand plan to reintroduce mystery to the character. We all thought we knew who the Doctor was, but did we really? As the old saying goes, you never really know anyone for sure and here it seemed the Doctor had a secret history. In the novelization of Remembrance of the Daleks, we saw flashbacks to Gallifrey when Omega and Rassilon gained the power of time travel for the Time Lords. Official history always said that these two were responsible but a third person was introduced. Known only as the Other, he was a shadowy figure that ensured that the event took place and when we later discover that the first Doctor had actually arrived on Earth to leave the Hand of Omega, another super weapon, for the Daleks to find, everything we knew went out the window.
It was indicated that the Doctor was in fact the Other and may at some point become this character from the dawn of Time Lord history itself. Other theories included that the Doctor had somehow become part of this character in an unseen adventure, almost a host of sorts, possibly at the moment of one of his regenerations Could it be his life as a wandering traveller was merely his way of blowing off steam as the momentous events that shaped the future of the Time Lord race faded into the background? Was he the Other who had somehow become immortal and survived from that day,assuming a new identity to cover some secret?
We know from the Three Doctors that Omega had become trapped in an anti-matter universe when he was presumed dead and that Borusa is alive and well in the Tomb of Rassilon at the heart of the Death Zone in the Five Doctors. So why couldn’t the Other have survived too, getting the best deal of the three; the chance to live a life travelling the universe. Could the reason he left Gallifrey be because he was a relic from another time and couldn’t live the life other Time Lords did? Had he in fact changed his own past to lay traps for the Daleks by getting his first incarnation to drop the Hand of Omega in 1963 for the Daleks to avert the Time War itself? If so, then the Doctor’s first meeting with the Daleks has to be seen in a whole new light.
Up to Remembrance of the Daleks, we thought the Doctor and Susan were just killing time in the 20th century in an Unearthly Child but twenty five years later we discover the Doctor had been there to set the Dalek trap and yet he gave no indication he knew what the Daleks were in the second story ever. Could it be the Tardis took them to Skaro on their second trip because the Doctor, having set his trap, had to ensure his meeting with the Daleks began properly? Which means he did have control over the Tardis after all so this does play into the Other theory. He knew of the Cybermen in the Tenth Planet yet we had never seen him meet them before and they became his second target for mass extermination in the 25th anniversary season in Silver Nemesis.
The seventh Doctor reveals a second weapon from Gallifrey, the living statue called Nemesis that is a massive bomb. It knows who he is and again we never saw how he came to get her on television. Lady Peinforte wants the Nemesis and at some point she briefly had it because it told her the Doctor’s secret. The Cybermen also want the statue as do a group of neo Nazis seeking to restore the Reich. It all comes to a climax in an abandoned hangar where Ace is about to be killed if the Doctor doesn’t hand over the Nemesis to the silver giants. They have already killed the last of the Nazis so it’s down to a battle between Peinforte and the Cybermen with the Doctor caught in the middle. Peinforte threatens to reveal all if he doesn’t hand it over to her. However the Doctor doesn’t seem that worried when he gives the power of the Nemesis to the Cybermen. Losing her prize, Peinforte grows angry when she continues: “I shall tell them of Gallifrey, of the Old Time, the Time of Chaos.”. The Cybermen reply that the secrets of the Time Lords mean nothing to them and Peinforte has lost her bargaining chip. Even at the end when Ace asks him directly “Doctor, who are you?” he smiles and puts his fingers to his lips. Now we know that the grand plan would have gone nowhere as you could never reveal the true story of the character. But it worked so well at the time. That second when Peinforte says those delicious words, ‘Doctor Who?’ viewers were on the edge of their seats. Not bad for an era that was generally slammed at the time but is now rightly regarded as containing many classics and the blueprint for the Russell T Davies era.
It was also here we learned that at some point a ginger-haired Doctor would become Merlin in another dimension, something that came as a surprise to him. So we know at some point the Doctor will get his wish and become ginger. Indeed, even now the eleventh Doctor is surprised to learn that his name causes such fear in the universe and when he arrives on Trenzalore, no lies can be told and the truth will come out. But why? What is it? Can a name bring down creation itself? In fact could there be more to the Time War than we were first told? The Doctor wiped out two empires in one go, so what is he really capable of? Armies have turned and run away at the mention of his name and he is known as the Oncoming Storm to the Daleks, when they had a memory of him, that is. What is it about the Doctor that is so terrible that the universe itself will hold its breath when the question is asked?
McCoy’s era reinvented the Doctor and gave us something to think about. A friend we thought we knew, now has a secret past which he can never speak of. A dangerous past that is too horrible to reveal. For Lady Peinforte, it was a bargaining chip that she was sure would make the Doctor cower in fear and do whatever she wanted him to. To the Cybermen,it meant nothing, but to us on this day, in this place, the Doctor is going to fall. In the Rings of Akhaten, he faces down the sun monster by revealing he knows things, terrible things that can never be said and maybe, just maybe, we are about to have some of those answered. Now, as we know the question will be asked, the first question, the question that must never be answered is about to fall…
Doctor Who, indeed?
