text:
French competition autority forcing Google into (kind of) access regulation
Tagaccess regulation, Ancillary copyright for press publishers, Antitrust Law, Autorité de la Concurrence, Copyright, design souverenity, Competition law, Kartellrecht Boutique, Leistungsschutzrecht, LSR, Abuse of market power, Must Carry, Neighbouring Right, press publisher, Refusal to deal, Regulatory, Access
Google has been imposed various provisional obligations by the French competition authority Autorité de la Concurrence in connection with the enforcement of the so-called ancillary copyright for press publishers. The company must therefore enter into a negotiation process with the French publishing industry regarding remuneration. Furthermore, Google is not allowed to hide their content. What is the background? Which law is being enforced here and why does antitrust law have to come into play once again? Detailed commentary in German can be found on telemedicus.info.
Summary of the decision
Several publishers had complained to the French competition authority about Google's conduct in relation to Art. L.218 Code de la propriété intellectuelle (CPI). The authority subsequently took up the matter and initiated abuse proceedings. It came to the preliminary conclusion that the company was likely to abuse its market power through its previous practice. In its decision of 20.4.2020, it therefore issued interim measures. Here is a summary of the injunctions:
Obligation to negotiate in good faith on remuneration in accordance with the terms of Art. L218-4 CPI with retroactive effect to the period since 24.10.2019 within three months of request (also possible through collecting societies)
Transmission of the necessary information specified in Art. L218-4 within three months of request (also possible through collecting societies)
Must carry provisions:
Retention of the presentation introduced since the introduction of the French ancillary copyright and no delisting
No impairment of the indexing, classification or presentation of the protected contents by negotiations or information supply
No impairment of other economic relations between Google and publishers through negotiations or the supply of information
First report on implementation of commitments four weeks after the start of negotiations, and every month thereafter
These decisions shall apply provisionally and without prejudice to further investigations by the Authority. This means that the outcome of the main proceedings is still open for the time being. However, the reasons for the adoption of such provisional measures must be weighty, so that this decision clearly indicates the authority's assessment under competition law.
What is press ancillary copyright law about?
The ancillary copyright law for press publishers is a new instrument in copyright law. However, it is not possible to speak of one ancillary copyright in this context. Because there are different variants. The political ideas behind it – not its actual legal object – can be summarised roughly like this: Google should pay the publishers. The specific instrument is actually irrelevant, but at the time the path chosen was that of a ancillary copyright. Ancillary copyrights in general are so-called neighbouring rights to copyright. They serve to protect investments.
A first implementation of this kind of acillary copyright for press publishers in Germany a few years ago can easily be described as futile in the end. Initially, the actual goals were not achieved, namely Google's direct payment obligation towards the publishing industry. Instead, there was only a new right of prohibition. Several attempts to enforce this ancillary copyright law failed afterwards. Finally, the German law was also overturned by the ECJ because the German legislator had not complied with his notification obligation. Simon Assion and I had pointed out this risk early on.
The next step was a European manifestation in the Copyright Directive. The Art. 15 included there can confidently compete with Art. 17 ("upload filter"), which caused considerable controversy last year. Directives do not regularly apply directly to all, but must first be implemented by the member states. However, the text of Art. 15 again indicates that it is a right of prohibition.
How did it start in France?
Very early last year, France introduced its own regulations on an ancillary copyright in its copyright law Code de la propriété intellectuelle (CPI). The full text of the entire chapter in the law can be found here. According to Art. L218-2 CPI, any reproduction or public communication in digital form by an online public communication service of all or part of the press products requires the permission of the press publisher or press agency. This provision also initially corresponds to a pure right of prohibition. However, there are further provisions in Art. L218-4 concerning the amount of a remuneration. This is to be determined either on the basis of the revenue from each type of direct or indirect use or, failing that, on a flat-rate basis. The latter is not even rare in itself; rather, collective remuneration tariffs are quite common in collective copyright law. However, this does not yet result in a positive listing obligation at a positive fee as desired by the publishers. The latter should continue to be based on the financial, material and personnel investments made by publishers and press agencies, the contribution of press publications to political and general information and the importance of the use of press publications by public online communication services. The French ancillary copyrith therefore also does not make any statement on the need to list the content regulated by it. It only regulates the consequences if the content is listed. In this context, however, it is interesting to note an included obligation of public online communication services to provide information on the use of press publications by their users as well as all other information necessary for a transparent assessment of the remuneration and its distribution. However, this can only be understood again as being in connection with the negotiation of a remuneration, if the content is to be listed at all.
