Datasets:

yunyu

/

wiki40b_en_100_0_split

like 0

{"datasets_id": 162235, "wiki_id": "Q16955274", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 256}

Q16955274

The Other Side of Something

Commercial performance

The Other Side of Something Commercial performance For the Billboard charting week of April 10, 2004, The Other Side of Something was the No. 29 most sold album in the Christian music market via the Christian Albums position. Also, it placed at No. 32 on the breaking-and-entry chart the Heatseekers Albums.

{"datasets_id": 162236, "wiki_id": "Q17102110", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 4, "ec": 627}

Q17102110

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting This article about the development of themes in Italian Renaissance painting is an extension to the article Italian Renaissance painting, for which it provides additional pictures with commentary. The works encompassed are from Giotto in the early 14th century to Michelangelo's Last Judgement of the 1530s. The themes that preoccupied painters of the Italian Renaissance were those of both subject matter and execution- what was painted and the style in which it was painted. The artist had far more freedom of both subject and style than did a Medieval painter. Certain characteristic elements of Renaissance painting

{"datasets_id": 162236, "wiki_id": "Q17102110", "sp": 4, "sc": 627, "ep": 8, "ec": 392}

Q17102110

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting

Themes

evolved a great deal during the period. These include perspective, both in terms of how it was achieved and the effect to which it was applied, and realism, particularly in the depiction of humanity, either as symbolic, portrait or narrative element. Themes The Flagellation of Christ by Piero della Francesca (above) demonstrates in a single small work many of the themes of Italian Renaissance painting, both in terms of compositional elements and subject matter. Immediately apparent is Piero's mastery of perspective and light. The architectural elements, including the tiled floor which becomes more complex around the central action, combine to

{"datasets_id": 162236, "wiki_id": "Q17102110", "sp": 8, "sc": 392, "ep": 8, "ec": 1005}

Q17102110

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting

Themes

create two spaces. The inner space is lit by an unseen light source to which Jesus looks. Its exact location can be pinpointed mathematically by an analysis of the diffusion and the angle of the shadows on the coffered ceiling. The three figures who are standing outside are lit from a different angle, from both daylight and light reflected from the pavement and buildings. The religious theme is tied to the present. The ruler is a portrait of the visiting Emperor of Byzantium. Flagellation is also called "scourging". The term "scourge" was applied to the plague. Outside stand three men representing

{"datasets_id": 162236, "wiki_id": "Q17102110", "sp": 8, "sc": 1005, "ep": 12, "ec": 173}

Q17102110

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting

Themes & Elements of Renaissance painting

those who buried the body of Christ. The two older, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea, are believed to be portraits of men who recently lost their sons, one of them to plague. The third man is the young disciple John, and is perhaps a portrait of one of the sons, or else represents both of them in a single idealised figure, coinciding with the manner in which Piero painted angels. Elements of Renaissance painting Renaissance painting differed from the painting of the Late Medieval period in its emphasis upon the close observation of nature, particularly with regards to human anatomy,

{"datasets_id": 162236, "wiki_id": "Q17102110", "sp": 12, "sc": 173, "ep": 16, "ec": 532}

Q17102110

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting

Elements of Renaissance painting & Subjects

and the application of scientific principles to the use of perspective and light. Subjects Devotional images of the Madonna and Child were produced in very large numbers, often for private clients. Scenes of the Life of Christ, the Life of the Virgin, or Lives of the Saints were also made in large numbers for churches, particularly scenes associated with the Nativity and the Passion of Christ. The Last Supper was commonly depicted in religious refectories. During the Renaissance an increasing number of patrons had their likeness committed to posterity in paint. For this reason there exists a great number of

{"datasets_id": 162236, "wiki_id": "Q17102110", "sp": 16, "sc": 532, "ep": 16, "ec": 715}

Q17102110

Themes in Italian Renaissance painting

Subjects

Renaissance portraits for whom the name of the sitter is unknown. Wealthy private patrons commissioned artworks as decoration for their homes, of increasingly secular subject matter.

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 566}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Background

Third Battle of Seoul Background With the China entering the Korean War in late 1950, the conflict had entered a new phase. To prevent North Korea from falling under UN control after the UN offensive into North Korea, the PVA entered North Korea and launched their Second Phase Offensive against the UN forces near the Sino-Korean border on 25 November. The resulting battles at the Ch'ongch'on River Valley and the Chosin Reservoir forced the UN forces to retreat from North Korea during December 1950, with PVA and North Korean Korean People's Army (KPA) forces recapturing much of North Korea. On

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 6, "sc": 566, "ep": 6, "ec": 1175}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Background

the Korean western front, after the US Eighth Army suffered a disastrous defeat at the Ch'ongch'on River, it retreated back to the Imjin River while setting up defensive positions around the South Korean capital of Seoul. Although the Eighth Army was ordered to hold Seoul for as long as possible, UN commander General Douglas MacArthur planned a series of withdrawals to the Pusan Perimeter if UN forces were about to be overwhelmed. General Walton Walker, commander of the Eighth Army, was killed in a traffic accident on December 23, and Lieutenant General Matthew B. Ridgway assumed command of the Eighth

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 6, "sc": 1175, "ep": 6, "ec": 1800}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Background

Army on December 26, 1950. At the UN, a ceasefire along the 38th Parallel was proposed to China on December 11, 1950 in order to avoid any further escalation of hostility between China and the US. Although the PVA had been weakened from their earlier battles, with nearly 40 percent of its forces rendered combat ineffective, its unexpected victories over the UN forces had convinced the Chinese leadership of the invincibility of the PVA. Immediately after the PVA 13th Army's victory over the Eighth Army at the Ch'ongch'on River, China's Chairman Mao Zedong started to contemplate another offensive against the UN

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 6, "sc": 1800, "ep": 6, "ec": 2430}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Background

forces on the urging of North Korean Premier Kim Il-sung. After learning of MacArthur's plans and the UN ceasefire, Mao also believed that the UN evacuation of the Korean Peninsula was imminent. Although the over-stretched Chinese logistics prevented the PVA from launching a full-scale invasion against South Korea, Mao still ordered the PVA 13th Army to launch an intrusion, dubbed the "Third Phase Campaign", to hasten the UN withdrawal and to demonstrate China's desire for a total victory in Korea. On December 23, 1950, China's Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai formally rejected the UN ceasefire while demanding all UN forces to

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 6, "sc": 2430, "ep": 10, "ec": 521}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Background & Locations, terrain and weather

be withdrawn from the Korean Peninsula. Locations, terrain and weather Seoul is the capital city of South Korea, which is roughly bisected into northern and southern halves by the Han River. Seoul is located 35 mi (56 km) south of the 38th Parallel. The battle was fought over the UN defenses at the 38th Parallel, which stretches horizontally from the Imjin River mouth on the Korean west coast to the town of Chuncheon in central Korea. Route 33 runs south across the 38th Parallel at the Hantan River, passes through Uijeongbu and eventually arrives at Seoul, and it is an ancient invasion