Time Warriors talk to Alien Nation’s Eric Pierpoint
Heroes of Doctor Who: Adric


Why should computational neuroscientists care about the distribution of prime numbers?
Sep 18, 2021 • Aidan Rocke
Motivation:
How could a reasonable scientist make sense of the astonishing developments in number theory over the course of millenia(dating back to Euclid and Eratosthenes) without a precise application in mind? What more, how did number theory singularly avoid developing into a baroque construct; the tragic fate of all pure sciences that aren’t moulded by practical applications? Yet, if not for these developments secure communications and modern cryptography in general would be non-existent. It is as if the best musicians in history developed the fundamentals of jazz music without a particular audience in mind. Each generation of mathematicians passing down their craft in number theory to the next with a consistency and originality unmatched by any other branch of science.
The objective of this article is precisely to propose a reasonable explanation.
The distribution of primes and information-theoretic mechanisms of human cognition:
From the Prime Number Theorem, we may infer that the number of primes less than \(N\) is given by:
\begin{equation} \pi(N) \sim \frac{N}{\ln N} \end{equation}
What makes the density of primes interesting for an information-theorist is that the typical frequency with which a large integer \(N\) is prime is inversely proportional to the information gained from observing that integer \(K_U(N)\) multiplied by the constant \(\frac{\frac{d}{dN} 2^N}{2^N} = \ln 2\):
\begin{equation} K_U(N) \sim \log_2(N) \sim \frac{1}{\ln 2} \cdot \Big(\frac{\pi(N)}{N} \Big)	^{-1} \sim \frac{\ln N}{\ln 2} \end{equation}
where \(\ln N\) corresponds to the average information gained from identifying a unique object distributed uniformly among \(N\) possible locations.
In addition, information theory and information-theoretic formulations of human cognition such as the Free Energy Principle provide us with an ideal vantage-point to clarify the nature of Godfrey Hardy’s remarkable insight:
A science is said to be useful if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life. The theory of prime numbers satisfies no such criteria. Those who pursue it will, if they are wise, make no attempt to justify their interest in a subject so trivial and so remote, and will console themselves with the thought that the greatest mathematicians of all ages have found in it a mysterious attraction impossible to resist.-Godfrey Hardy
The second half of this quote is crucial as it appears that we may use information-theory to address part of the mystery Hardy refers to. The information-theoretic arguments presented thus far suggest that to a large extent the human brain is an instrument for data compression besides being a movement co-processor. The implicit argument here is that good mathematicians maximise expected surprise(i.e. information gained).
Besides telling us something profound about the human mind, might this also reveal something important about the distribution of primes? It might, if we first make the reasonable conjecture that all of physics may be simulated by a Universal Quantum Computer. In light of this hypothesis, it is worth considering that a number of reasonable theories of Quantum measurement are not observer-independent. This includes the Wigner-Von Neumann formulation of the measurement problem as well as the Many-World formulation of the measurement problem.
Deeper investigations in these complementary directions may reveal a direct correspondence between information-theoretic mechanisms of human cognition and the distribution of prime numbers.
J. Hadamard, Sur la distribution des z´eros de la fonction ζ(s) et ses cons´equences arithm´etiques, Bull. Soc. Math. France 24 (1896), 199–220; reprinted in Oeuvres de Jacques Hadamard, C.N.R.S., Paris, 1968, vol 1, 189–210.
Aidan Rocke (https://mathoverflow.net/users/56328/aidan-rocke), information-theoretic derivation of the prime number theorem, URL (version: 2021-02-20): https://mathoverflow.net/q/384109
Lance Fortnow. Kolmogorov Complexity. 2000.
John A. Wheeler, 1990, “Information, physics, quantum: The search for links” in W. Zurek (ed.) Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Karl Friston. The free-energy principle: a rough guide to the brain? Cell Press. 2009.
Hugh Everett Theory of the Universal Wavefunction, Thesis, Princeton University, (1956, 1973), pp 1–140


Executive Spotlight: Mark Testoni, SAP National Security Services President
in Executive Spotlight
Admin May 29, 2012, 2:54 pm
Mark Testoni
U.S. national security agencies and critical infrastructure companies have a new name to know for information technology, as SAP Government Support and Services and its Sybase Federal unit have completed an operational realignment and are now doing business as SAP National Security Services.
Mark Testoni is president of SAP NS2 and recently caught up with ExecutiveBiz about the new business he leads, market opportunities and trends in the field.