As a result, Google reacted in a similar way to other companies: the publishers were asked to give their permission to use the content in a very abbreviated form – without monetary compensation. This was done in connection with an overall differentiated design of the entire process, as snippets can be presented. The publishers are thus basically given the opportunity to determine the scope and presentation of the snippets on Google to a large extent themselves. Only in cases in which infringements of the ancillary copyright and a subsequent obligation to pay remuneration would be possible does Google provide for the granting of a licence at a price of X=0. The company has already been successful in Germany for these cases. The German Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt – BKartA) had already decided in 2015 that the listing was basically objectively justified by the fact that Google would retain its otherwise permissible business model and protect itself against possible claims for damages based on the German ancillary copyright.
From this, two main statements can be made: Firstly, even a company with market power has a legitimate interest in not breaking the law. Secondly, the business model of the search engine as such cannot be objected to in principle. We will recall this second sentence when the French competition authority accuses Google of trying to impose a "general principle" of non-remuneration.
However, the main conflict arises from the political interests. This is not only aimed at a ban on the use of snippets, i.e. the ability of publishers to ban them, but rather the need for Google to license them. However, this does not result from the existing German or French copyright law, nor does it result from the Copyright Directive. Copyright law is therefore of no help. For this reason, it is worth taking a look at the antitrust law, which in principle provides for the possibility of a compulsory deal – but again only if the refusal to deal itself was abusive. The BKartA's investigation also went in this direction. In addition, a company with market power can be controlled with regard to the amount of its fees. However, this would not be limited to the fees, prices or similar exchange conditions in connection with an ancillary copyright.
How does the French authority conclude this?
Consequently, the authority's decision is based on the ban on abuse of market power under cartel law. This is similar to the German regulations and is also otherwise similar to the European provision of Art. 102 TFEU. According to this provision, a company must have abused its dominant market position. The first step is to examine whether a dominant position exists on a relevant market. This means first of all an answer to the question of the relevant product market. This is always a major issue with digital platforms. If digital platforms provide their services to several very different sides of the market, each of which is characterised by a completely different interest, this also speaks for different relevant product markets. The Authority makes two brief considerations here. First, it focuses on the user-side market for "general search services" and assumes a dominant position there due to the high number of users. Secondly, from recitals 173 et seq. of its decision, it refers to the wording of the French provision according to which the prohibition of abuse of market power can also be imposed in the case of "economic dependence". This comes close to the so-called "relative market power" in the German provision of § 20 Abs. 1 S. 1 GWB. The decisive factor for economic dependence is whether companies have reasonable alternatives. Accordingly, information on market shares is not required if the dependency can be concluded from other circumstances.
The Authority currently considers that this position is being abused for three reasons: Firstly, unfair trade practices, secondly unjustified discrimination and finally "circumvention of the spirit of the ancillary copyright law" (para. 243). The first case aims at the abuse of conditions. Similar to the BKartA in the Facebook proceedings, the Autorité seems to argue here with a kind of accessoriness. In this case this approach is even more critical, as it shows its vulnerability to the enforcement of interests which are not covered by the protective object of antitrust law. On the other hand, however, the authority also takes up considerations of the obligation to do a deal. For it comes to the conclusion that for the time being, at any rate, Google must not list the publishers. However, this would only be possible in principle if, in a specific case, the removal of a publisher's list is an abuse of market power.
In recital 194, the Autorité considers that the French ancillary copyright should make it possible to redefine the division of values in the context of negotiations between the platforms and the publishers and news agencies. The refusal to negotiate already constituted an abuse. But even otherwise, the Autorité seems to assume that in any case only positive remuneration – which means a price x > 0 – could be the result of a negotiation. It also refers in part to the Copyright Directive. However, although the interest in an economic remuneration of the publishers is mentioned there again several times, it is expressly not mentioned that there is any enforceable right of access to the platform.