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 10, "sc": 521, "ep": 14, "ec": 154}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Locations, terrain and weather & Battle

route towards Seoul. Another road ran across the Imjin River, and it connects Seoul and Kaesong through the towns of Munsan and Koyang. Finally, a road runs through Chuncheon and it connects to Seoul from the northeast. The harsh Korean winter, with temperatures as low as −20 °C (−4 °F), had frozen the Imjin and the Hantan River over most of the river crossings, eliminating a major obstacle for the attacking Chinese forces. Battle On the evening of December 31, 1950, the PVA 13th Army launched a massive attack against the ROK forces along the 38th Parallel. Along the Imjin River and

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 14, "sc": 154, "ep": 18, "ec": 170}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Battle & Actions at Gapyeong and Chuncheon

the Hantan River, the PVA 38th, 39th, 40th and 50th Corps decimated the ROK 1st Division while routing the ROK 6th Division. At the Chuncheon sector, the PVA 42nd and the 66th Corps forced ROK III Corps into full retreat. With the defenses at the 38th Parallel completely collapsed by January 1, 1951, Ridgway ordered the evacuation of Seoul on January 3. Actions at Gapyeong and Chuncheon At the beginning of the battle ROK III Corps was located to the east of the US 24th Infantry Division of US IX Corps, defending the 38th Parallel to the north of Gapyeong

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 18, "sc": 170, "ep": 18, "ec": 799}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Actions at Gapyeong and Chuncheon

(Kapyong) and Chuncheon. Composed of four divisions, ROK III Corps placed its 2nd Infantry Division on the Corps' left flank at the hills north of Gapyeong, while the 5th Infantry Division defended the Corps' center at Chuncheon. The cold winter created great difficulties for the ROK defenders, with the heavy snow hindering construction and icy roads limiting food and ammunition supplies. North Korean guerrillas were also active in the region, and had caused serious disruption in the rear of ROK III Corps. The Chinese operational order for the Third Phase Campaign called for the 42nd and the 66th Corps to protect

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 18, "sc": 799, "ep": 18, "ec": 1419}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Actions at Gapyeong and Chuncheon

the PVA left flank by eliminating the ROK 2nd and 5th Infantry Divisions, while cutting the road between Chuncheon and Seoul. Following instructions, the two PVA Corps quickly struck after midnight on New Year's Eve. The PVA 124th Division first penetrated the flanks of the ROK 2nd Infantry Division, then blocked the division's retreat route. The trapped ROK 17th and 32nd Regiments, 2nd Infantry Division were forced to retreat in disarray. With the PVA 66th Corps pressuring the ROK 5th Infantry Division's front, the PVA 124th Division then advanced eastward in the rear and blocked the ROK 5th Infantry Division's

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 18, "sc": 1419, "ep": 22, "ec": 23}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Actions at Gapyeong and Chuncheon & Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

retreat route as well. The maneuver soon left the ROK 36th Regiment, 5th Infantry Division surrounded by PVA and they had to escape by infiltrating the PVA lines using mountain trails. By January 1, ROK III Corps had lost contact with the 2nd and 5th Infantry Divisions, while the rest of the III Corps were retreating to the town of Wonju. On January 5, the PVA 42nd and 66th Corps were relieved by the KPA II and V Corps, and the KPA launched a separate offensive towards Wonju. Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D I and IX Corps left the

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 23, "ep": 22, "ec": 582}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

lower bank of the Han while Hill’s engineers were still blowing Inchon, so Hill had been obliged to put out his own security above the port. These outposts were not engaged. Neither were Milburn’s forces as they moved to positions centered on Route 1 at the town of Anyang, nor were Coulter’s as they extended theintermediate line northeastward to the junction of the Han and Pukhan rivers. Late on the 4th, while I and IX Corps were withdrawing to positions above Suwon, Ridgway ordered the withdrawal to Line D to begin at noon on the 5th, by which time he

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 582, "ep": 22, "ec": 1196}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

now expected the supplies at Suwon to have been removed. All five Corps were to withdraw abreast, meeting in the process Ridgway’s basic requirement of maximum delay and maximum punishment of the enemy. Ridgway specifically instructed Milburn and Coulter to include tanks in their covering forces and to counterattack the PVA who followed the withdrawal. Ridgway learned during the morning of the 5th that the supplies at Suwon and at the airfield south of town could not be cleared by noon. Creating the delay was not only the sheer bulk of the materiel but also about 100,000 desperate refugees from the

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 1196, "ep": 22, "ec": 1781}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

Seoul area who crowded the Suwon railroad yards and blocked the trains. At mid-morning Ridgway radioed Milburn to stand fast until the remaining Suwon stocks had been shipped out and he notified Coulter to leave forces to protect the east flank of I Corps' forward position. Milburn received Ridgway’s instructions in time to hold the bulk of the 25th Division and the ROK 1st Division at the Anyang position and Coulter ordered the ROK 6th Division to protect Milburn’s east flank. But Coulter did not dispatch his instructions until an hour after the ROK 6th had started for Line D,

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 1781, "ep": 22, "ec": 2378}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

and General Chang did not receive them until midafternoon. It took Chang another half hour to get his division stopped. By that time his forces were almost due east of Suwon, where, with Coulter’s agreement, Chang deployed them along Route 17. During the night of the 5th a PVA regiment crossed the Han and assembled east of Yongdungp'o. Patrols from the regiment moved south through the hills east of Route 1 and reconnoitered the ROK 1st Division front before midnight but somehow missed finding the vulnerable east flank earlier left open by IX Corps. By daylight on the 6th the patrol

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 2378, "ep": 22, "ec": 2958}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

contact in the center of General Paik’s front developed into a general engagement between a PVA battalion and the ROK 3rd Battalion, 11th Regiment, but the PVA attempt to dislodge the ROK eased by noon and ended altogether at 14:00. By then supplies had been cleared from Suwon and Milburn and Coulter could continue south toward Line D. The two Corps completed their withdrawals on the 7th. Since the 15th Infantry and 3rd Battalion, 65th Infantry, of the 3rd Division in the meantime had arrived from Kyongju and been attached to I Corps, Milburn was able to keep a substantial

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 2958, "ep": 22, "ec": 3544}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

reserve and still organize a fairly solid 20 miles (32 km) Line D front from the west coast eastward through Pyongtaek and Ansong. The British 29th Brigade and the Thai battalion stood at the far left astride Route 1 just below P’yongt’aek. The 3rd Division held a sector across the hills between Routes 1 and 17, which General Soule manned with the 15th Infantry. Lending depth to this central position, the 3rd Battalion, 65th Infantry, and the 35th Infantry of the 25th Division were assembled not far behind it. Above Ansong, the ROK 1st Division lay across Route 17. The remainder

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 3544, "ep": 22, "ec": 4130}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

of the 25th Division and the Turkish Brigade went into Corps' reserve at Cheonan, 13 miles (21 km) south of Pyongtaek. Along a slightly longer front tipping to the northeast and reaching beyond Changhowon-ni to the Han River, Coulter deployed the ROK 6th Division, British 27th Brigade, and 24th Division, west to east. Hard against the right Corps' boundary 20 miles (32 km) behind the front, the bulk of the 1st Cavalry Division was in Corps' reserve at Ch’ungju on Route 13, now IX Corps’ main supply route. To protect the route from attacks by guerrillas known to be located in the

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 4130, "ep": 22, "ec": 4761}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