ExecutiveBiz: What advantages will operating under one roof provide you? What obstacles will you need to overcome to successfully merge operations?
Mark Testoni: SAP has been in the defense and intelligence business for a long time, but historically did not have a huge presence. In the mid-2000s, SAP created a separate unit called SAP Government Support and Services to serve the specialized information assurance needs of certain government customers. In 2008, SAP acquired BusinessObjects to expand our footprint in the analytics space, and in 2011, SAP acquired Sybase, a big data management player.
As we went through the vetting process for the Sybase acquisition, specifically looking at implications on defense and intelligence, we discovered that they had a significant business in intelligence in highly classified programs. So we had to change SAP Government Support and Services from a Special Security Arrangement company into a fully independent proxy company to support that business. It took us from a $15 million business in this arena to about a $130 million business overnight.
I was brought in to meld the two businesses into one software company supporting this market. Now as SAP National Security Services, we have a full complement of capabilities“”data management, business applications, business intelligence and analytics, cloud and mobility solutions“”plus a 100 percent U.S.-staffed and located team to serve our customers. We think the combination is very powerful. SAP NS2 is a fast-growing player in the marketplace, a real alternative to business as usual, with a $17 billion-annual-revenue company standing behind us.
ExecutiveBiz: Were there any challenges you had to overcome to successfully merge those operations to what they are today?
Mark Testoni: The biggest challenge is just trying to get everybody on the same page, and we're probably 90 percent of the way there. There are always some internal procedures and systems that are different, but the biggest challenge is always about change management. We've also aligned our efforts with the SAP teams who handle other defense and civilian accounts, and that has created a substantial force multiplier in the marketplace for SAP.
When I arrived last year, my first priority was to try to align our focus, and that's what we've been doing the last six to nine months, in addition to bringing on more talent. I find this extremely exciting. Given the market situation, there is not a better time to be rolling out this message and this company, because our customers are looking for new models to reduce costs and drive innovation more quickly.
ExecutiveBiz: How has SAP's data analytic strategy evolved since 2010, and how will your company continue to innovate as demand for analytics increases?
Mark Testoni: Although business process transformation is still our core strength, the management of information is becoming paramount. There are two facts driving this trend. One is that in the last two or three years, we've doubled the total amount of information ever created by man, and we know the growth will continue to be exponential. And we are just scratching the tip of the iceberg on all the data created by social media. This is the big data challenge that we hear so much about in business and government.
SAP is now a far broader transformational company, from improving business processes to helping organizations analyze and act on information. The evolution of cloud computing is also a huge focus for SAP and allows us to deliver these capabilities more rapidly to our customers.
We're also focusing heavily on data management and analytics. We rolled out a new product in the last 18 months called SAP HANA, which fuses hardware, memory and software together to increase the speed and volume of information that can be managed and turned into actionable information. Some of our largest corporate customers are taking advantage of this and getting almost real-time information on all aspects of their business.
Today, we are working with the federal government on a significant number of big data management projects. In fact, some of the largest and most complex databases in the world run on SAP.
ExecutiveBiz: Is the goal of organic versus acquired growth changing in the lean budget environment, and where are growth opportunities?
Mark Testoni: If we look at the overall government piece of pie, it's going to continue to get smaller. The US has nearly doubled our debt and deficits over the last five years. We're going to see that reflected in budgets in years to come. There are only two ways to grow in that environment: one is to acquire other businesses, and the other is to take more market share. Either way, those who bring innovation to market rapidly, at low cost, will be the ones who succeed. Beyond our own initiatives, a major component of our growth will come from other great companies extending new innovations on our platform.
When it comes to NS2, we think that there are new ways to offer capabilities to the government. We see our opportunity in offering high-end data management and business transformational capabilities in different ways, perhaps through alternative acquisition models that make it easier for the government to innovate and cost them less money. There's going to be a big market for that. The convergence of the volumes of information, the demands for faster analysis of it, and the budget cuts will put pressure on companies to do business with the government in ways we haven't ever done before.
ExecutiveBiz: What next-generation technologies do you see that will deliver significant cost savings to the U.S. public and enable more productivity in the public sector?
Mark Testoni: The biggest challenge for government today, similar to the private sector, is the dollars. Investing in long-term projects that cost a lot of money for less-defined outcomes is no longer the norm. Managing and analyzing information as it happens with fewer hardware resources“”that's going to be huge. The ability to assimilate that information from many places and sources is critical as well.
If you go back 10 years, companies would say, “Come on to our platform and get all the information into one place, and then you can get all this great analytics.“ This is not so feasible anymore, when new data sources are being created all the time. Those who can integrate, pull together and access and manage data rapidly and turn it into actionable information at lower cost are going to be the successful players, and I'm excited about where we are in that space.
ExecutiveBiz: How do you think the IT needs of the military will change with the drawdown of combat forces and with changes in global military policy?