With this procedure, the authority is demonstrating an error of reasoning which has recently occurred frequently in similar case constellations with digital platforms. Even if charges are subject to abuse control under cartel law, all circumstances of the individual case would have to be sufficiently taken into account. The provision of Art. L218-4 is aimed at the circumstances that justify investment protection for publishers. However, these would not be conclusive if it is a question of the anti-trust law consideration of their appropriateness. For what is inappropriate results from a blancing of interests. And although it can and should still be openly discussed whether such decisions can and should also be supported by non-antitrust law provisions – such as, for example, data protection law – the respective return would always have to be taken into account in such an approach. In this case, this means that the specifications for the level of remuneration in the French ancillary copyright do not have a blocking or even structuring effect on the legal application of the prohibition of abuse. Rather, a decision on appropriateness without legal error must also take into account the other circumstances that are relevant to the dealing constellation. However, other circumstances can also be services that are provided in return. Google, for example, could also potentially price its infrastructure and related services. In this case, for example, a monetary price could be charged for inclusion in search engine results. This would be netted out against the remuneration demanded from the publishers. The "spirit" of the French ancillary copyright is of little help here, as it only refers to the prohibition right and its remuneration rules themselves, but not to the entire market exchange process. What constitutes this process, however, is usually difficult to specify. What was needed is a positive regulatory specification.
These objections have been dismissed by the French Autorité simply by stating that Google is trying to establish a principle of non-remuneration. Publishers, without exception, would therefore be set at a zero price simply to circumvent the French ancillary copyright. This is either very short-sighted or a big succes in lobbying of the publishing industry. Because this principle has been around for a long time, even before Google appeared. Publishers have always benefited from the fact that their content was widely found in search engines. They even wanted to be listed at all. The prices for these services and thus also the remuneration develop in competition. As long as an ancillary copyright does not concretely shape the market result here, every company is free to determine the conditions of its services and their prices. So even if the French ancillary copyright even aims to monetarise the protected content, this does not have to result in a positive monetary value. Figuratively written: A zero price does not arise merely because a company allows itself to be granted a zero discount on its services; it can also arise when services are provided at opposite ends of the spectrum, the price of which is always set at the same level. The one "pays" for the fact that he is allowed to distribute his content via the platform; the other "pays" for the fact that he exploits this content economically. The BKartA has already argued in a correspondingly comprehensible manner that even a market-dominant company cannot be prohibited from basically wanting to maintain its previous price structure.
Moreover, this is the real critical point of the Autorité's decision: it presumes to make decisions on the outcome of a basically competitive negotiation process, while limiting the design sovereignty of the platform. For the latter, like the fundamental private autonomy, is one of the interests protected and to be respected. What does this mean? Every company has the fundamental freedom to decide for itself with whom it enters into business relations and with whom it does not. An obligation to enter into a business transaction under cartel law is only possible under narrow exceptions. However, every company also has the freedom to determine the individual conditions of its product design or service provision. The company has a prerogative to make an assessment in this respect. Before a compulsory deal could even be considered here, another question must first be answered: Does a company abuse its market power through a design decision? In the case of platforms, this is such a complex balancing act that it could not be carried out by a legal implementation of the ancillary copyright alone. The Autorité makes it too easy for itself here.
In order to secure these results, the authority imposes a must-carry obligation. Google must therefore in principle present the publishers as if there was already an agreement on the ancillary copyright. This requires that the publishers themselves or an organisation representing them file a request for a hearing with Google. This is a very unusual and highly regulatory procedure, which is not provided for in antitrust law. This equally provisional measure is intended to support the ordered negotiation process between Google and the publishers. It cannot therefore be interpreted as a general instrument of access regulation. Because even and despite the orders of the authority, the outcome of the negotiations may lead to a similar result as before. Even a zero price can be negotiated.
Since 2016 I have been an attorney at law. I advise mainly on antitrust law and telecommunications law. Further focal points of my work are intellectual property law as well as distribution law and IT law.
News Secretary General of IFCLA
Digital Markets Act and Private Enforcement
BGH refers dispute between Wikingerhof and Booking back to the North
More about regulatory and competition law in my newsletter
EU Commission opens investigation against Apple
Please forward me frequently more information regarding competition and telecommunications law. By clicking on the button "Register" I confirm that I have read the information on the privacy policy (including the use of the service provider MailChimp (based in the USA) and the success measurement).
louven.legal is a law firm specialized in the antitrust law of the information society, telecommunications law and networks. I advise companies and other law firms on the design of their contracts and business models.
louven.legal – Lawyer Sebastian Louven, Spitzenkamptwete 29, 32756 Detmold · Legal notice · Privacy policy