Tanyang area 20 miles (32 km) further east, the 5th Cavalry Regiment had begun to patrol the road from Ch’ungju south through a mountain pass at Mun’gyong. The way Milburn and Coulter had moved to Line D exasperated General Ridgway. "Reports so far reaching me," he told the two Corps commanders on the 7th, "indicate your forces withdrew to ‘D’ line without evidence of having inflicted any substantial losses on enemy and without material delay. In fact, some major units are reported as having broken contact. I desire prompt confirming reports and if substantially correct, the reasons for non-compliance with my basic

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 4761, "ep": 22, "ec": 5364}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

directives." The reports reaching Ridgway were true. Except for the clashes between the PVA and the ROK 1st Division east of Anyang on the 6th, I Corps had withdrawn from the south bank of the Han without contact and IX Corps had not engaged enemy forces since leaving the Bridgehead Line Attempting once more to get the quality of leadership he considered essential, Ridgway pointed out to Milburn and Coulter that their opponents had only two alternatives: to make a time-consuming, coordinated follow-up, or to conduct a rapid, uncoordinated pursuit. If the PVA chose the first, Eighth Army could at

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 5364, "ep": 22, "ec": 5986}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

least achieve maximum delay even though there might be few opportunities for strong counterattacks. If they elected the second, Eighth Army would have unlimited opportunities not only to delay but to inflict severe losses on them. In either case, Ridgway again made clear, Milburn and Coulter were to exploit every opportunity to carry out the basic concept of operations that he had repeatedly explained to them. The immediate response was a flurry of patrolling to regain contact. According to the I Corps intelligence officer, the 39th and 50th Armies were now advancing south of Seoul, and their vanguards had reached

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 5986, "ep": 22, "ec": 6558}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

the Suwon area. An ROK 1st Division patrol moving north over Route 17 during the afternoon of the 7th supported this assessment when it briefly engaged a small PVA group in Kumnyangjang-ni, 11 miles (18 km) east of Suwon. Further west, patrols from the 15th Infantry and the British 29th Brigade moved north as far as Osan, 8 miles (13 km) short of Suwon, without making contact. In the IX Corps' sector, the 24th Division at the far right sent patrols into Icheon and Yeoju, both on an east-west line with Suwon. Both towns were empty. Shallower searches to the north by

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 6558, "ep": 22, "ec": 7163}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

the British 27th Brigade in the center of the Corps' sector also failed to reestablish contact. General Ridgway considered the attempts by patrols to regain contact at least to be moves in the right direction. What he wanted and planned to see next in the west was more vigorous patrolling by gradually enlarged forces. This patrolling would be the main mission of the larger efforts to acquire better combat intelligence, which in his judgment had been sadly neglected and which was a prime requisite for the still larger offensive action that he intended would follow. His attention meanwhile was drawn

{"datasets_id": 162237, "wiki_id": "Q493922", "sp": 22, "sc": 7163, "ep": 22, "ec": 7301}

Q493922

Third Battle of Seoul

Eighth Army withdrawal to Line D

to the east, where the withdrawal to Line D was still in progress and where KPA forces, as expected, had opened an attack to seize Wonju.

{"datasets_id": 162238, "wiki_id": "Q30635130", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 580}

Q30635130

Tiatr Academy of Goa

History

Tiatr Academy of Goa History The tiatr has a rich history of 125 years and is an important form of theatre in the Konkani language. The first tiatr was performed in 1892 in Bombay. There had been a demand from lovers of tiatr and the artists that the Government of Goa take steps to protect and promote the theatre form. During the tenure of Digambar Kamat as the Chief Minister of Goa, a committee was established under Chief Minister Kamat's chairmanship for the purpose of drafting a constitution for the proposed Tiatr Academy. The committee included Tomazinho Cardozo, Premanand Sangodkar, Fatima

{"datasets_id": 162238, "wiki_id": "Q30635130", "sp": 6, "sc": 580, "ep": 10, "ec": 170}

Q30635130

Tiatr Academy of Goa

History & Administration

D'Souza, Wilson Mazarello, Prince Jacob and Prasad Lolayekar (Director, Directorate of Art & Culture of the Government of Goa) as members. The committee drafted the constitution and the Academy was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 under No. 85/Goa/2009 on 2 February 2009. The Government of Goa appointed Tomazinho Cardozo as the first President of the Academy and the Academy was inaugurated on 16 January 2009. Administration The General Council and the President of the Tiatr Academy of Goa are appointed by the Government of Goa for a term of three years. In addition to ex officio members like

{"datasets_id": 162238, "wiki_id": "Q30635130", "sp": 10, "sc": 170, "ep": 14, "ec": 442}

Q30635130

Tiatr Academy of Goa

Administration & Activities

the Secretary and the Directror of Art & Culture, Government of Goa; the Council also other members and organisations who work in the field of tiatr. The term of the General Council shall be three years. Activities The Academy organises various programmes and events for the promotion and conservation of tiatr. The Academy organises competitions and festivals such as the Children's Tiatr Festival and the Popular Tiatr Festival. The Academy also organises jubilees of various tiatr actors. The Tiatr Academy of Goa organises workshops on tiatr in educational institutions across Goa to promote awareness about tiatr among the students. The Academy

{"datasets_id": 162238, "wiki_id": "Q30635130", "sp": 14, "sc": 442, "ep": 14, "ec": 957}

Q30635130

Tiatr Academy of Goa

Activities

also has various schemes such as oral documentation of tiatr, documentation of tiatr through research, etc. The Academy organise special programmes every month called Somplolea Tiatristancho Ugddas to remember the tiatr artists of yesteryears. The Academy also organises a monthly programme where tiatr artists of repute are invited to interact with tiatr lovers. The Tiatr Academy of Goa has published several books regarding tiatr. The Academy confers Lifetime Contribution Awards and Khell Tiatr Awards.

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 632}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Studies and early career

Tor Nessling Studies and early career Nessling's parents were engineer John Nessling and Greta née Grönholm. Nessling did his abitur at the Helsinki coeducational (Swedish language) grammar school in 1920. He continued his studies at the Mechanical Engineering Faculty of the Helsinki University of Technology: simultaneously he studied Geology at the University of Helsinki between 1922 and 1924. Nessling graduated as a diplomi-insinööri in 1924. He traveled in Sweden, the UK, Germany and the USA, and between 1926 and 1928 Nessling worked successively for three Finnish automobile import companies Korpivaara & Halla, Henry-Auto and Auto-Bil. He worked as manager in

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 6, "sc": 632, "ep": 10, "ec": 519}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Studies and early career & Formation of Suomen Autoteollisuus

the auto-business with Munkkisaaren Autotalli ja Konepaja from 1928 to 1929 and then with Autovarikko between 1929 and 1930. Formation of Suomen Autoteollisuus In 1929 Nessling was appointed Technical Manager of the bus and coach builder Autoteollisuus-Bilindustri. Nessling wanted to develop a new branch of industry for his country and in the same year he became interested in starting a lorry and bus industry in Finland. Autoteollisuus–Bilindustri put together its activities with another coachbuilder Osakeyhtiö Autokoritehdas in 1931. The name of the new company was Suomen Autoteollisuus (Finnish Auto-industry) and its first General Manager was John Hellsten. It is often