Mark Testoni: I was in the military in the “˜70s, and we worried about having enough tanks to stop our adversary from rolling across Europe. Today, we worry about networks and our ability to sustain command-and-control as we face threats we couldn’t conceive of 35 years ago. We have to be able to move our troops in the field rapidly, and that depends on information and communications.
We're also going to have to provide great protection for our networks and leverage equipment to do things that humans used to do. Controlling and securing the information network is going to be the driving factor in a much smaller, much more agile military. Against this backdrop, the military must rapidly leverage commercially available solutions to support this environment. This creates many opportunities for our company and others moving forward.
ExecutiveBiz: How does the company decide which technologies to adapt for the public sector?
Mark Testoni: Business problems in the private and public sectors are often the same. The US government has as large an information-management problem as any company in the world. The way they acquire technology often isn't as nimble, but that's going to change. I believe we're at an inflection point inside government, and we're actually going to see some dramatic changes over the next decade. I guarantee you that SAP NS2 will be an organization that actually helps alter the way the government acquires and pays for the management of information and business processes.
Lockheed Submits Proposal For AF Aircrew Training System
General Atomics to Modernize Italy’s MQ-9 Fleet
Booz Allen Expanding Tech, Cyber Services to Kuwait
HP Names 30-Year IT Vet George Kadifa Software Group EVP


Home Uncategorized The top three favourites to win the Champions League this season
The top three favourites to win the Champions League this season
Chris Darwen
The 2020-21 Champions League is now well underway, and after three matches there are already signs of who the favourites might be to win the competition when the final rolls around. Istanbul will play host to the showpiece match this year, having been the original venue for the 2019-20 final before the coronavirus pandemic meant the final stages of the tournament were all played out in Lisbon.
All the usual suspects are among the favourites in the UEFA Champions League odds, and with the group stage already providing some top-drawer entertainment, we could be set for a mouth-watering edition of the Champions League. Here, we run through the top three teams who are fancied to win the competition according to the latest odds.
It’s no surprise that defending champions Bayern Munich are the top favourites to lift the trophy again. Last season, the German champions were by far and away the best team in Europe, and this was evident in their 8-2 humiliation of Spanish giants Barcelona in the quarter-finals. In Robert Lewandowski, they have one of the best finishers in the world, and will take some stopping on the road to Istanbul.
They already showed signal of their intent in the opening game of this season’s Champions League, when they thrashed Atlético Madrid 4-0 in Munich to kick-start their group stage campaign. The match was proof that although Bayern enjoyed the immense satisfaction of winning their sixth European Cup last season, there is still a desire for even more success.
With every passing season, it seems as though Manchester City are tipped as one of the top contenders to win the Champions League, but each year they fail to live up to expectations. It is the one disappointment of Pep Guardiola’s hugely successful reign as Manchester City manager – that he hasn’t been able to land the club’s first Champions League title.
This season, there will be even greater pressure on City to avenge their defeat to Lyon in last season’s quarter-finals. They’ve got off to a winning start in their group stage campaign, defeating Porto and Marseille to take maximum points. But while City usually breeze through their group, it’s the knockout stages where they often come unstuck. They have only reached the semi-finals on one occasion, which is poor from a club that spend such large amounts. It will be Guardiola’s chief quest to put that right this season.
Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool will be on a mission to regain their Champions League crown this season. The 2019 champions have begun the group stage well by beating Ajax, Midtjylland and Atalanta setting themselves up well to qualify for the knockout stages if they can continue their good form in the competition.
The Reds’ journey to winning the competition in the 2018-19 season was a memorable one, and set the tone for the club’s Premier League title success in the following campaign. Now the quest has begun to turn those moments of success into a real Anfield dynasty, and further success in the Champions League would cement this Liverpool team’s place in the pantheon of greats.
Previous articlePer Mertesacker considers himself to have been a panic buy
Next articleArsenal players ‘angry’ with Mikel Arteta
Founder and Editor-In-Cheif of the Ronnie Dog Media Group and therefore WATA, follow me on Twitter.
Why Arsenal is Underperforming in the Premier League?
Arsenal at Anfield – More of the same or signs of progress?
Zech Medley: The solution to our defensive woes?
Tactical Analysis: Arsenal Women’s perfect setup in 6-0 win over Reading...
Match Analysis October 23, 2018
Cardiff City 2-3 Arsenal: Alexandre Lacazette proves he should start
Match Analysis September 3, 2018
Forget Ramsey: Arsenal have a ready-made replacement in young Joe Willock
Player Analysis August 15, 2019
Tactical analysis: How did Arsenal improve in the second half to...
Match Analysis October 2, 2018
U-23 Manager Bould impressed with Mari’s debut match
Columnist February 17, 2020