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 10, "sc": 519, "ep": 10, "ec": 1161}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Formation of Suomen Autoteollisuus

claimed that Nessling was a founder of SAT: he was not. The operation was organised by Karl Arthur Nordgrén, Emil Anton Winckelmann and Lars Wilhelm Åberg. However, the year after the company's creation Nessling was appointed General Manager of the SAT. Starting a vehicle construction business virtually from scratch in the middle of a recession seemed impossible, but under Nessling's determined leadership that is what was achieved. The vehicle brand selected was Sisu, and the first 12 Sisu vehicles rolled out from the factory in 1932. Although the level of domestic content was just 20% at the beginning Nessling was determined

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 10, "sc": 1161, "ep": 10, "ec": 1825}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Formation of Suomen Autoteollisuus

to increase this substantially. Famously, he liked to say : "A Finn is capable of making anything which a foreigner can make." By the end of the 1930s Sisu vehicles contained 40% local content. Nessling strongly lobbied the Finnish government about the growth potential of automotive industry, stressing the employment potential and also the strategic significance of Finnish controlled vehicle production for national defence. However, the government ignored his arguments and progressively cut the import tariffs on heavy vehicles during the 1930s, making competition for the domestic industry more intense. In addition, some of the owners of SAT began to doubt

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 10, "sc": 1825, "ep": 14, "ec": 308}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Formation of Suomen Autoteollisuus & Second World War and Yhteissisu

the prospects for domestic heavy vehicle production. Nessling offered to buy from Helsingin Osakepankki its shares in SAT in 1938. He obtained the shares cheaply, but to finance the bargain he nevertheless had to pledge his wife's entire property. Eventually, Nessling ended up owning 80% of SAT. Second World War and Yhteissisu The Second World War brought new challenges to SAT because many foreign components became unobtainable. The degree of domestic content could be increased to 90%, though only with much effort. A big step forward came with the start of American Hercules engine production under licence. Principle customers for

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 14, "sc": 308, "ep": 14, "ec": 947}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Second World War and Yhteissisu

SAT during the war were the Finnish Defence Forces and other government institutions. SAT started building a new factory in Karis, where it would be less vulnerable to Soviet air raids than Helsinki. The production capacity was not adequate to meet the demand; in 1942 the Defence Forces estimated that they would need 7,000 lorries and buses in the next few years. Nessling suggested building the Karis factory larger than had originally been planned. However, SAT's economic and technical resources were limited, and influential heavy vehicle importers, supported by some political factions, suspected that SAT was exploiting the war to

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 14, "sc": 947, "ep": 14, "ec": 1565}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Second World War and Yhteissisu

benefit unfairly and gain a dominant position in the Finnish market. The government suggested an arrangement in which SAT would have become partly state owned. Nessling ruled this option out, however: he did not want the state to be involved in SAT. The fall-back option was creation of another company with support of the state and some significant Finnish companies. Such a company, Yhteissisu, was formed in 1943 and Tor Nessling, most reluctantly, found himself installed its General Manager. Yhteissisu started building Sisu lorries in Vanaja, some 100 km (63 miles) to the north of Helsinki. But war gave way to

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 14, "sc": 1565, "ep": 14, "ec": 2260}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Second World War and Yhteissisu

peace before Yhteissisu's capability to build military trucks had come fully on stream. Nessling left his post with Yhteissisu in 1946, complaining of lack of support from the company owners. Yhteissisu lorry production was redirected to the civilian market, and in 1948 the company was renamed "Vanajan Autotehdas" (VAT). By now Nessling was becoming increasingly embittered with the Finnish government. First his ideas about domestic heavy vehicle production were ignored in the 1930s, and then the government had forced through the creation of a powerful competitor which had established itself by using technology developed by Nessling's company. Disenchantment with the politicians

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 14, "sc": 2260, "ep": 18, "ec": 425}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Second World War and Yhteissisu & Post-war growth of SAT

was in evidence when the government offered Nessling beneficial funding opportunities in the 1960s: he replied that he had never requested, and would never ask for anything from the government. Post-war growth of SAT Production of SAT grew strongly in the 1950s and 1960s; the volumes quadrupled to 800 vehicles per year during the 1950s. In addition to producing lorries and bus chassis, the company provided trams and rail vehicles to the Finnish State Railways. SAT products were exported to four continents. The growing volumes both required and benefited from investment in production facilities and sales and marketing campaigns. Unlike

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 18, "sc": 425, "ep": 22, "ec": 469}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Post-war growth of SAT & Merger with VAT and resignation

many contemporary industrialists, Nessling valued marketing, and he focused closely on identifying, understanding and satisfying customer needs. Merger with VAT and resignation SAT's leading domestic competitor, Vanajan Autotehdas, was in financial trouble by end of the 1960s. Nessling proposed a merger between Vanajan Autotehdas and SAT because he was afraid that a foreign competitor, such as Volvo or Scania, would otherwise take over Vanajan Autotehdas. The companies came together in 1968. In the end, the merger led to a situation that Nessling had wanted to avoid: the state became a part-owner of the new SAT with a 17% shareholding and

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 22, "sc": 469, "ep": 22, "ec": 1097}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Merger with VAT and resignation

Nessling lost his controlling majority as his own holding fell to below 50%. SAT acquired an executive board of directors and a supervisory board. Although Nessling was still the company's principal shareholder, his influence was diminished: he had very little recent experience of receiving orders or of operating with a board of directors, and he found adapting to the new situation difficult. Relations between Nessling and the board got worse when Nessling fell ill: he recovered, but not sufficiently to be able to work as before, although he was keen to continue with his role in the company management. The board

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 22, "sc": 1097, "ep": 26, "ec": 88}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Merger with VAT and resignation & Personal life and death

was not convinced and reorganised the company structure. Nessling resisted the transfer of marketing responsibilities to other hands but could not prevent it. Nessling's old business partner and friend, then head of British Leyland Motor Corporation, Lord Stokes, whom Nessling greatly respected, eventually persuaded him to step aside. Tor Nessling announced his resignation as General Manager of Suomen Autoteollisuus in June 1970, after leading the company for nearly four decades. Erik Gillberg was appointed the new General Manager in February 1971. Personal life and death Nessling worked hard and shunned the limelight. He worked closely with a small number of

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 26, "sc": 88, "ep": 26, "ec": 720}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Personal life and death

trusted colleagues, but many colleagues and underlings remembered his leadership style as patriarchal and distant. He resisted delegating decisions. He is described as a brilliant businessman who had the ability to spot business opportunities, but he was also a quick tempered, and was found by some to be excessively risk-averse. The tough industrialist also had his softer side: he liked nature and animals, and he kept many pets at his home. Nessling had married in 1926 Greta Maria "Maj" (née Kock) who stayed home as a housewife while supporting her husband in his career. The marriage was childless, and when Nessling

{"datasets_id": 162239, "wiki_id": "Q2043093", "sp": 26, "sc": 720, "ep": 26, "ec": 938}

Q2043093

Tor Nessling

Personal life and death

died in 1971 his widow sold the family share in SAT. In 1972 she bequeathed their property to establish the Maj and Tor Nessling Foundation. The foundation is a significant funder of environmental research in Finland.

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 571}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Founding

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Founding The first settlers, of German, Welsh, and Dutch descent, arrived in Towamencin Township around the turn of the 18th century. They mainly pursued agricultural endeavors to sustain their livelihood. The first grant of land in Towamencin Township was in 1703 from William Penn's Commissioners to Benjamin Furley on June 8. The Commissioners granted 1,000 acres (4 km²) to him. On June 17 of that same year, Abraham Tennis and Jan Lucken bought the property from him, and then divided the land in half in 1709. The Edward Morgan Log House stands on land that was part

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 6, "sc": 571, "ep": 6, "ec": 1196}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Founding

of 600 acres (2.4 km²) granted to Griffith Jones by the Commissioners. Edward Morgan purchased 309 acres (1.25 km²) of this land, which included an existing "dwelling house", from Griffith Jones on February 26, 1708. In 1720, his daughter Sarah, who in 1734 would give birth to the famous frontiersman Daniel Boone, married Squire Boone. The land containing the house was then deeded to John Morgan, son of Edward, on August 23, 1723 as part of a 104-acre (.42 km²) tract. In March 1728 the settlers of the area petitioned William Penn's Commissioners for Towamencin to become a Township. The request was granted and

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 6, "sc": 1196, "ep": 10, "ec": 276}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Founding & The Indians of Towamencin

a charter given. The land was surveyed and recorded, outlining the boundaries of the Township, known as antioch. Those boundaries are similar to what they are today. In the enumeration of 1734 there were 32 landholders within the Township, with William Tennis having the most area at 250 acres (1 km²). The Indians of Towamencin The American Indians who inhabited the area were the Lenni Lenape. They lived in Pennsylvania, as well as Delaware, New Jersey, and parts of Maryland. They were divided into three tribes: the Turtle, Turkeys, and Wolf, which were subdivided into clans, each clan having a name

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 10, "sc": 276, "ep": 10, "ec": 906}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

The Indians of Towamencin

representing the character and situation of the tribe as a whole. The Indians of Towamencin Township are of the Delaware Nation. They had a settlement in the southwest section of the Township along the Towamencin Creek. They established friendly relations with the settlers when they came to the Township. There are some accounts of violence attributed to the Indians, but they cannot be proven and are probably fictional. There are many accounts of Indians helping to tend the sick, and trading food and goods with the settlers. It is not recorded when the tribes of Indians left Towamencin; it is suspected they

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 10, "sc": 906, "ep": 14, "ec": 474}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

The Indians of Towamencin & American Revolutionary War

left after the Revolutionary War. The Maltese Cross of the Towamencin Volunteer Fire Company has an American Indian in the center. American Revolutionary War Pennsylvania is known as the Keystone State for its role in the Revolution, and as one of the oldest settlements during the time, Towamencin Township played a part: the Township had encampments of soldiers, had many citizens that served, and was the retreating place for General Washington and his troops after the Battle of Germantown. The Continental Army troops were in Towamencin from October 8, 1777 to October 16, 1777 and camped in the Northern section of the

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 14, "sc": 474, "ep": 14, "ec": 1141}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

American Revolutionary War

Township. The Township provided a secure area to rest, without fear of surprise attack by the British. Washington commandeered Frederick Wampole's house to establish his quarters and conducted military duties from there. The house was located on Wambold Road. General Francis Nash was wounded at the Battle of Germantown and was carried from Germantown to Towamencin. He was cared for in a house, according to Washington's writings, located "a mile-and-a-quarter south of the Great North Wales Turnpike," now Sumneytown Pike, along with other wounded men of the Battle of Germantown. He died two days later and is buried at the present-day Towamencin

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 14, "sc": 1141, "ep": 18, "ec": 169}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

American Revolutionary War & Geography

Mennonite Church cemetery, known then as the Towamencin Mennonite Meetinghouse. It was reported that Henry Cassel, whose land was used as an encampment by the Colonists, submitted to the Continental Congress an estimate of damages to his property by Washington's Army. The damage was to 696 fence rails used for firewood. The cost to replace those rails was 8.14 pounds. It is not known whether the newly formed government paid. Geography According to the United States Census Bureau, the township has a total area of 9.7 square miles (25.1 km²), all of it land. It is drained via the Skippack Creek into the

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 18, "sc": 169, "ep": 22, "ec": 95}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Geography & Township Strategic Plan

Perkiomen Creek and Schuylkill River. Its villages include Inglewood, Kulpsville, and Oak Park (also in Hatfield Township.) The Lansdale Interchange to Interstate 476 is with Sumneytown Pike (Route 63) in Kulpsville. Other roads of note include Allentown Road, Bustard Road/Forty Foot Road, Morris Road, Valley Forge Road (Route 363,) Wambold Road, and Welsh Road. 63 follows Forty Foot Road and Welsh Road east into Lansdale. The township boundaries consists entirely of straight sides at right angles and most of its boundaries consist of roads. Township Strategic Plan The Towamencin Township Board of Supervisors recognized the need for a Five-Year Strategic Plan

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 22, "sc": 95, "ep": 22, "ec": 734}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Township Strategic Plan

during the 2007 budget process. In early 2007 the Board authorized the formation of a Strategic Planning Committee. A committee of five residents, two supervisors, and the Township Manager was formed in late February, charged with developing a Five-Year Strategic Plan and a goal of completing it in time for the 2008 budget process. The committee expanded to six residents in mid-May. The committee began weekly meetings in March 2007, starting with the task of developing a Community Vision and Mission Statement. They then received planning inputs from all Department Heads and the Township Manager. At the end of the

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 22, "sc": 734, "ep": 26, "ec": 53}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Township Strategic Plan & Name

input process, the committee developed Priorities, which were then voted on by each member of the committee for prioritization. The committee then developed Goals, Sustainability Objectives and Implementation Tools and Techniques for each of the Priorities, segmenting them by areas of the Township Budget. The Strategic Plan was then briefed to the Board of Supervisors 22 August 2007 by Mr. Fred Seipt, who represented the entire committee. The plan was accepted and approved by the Board of Supervisors 26 September 2007. The Strategic Plan has been updated every year since. Name The name Towamencin is of Native American origin, and

{"datasets_id": 162240, "wiki_id": "Q5485568", "sp": 26, "sc": 53, "ep": 26, "ec": 502}

Q5485568

Towamencin Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Name

means "Poplar Tree". An alternate etymology is a legend associated started in the 1720s when Heinrich Fry purchased some land near what is now known as the Towamencin Creek. On this tract of land was a Native village whose chief spoke broken English. He observed one day two men clearing trees near the creek and said "Towha-men-seen", meaning "Two men seen." As the legend goes, the chief's pronunciation stuck, and is how Towamencin got its name.

{"datasets_id": 162241, "wiki_id": "Q7829564", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 4, "ec": 599}

Q7829564

Toward Soviet America

Toward Soviet America Toward Soviet America is a book written by Communist Party, USA Chairman William Z. Foster in 1932. The book documented the rise of socialism in the Soviet Union, the crisis facing capitalism, the need for revolution, and a vision of what a socialist society would be like. The book also attacks social-democrats and liberals calling them "Social Fascists" because they seek to give the masses concessions in order to calm them and prevent communist revolution. The book was reprinted in 1961 by the House Un-American Activities Committee as an exposé of the purported communist conspiracy. The book

{"datasets_id": 162241, "wiki_id": "Q7829564", "sp": 4, "sc": 599, "ep": 4, "ec": 664}

Q7829564

Toward Soviet America

remains popular among orthodox Marxist-Leninists and Stalinists.

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 643}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Background

Triennial Convention Background Distinguished from other churches by their commitment to believer's baptism, congregational autonomy and the separation of church and state, Baptists have been present in the United States since Roger Williams founded the First Baptist Church in America at Providence, Rhode Island, in 1638. Baptist churches were soon found elsewhere in colonial America. The First Baptist Church of Boston was founded in 1665, and Pennepack Baptist Church in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was organized in 1688. The founding of First Baptist Church of Charleston, South Carolina in the late 1690s marked the spread of Baptists to the South. In the 18th

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 6, "sc": 643, "ep": 6, "ec": 1401}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Background

and 19th centuries, Baptists began forming regional associations and societies to foster cooperation in missionary, benevolent, and educational work. The voluntary nature of these associations was consistent with Baptist belief in the autonomy of local congregations. Associations could determine their own standards for fellowship and offer advice to churches, but local congregations governed themselves and ordained their own ministers. The first permanent Baptist association in America was the Philadelphia Association, established in 1707. The Second Great Awakening inspired the establishment of foreign missions agencies to spread the Christian religion throughout the world. In 1810, the Congregationalists established the American Board of

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 6, "sc": 1401, "ep": 10, "ec": 287}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Background & Organization and growth

Commissioners for Foreign Missions. Two years later, the Congregationalist Board sent Adoniram Judson, Jr. (1788–1850), Ann Hasseltine Judson (1789–1826), and Luther Rice to India. Upon arrival, however, the three missionaries repudiated infant baptism and became Baptists under the influence of British missionary William Carey (1761–1834), a founder of Britain's Baptist Missionary Society. Organization and growth Carey and the three American missionaries mobilized Baptists in America to support the Judsons' planned mission trip to Burma. Their efforts led to the creation in 1814 of the General Missionary Convention of the Baptist Denomination in the United States of America for Foreign Missions.

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 10, "sc": 287, "ep": 10, "ec": 978}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Organization and growth

The Convention was tasked with collecting funds from Baptist groups and individuals to support foreign missions. The Convention was called "Triennial" because the national convention met every three years. Members of the denomination were called American Baptists or Triennial Baptists. At its first meeting, the American Baptist Missionary Union for foreign missions was created, and the denomination sent missionaries to China, Africa, and South America. Additional state or regional Baptist conventions were formed along with other societies, such as the Baptist General Tract Society (later renamed the American Baptist Publication Society) in 1824 and the Home Mission Society in 1832.

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 10, "sc": 978, "ep": 10, "ec": 1693}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Organization and growth

The various societies held their own conventions during sessions of the Triennial Convention. By 1840, Baptists were in every state and territory as well as missions around the world. Alongside the Methodists, Baptists had grown to be one of the two largest denominations in the United States. Nevertheless, there were Baptists who opposed efforts to establish missions boards and denominational agencies as unbiblical. These Baptists became known as "anti-mission" or Primitive Baptists, while those who supported organized missionary work became known as Missionary Baptists. As early as 1838, African-American Baptists began organizing their own associations and conventions. Immigrants, such as Danish,

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 10, "sc": 1693, "ep": 14, "ec": 511}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Organization and growth & Southern Baptist split

Norwegian, Swedish and German Americans, also formed their own Baptist denominations along ethnic lines rather than affiliate with the Anglo-American oriented Triennial Convention. Southern Baptist split The Triennial Convention attempted to take no stated position on slavery. This moderate position allowed both abolitionists and slavery supporters to remain in the denomination. The majority of Triennial Baptists in the Northeast opposed slavery, while the growing number of Triennial Baptists in the Southeast supported slavery. In 1843, the abolitionists in the Northeast founded the Northern Baptist Mission Society in opposition to slavery. In 1844, the Home Mission Society refused to ordain James

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 14, "sc": 511, "ep": 16, "ec": 6}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Southern Baptist split & Later history

E. Reeve of Georgia as a missionary because he was put forward as a slaveholder. They refused to decide on the basis of slavery. In May 1845, in Augusta, Georgia, the slavery supporters in the Southeast broke with the Triennial Convention and founded the Southern Baptist Convention. The Triennial Baptists were concentrated in the Northeast. The abolitionists in the Northeast inherited the Triennial Convention and the Northern Baptist Mission Society was dissolved. After the split, authorization was given to change the name to the American Baptist Missionary Union. William Bullein Johnson joined the Southern Baptists. Later

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 16, "sc": 5, "ep": 18, "ec": 675}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Later history

history During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Triennial Convention took no official position on Evolution. This moderate position accepted the Bible and science and allowed both Fundamentalists and liberals to remain in the denomination, but it also contradicted the New Hampshire Confession and the Bible. The liberals in the urban Northeast accepted the position, while the Fundamentalists in the rural Northeast rejected the position but remained in the Triennial Convention. The Triennial Baptists supported Progressivism and the Social Gospel, but not the more radical ideas of Walter Rauschenbusch (1861–1918) and other Christian Socialists. In 1888, the Triennial

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 18, "sc": 675, "ep": 18, "ec": 1380}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Later history

Convention founded the American Baptist Education Society to organize support for affiliated schools, colleges, and seminaries. On May 17, 1907 in Washington, D.C., the Triennial Convention organized the American Baptist Education Society, the American Baptist Home Mission Society, the American Baptist Missionary Union, and the American Baptist Publication Society into a new Northern Baptist Convention. Governor of New York, Charles Evans Hughes (April 11, 1862 – August 27, 1948, served since 1907) (Republican) was elected the first Northern Baptist Convention president, but he continued his job as Governor. 29th President of the United States, Warren Gamaliel Harding (November 2, 1865 –

{"datasets_id": 162242, "wiki_id": "Q7841438", "sp": 18, "sc": 1380, "ep": 18, "ec": 1684}

Q7841438

Triennial Convention

Later history

August 2, 1923, served March 4, 1921 – August 2, 1923) (Republican) was a Baptist by upbringing, faith, and self-identification, but he was a member of the Masonic Lodge. The Northern Baptist Convention was renamed the American Baptist Convention in 1950, and the American Baptist Churches, USA in 1972.

{"datasets_id": 162243, "wiki_id": "Q7843565", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 587}

Q7843565

Triplemanía V-B

Background

Triplemanía V-B Background In early 1992 Antonio Peña was working as a booker and storyline writer for Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre (CMLL), Mexico's largest and the world's oldest wrestling promotion, and was frustrated by CMLL's very conservative approach to lucha libre. He joined forced with a number of younger, very talented wrestlers who felt like CMLL was not giving them the recognition they deserved and decided to split from CMLL to create Asistencia Asesoría y Administración, later known simply as "AAA" or Triple A. After making a deal with the Televisa television network AAA held their first show

{"datasets_id": 162243, "wiki_id": "Q7843565", "sp": 6, "sc": 587, "ep": 10, "ec": 255}

Q7843565

Triplemanía V-B

Background & Storylines

in April 1992. The following year Peña and AAA held their first Triplemanía event, building it into an annual event that would become AAA's Super Bowl event, similar to the WWE's WrestleMania being the biggest show of the year. The 1997 Triplemanía was the fifth year in a row AAA held a Triplemanía show and the twelfth overall show under the Triplemanía banner. Storylines The Triplemanía V-B show featured eight professional wrestling matches with different wrestlers involved in pre-existing scripted feuds, plots and storylines. Wrestlers were portrayed as either heels (referred to as rudos in Mexico, those that portray the

{"datasets_id": 162243, "wiki_id": "Q7843565", "sp": 10, "sc": 255, "ep": 10, "ec": 438}

Q7843565

Triplemanía V-B

Storylines

"bad guys") or faces (técnicos in Mexico, the "good guy" characters) as they followed a series of tension-building events, which culminated in a wrestling match or series of matches.

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 2, "sc": 0, "ep": 6, "ec": 621}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Background

Trump Tower meeting Background Prior to the Trump Tower meeting, Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos met at least twice with Joseph Mifsud who asserted his awareness that Russians had thousands of emails that were damaging to Hillary Clinton. This occurred before the hacking of the DNC computers had become public knowledge. Papadopoulos later shared this information with at least two other people, including an Australian diplomat to Britain. At a meeting on March 24, 2016, the professor brought along a Russian woman, Olga Polonskaya. Papadopoulos made multiple unsuccessful attempts to set up meetings in Russia between Trump or members of

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 6, "sc": 621, "ep": 6, "ec": 1269}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Background

his campaign and Russian officials. He communicated his proposals and interactions to several Trump campaign officials. In October 2017 he pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI about his actions. On June 3, 2016, before the public was made aware of potential Russian interference in the presidential election, Donald Trump Jr. was contacted by Rob Goldstone, a British music publicist whose association with the Trumps dates back to the Miss Universe 2013 pageant held in Moscow; at that time, Trump Jr.'s father, businessman Donald Trump, had been co-owner of the pageant. Goldstone's client, Emin Agalarov, an

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 6, "sc": 1269, "ep": 6, "ec": 1925}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Background

Azerbaijani singer, performed at the Miss Universe event. His father, Aras Agalarov, is a wealthy real estate developer in Moscow. In his June 3 email to Trump Jr., Goldstone wrote: Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 6, "sc": 1925, "ep": 6, "ec": 2512}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Background

government’s support for Mr. Trump – helped along by Aras and Emin. Trump Jr. responded: Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back? In a June 7 email, it was agreed that the material would be delivered to Trump Jr. by an unnamed "Russian government attorney". At the meeting, Goldstone introduced this person as Moscow-based attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya.

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 6, "sc": 2512, "ep": 10, "ec": 129}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Background & Trump Tower meeting

She stated that she was not a government official, however she is known to have ties to the Russian government and later described herself as an "informant" to the office of the Russian prosecutor general. According to Goldstone, she had planned to be in New York for a court appearance on June 9. Trump Jr. offered an in-person meeting that afternoon, which Goldstone confirmed. Trump Jr. forwarded the email thread to Kushner and Manafort. Trump Tower meeting The arranged meeting took place at Trump Tower in the afternoon of June 9, 2016. At least eight people attended. When the meeting

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 10, "sc": 129, "ep": 14, "ec": 418}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Trump Tower meeting & Purpose

first became known, conflicting accounts of who attended circulated. With time, more names came forward. At first, Donald Trump, Jr. did not disclose that Irakly "Ike" Kaveladze, Rob Goldstone, and Anatoli Samachornov attended the meeting. Purpose Trump Jr. initially told reporters that the meeting had been "primarily about adoptions". He then released a statement saying it had been a "short introductory meeting" concerning "a program about the adoption of Russian children". A few days later Trump Jr. acknowledged that he went into the meeting expecting to receive opposition research from Veselnitskaya that could hurt Clinton's campaign, adding that none was

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 14, "sc": 418, "ep": 14, "ec": 1050}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Purpose

presented and that the conversation instead focused on the Magnitsky Act. Later a statement from Trump Jr.'s lawyer said Veselnitskaya had claimed to have information "that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton" but "it quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information". Trump Jr. said he felt the adoption issue was her "true agenda all along" and the claims of helpful political information were a pretext. After learning that the New York Times was about to publish the series of emails setting up the meeting, Trump Jr. himself published the email

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 14, "sc": 1050, "ep": 14, "ec": 1677}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Purpose

chain via Twitter, and explained that he considered the meeting to be "political opposition research". He summarized the meeting as "such a nothing... a wasted 20 minutes". Veselnitskaya said that she intended to provide allegations to the Trump campaign about a firm connected to William Browder, a financier who lobbied for the Magnitsky Act. She said that the firm committed tax evasion in Russia and donated to Democrats. She said in an interview, "I never had any damaging or sensitive information about Hillary Clinton. It was never my intention to have that." She initially denied the allegation that she was or

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 14, "sc": 1677, "ep": 18, "ec": 52}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Purpose & Disclosure timeline

is connected to the Russian government. At a later date she disclosed that she was in regular contact with the Russian Prosecutor General's office and with Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, about sharing information she acquired in her investigation relating to the Magnitsky Act. On July 14, Akhmetshin stated in an interview that Veselnitskaya had claimed to have evidence of "violations of Russian law by a Democratic donor", and added that she "described her findings at the meeting and left a document about them with Trump Jr. and the others." Disclosure timeline The meeting, which took place on June 9, 2016, first

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 52, "ep": 18, "ec": 649}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

came to the attention of authorities in April 2017, when Kushner reported on a revised security clearance form that he had met with Veselnitskaya. On July 8, 2017, The New York Times first mentioned a June 2016 meeting with "a Russian lawyer who has connections to the Kremlin", arranged by Trump Jr. and including Kushner and Manafort. Later that day, Trump Jr. released a statement calling it a "short introductory meeting" about American adoption of Russian children and "not a campaign issue". The next day it emerged that Goldstone had told Trump Jr. that the meeting would provide the Trump

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 649, "ep": 18, "ec": 1249}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

campaign with negative information about Clinton, and that this offer was "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump", without mentioning adoptions or the Magnitsky Act. Trump Jr. reacted by acknowledging that he had been expecting information about Clinton. Over the next few days the identity of the attendees was established. On July 11 Trump Jr. tweeted the entire email chain leading up to the meeting, a few minutes before The New York Times published it as well. Trump Jr. stated that he would have preferred to just have a phone call but that didn't work out. He told

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 1249, "ep": 18, "ec": 1856}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

Sean Hannity that the meeting had been fully arranged by email, and that he had received no further details by phone. He would later contradict this statement during a closed-door interview with the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 7, acknowledging three short phone calls with Agalarov prior to the meeting. On July 12, 2017, President Trump stated in a Reuters interview that he had only known about the meeting for a couple of days, and that "many people would have held that meeting". Trump praised his son Don Jr. for his transparency in releasing the emails, and claimed that they were

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 1856, "ep": 18, "ec": 2395}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

victims of a "political witch hunt". The same day Trump Jr. denied having told his father about the meeting. On July 13, Corey Lewandowski was asked on NBC's Meet the Press why he had not been invited to the meeting. He replied that he was at a Trump rally in Florida on the meeting date, but there was in fact no rally in Florida that day. Instead, Trump attended a Trump Victory fundraising lunch at the Four Seasons Hotel in New York, and returned to Trump Tower at 1:02 PM, where he "remained for the rest of the afternoon". According

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 2395, "ep": 18, "ec": 2982}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

to emails, the Veselnitskaya meeting was scheduled for 4:00 PM. The July 8 statement by Trump Jr. became controversial in its own right because of conflicting stories about who had written it. On July 11 it was reported that the statement had been drafted by presidential advisers aboard Air Force One on the way home from the G20 summit in Germany, and that it had been approved by President Trump. On July 12 Trump's lawyer Jay Sekulow insisted that it had been written by Trump Jr. in consultation with his lawyer, and that Donald Trump "wasn't involved in that". He repeated

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 2982, "ep": 18, "ec": 3648}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

these statements on July 16. On July 31 The Washington Post reported that Trump had indeed personally dictated, worked on, and released the statement in Trump Jr's name, with claims that "were later shown to be misleading". According to The Post, Trump had "overruled the consensus" of Trump Jr., Kushner, aides, and lawyers, who favored issuing a transparent account "because they believed the complete story would eventually emerge." Some advisors reportedly feared "that the president’s direct involvement leaves him needlessly vulnerable to allegations of a coverup." The next day, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated that Trump "certainly

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 3648, "ep": 18, "ec": 4309}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

didn't dictate, but ... he weighed in, offered suggestions, like any father would do". In January 2018, in a confidential letter from Trump's legal team to special counsel Robert Mueller, Trump's lawyers acknowledged for the first time that Trump had in fact dictated the first statement put out about the meeting in Trump Jr.'s name, thus contradicting prior representations. Although Goldstone's emails described Veselnitskaya as a "Russian government attorney", Scott Balber, formerly a lawyer for Trump and now for Agalarov, said in a July 14, 2017, interview that she had no association with the Russian government. For his part, Akhmetshin denied

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 4309, "ep": 18, "ec": 4958}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

having ties to Russian intelligence, and said that the efforts by Veselnitskaya and himself "were not coordinated with the Russian government." Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the government didn't know Akhmetshin or Veselnitskaya, or anything about the meeting. In a November 2017 statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Veselnitskaya said "I have no relationship with Mr. Chaika, his representatives and his institutions other than those related to my professional functions as a lawyer." However she also stated in April 2018: “I am a lawyer, and I am an informant,” adding that "since 2013, I have been actively communicating with the

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 4958, "ep": 18, "ec": 5592}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

office of the Russian prosecutor general," Yury Chaika. CNN reported on October 9 that Balber had obtained the memo which Veselnitskaya took to the meeting, and it was released by Foreign Policy. It should be noted, though, that Veselnitskaya was Balber's only source for the document, as well as the only source of the claim that this is the same document that was brought to the Trump Tower meeting; this matters because Veselnitskaya has elsewhere been indicted on charges of falsifying the origin of another document which she helped draft and release to US investigators in a separate investigation which is also

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 5592, "ep": 18, "ec": 6301}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

related to William Browder and the Magnitsky Act. The memo released by Veselnitskaya claimed that an American firm, Ziff Brothers Investments, illegally evaded tens of millions of dollars in Russian taxes, and contributed to Clinton's election campaign. Veselnitskaya reportedly coordinated this accusation in advance with Chaika, and Putin later repeated the charge. Two previously undisclosed emails from Rob Goldstone emerged on December 7, as discovered by congressional investigators. The recipients included Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort. In a June 14, 2016, email, five days after the meeting, Goldstone forwarded a news story about Russian hacking of Democrats' emails, describing the news

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 6301, "ep": 18, "ec": 6919}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline

as "eerily weird" in light of what had been discussed at Trump Tower. This discovery contradicted the initial statement by Trump Jr. that "there was no follow up" after the meeting, as well as his September 2017 testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee in which he stated: "Rob, Emin and I never discussed the meeting again". On May 16, 2018, the Senate Judiciary Committee released emails and text messages in which Trump attorney Alan S. Futerfas provided a prepared statement for Goldstone, Agalarov and Kaveladze, further asserting that it "would be our preference" if they did not say anything else in

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 18, "sc": 6919, "ep": 22, "ec": 147}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Disclosure timeline & Congressional reactions

response to inquiries about the meeting. In May 2018, transcripts released by Senate Judiciary Committee revealed that Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya had met with Glenn Simpson who was the co-founder of Fusion GPS, both the day before and the day after she met with Donald Trump, Jr. The two had worked together on an unrelated litigation matter from 2014 through mid- to late-2016. Michael Cohen asserted in July 2018 that the president knew of the Tower meeting in advance. Congressional reactions Democratic Representatives Brad Sherman and Al Green sponsored a resolution to impeach President Trump. Sherman argued that Trump Jr.'s emails "add

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 22, "sc": 147, "ep": 22, "ec": 777}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Congressional reactions

credibility" to the theory that Trump dismissed James Comey as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as an attempt to derail the ongoing investigation. On July 10, 2017, the Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Democratic Senator Mark Warner, stated that "This is the first time that the public has seen clear evidence of senior level members of the Trump campaign meeting Russians to try to obtain information that might hurt the campaign of Hillary Clinton". Warner also stated that the incident was part of a "continuing pattern" in which Trump officials and members of the Trump campaign have

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 22, "sc": 777, "ep": 22, "ec": 1451}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Congressional reactions

"conveniently forgotten meetings with Russians only when they are then presented with evidence, they have to recant and acknowledge those kind of meetings". Another member of the committee, the Republican Susan Collins, stated that Donald Trump Jr. and others who attended the meeting should testify before the committee. Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, described the matter as "a very serious development", and that "It all warrants thorough investigation. Everyone who was in that meeting ought to come before our committee." Republicans in Congress have been for the most part muted with their comments about the

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 22, "sc": 1451, "ep": 26, "ec": 226}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Congressional reactions & Other reactions

event. On July 10, 2017, Representative Ted Yoho (R-FL) when asked in an interview if he thought it was appropriate for Trump Jr. to take a meeting with a Russian national, responded that he "probably would have done the same thing” calling it “opposition research". On July 11, 2017, Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) suggested that "the president’s son may have been 'duped' into attending the meeting". Other reactions The meeting was regarded by some commentators as evidence of attempted collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. A statement issued by Mark Corallo, former spokesperson for Trump's legal team, suggested that the

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 26, "sc": 226, "ep": 30, "ec": 431}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Other reactions & Congressional investigation

meeting was a "setup" and that Veselnitskaya and her translator had “misrepresented who they were”. He implied that the Russian lawyer was connected to the Clintons through British ex-spy Christopher Steele. Congressional investigation The Senate Intelligence Committee held a private hearing with Kushner on July 24. In the meeting he responded to questions by the Committee about his contacts with Russian officials and insisted that he had not colluded with foreign agents. He publicly released an 11-page written statement detailing four meetings he had with Russian officials during the campaign and transition periods, including the Trump Tower meeting. He said

{"datasets_id": 162244, "wiki_id": "Q33015021", "sp": 30, "sc": 431, "ep": 30, "ec": 1051}

Q33015021

Trump Tower meeting

Congressional investigation

he had not known all the details about that meeting because he did not read all of the email chain that Trump Jr. had forwarded to him. The Intelligence Committee also met privately with Manafort on July 25. The Committee on the Judiciary scheduled a hearing on July 26 on the subject "Oversight of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and Attempts to Influence U.S. Elections: Lessons Learned from Current and Prior Administrations". Trump Jr. and Manafort were originally scheduled to testify at that hearing, but each negotiated to meet privately with the committee on July 25 instead. They have also arranged