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Framework7 Cordova Ajax Post 503 service unavailable I am new to Cordova and Framework7 but can get along since it is similar with jQuery but I am stuck with this issue. I was using an external url link which is an API to login and I don't have any control of the API which means I cannot edit or modify it.
I tried to test it using Postman and it's working fine. I tried installing and using this extension CORS but still getting the result of No 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' header is present on the requested resource. Origin 'http://localhost:8000' is therefore not allowed access. The response had HTTP status code 503. I am using a Ripple extension to properly run my application.
HTML:
<form id="login" class="ajax-submit" method="post">
<input type="email" name="input[email]" class="required email login-email" placeholder="Email Address" />
<input type="password" name="input[password]" class="required login-password" placeholder="Password" />
</form>

JS:
function login_submit() {
    $$('#login').on('submit', function(e) {
        var $form = $(this);

        if (!$form.valid())
            return false;

        $.ajax({
            type: 'post',
            url: api_url + '/api/login',
            data: $form.serialize(),
            dataType: 'json',
            success: function(data) {
                if (typeof data.failed != 'undefined' && data.failed == '1') {
                    myApp.alert(data.msg_error, 'Error');
                } else {
                    $form.find('button').text('Sign in');
                    Specifier = data;

                    mainView.router.loadPage('featured.html');
                }
            },
            error: function(xhr, status) {
                console.log('Error: ' + JSON.stringify(xhr));
                console.log('ErrorStatus: ' + JSON.stringify(status));
            }
        })

        e.preventDefault();
    });
}

I use cordova run browser to run the application.
Thanks in advance.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Healing at a distance
Mind-Matter-Interaction
General overviews and critiques
Mediumship & Survival of Consciousness
Physiological correlations at a distance
Telepathy & ESP
Precognition & Presentiment
Money & Economy
Money & monetary system
Science & Meta theories
General Spirituality
A New Reality
Extraterrestrial Intelligence
The 7 Liberal Arts
I-Rummage
Radiation measurements
GEOFON Earthquake News
All 2011 earthquakes in one video
A timetraveller responds
Answers by Thomas Campbell
Fireside Chats with T. Campbell
Cool magic
Why was this website created ?
Matrixwissen on Youtube
Resource Highlights Archive
Search on Matrixwissen.de
Big picture & insights
Matrixwissen-internal news
Short biographies
Donation to Matrixwissen
Summary on 9/11 and inconsistencies regarding the official story (english)
Mind, Brain and Consciousness
A group of renowned physicians and neuroscientist gathered at the United Nations in New York to present and discuss their latest insights on the relationship between mind, brain, and consciousness. The presented findings are revolutionary and point towards the emergence of a new paradigm in science.
Link to a selection of videos from the UN Symposium
Author Michael Talbot was interested in parallels between mysticism and physics and wrote several books in this field. Over the last decades scientists developed a holographic model of reality which can explain several inexplicable phenomena. Michael presents this model and also shares personal experiences which formed his worldview in this respect and inspired him to write a best-selling book on the topic.
Link to interview in the Resource section
Scientific research on near-death experiences
Dr. Pim van Lommel is a Dutch cardiologist who started doing scientific research on near-death experiences after several of his cardiact arrest patients reported having witnessed events while their brain was clinically dead. In 2001 he published a by now famous Lancet study on the subject. In this interview he talks about his research and insights
The Science Delusion
Biochemist Dr. Rupert Sheldrake researched several delusions of science, particularly the assumptions on which modern science is based. In this lecture he traces back the history of several scientific dogmas and he shares his most inconvenient findings about them.
Link to lecture in the Resource section
Power of Subconscious Belief
Bruce Lipton was a professor for biology. During his research on genes, he made amazing discoveries. His key message : Your subconscious beliefs run your life. If these beliefs do not fit your life situation, you have the ability to change them.
Nature of Reality
Thomas Campbell is a physicist who used to work for NASA. Over the last 30 years he developed a "Theory of Everything" that brings physics and metaphysics in one theory. In his lecture he presents a condensed summary of his theory.
PSI Research
Dr. Dean Radin studied electrical engineering as well as psychology and has been researching PSI phenomena like telepathy and presentiments of future events for over 12 years. His experiments document that these phenomena are real but Dean's findings don't fit into the established scientific models.
Gates of Awakening
Neil Kramer identifies in this lecture different filters of conscious awareness, which conceil our perception of the external world. Additionally he provides some clues how to deconstruct these filters.
Children's memories of previous lives
Dr. Jim Tucker is a psychiatrist at the University of Virginia. He has researched 2500 cases of children that have detailed memories about previous lives. In this interview Jim talks about his research into children who have provided names and other verifiable information from previous lives.
Experiencing a stroke
Neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor realized she was having a massive stroke. As it happened - she felt her brain functions slip away one by one, speech, movement, understanding - she studied and remembered every moment. In this lecture she shares her experience.
Beware online filter bubbles
In this 9-minute lecture Eli Pariser elaborates on how filter algorithms are pre-selecting the information users are presented with on search engines like Google or websites like Facebook. This user-specific tailoring mechanism decides without our consent which information is of importance to us and puts us in a reality bubble that reconfirms our worldview.
This award-winning documentary explores the crop circle phenomenon from various angles. It presents scientific research results along with amazing videos and pictures of the most stunning formations. Various experts on crop circles are interviewed about their insights.
Link to documentary in the Resource section
This documentary covers the UFO / ET presence on Earth. It presents evidence gathered over the last 60 years along with interviews of witnesses from military and government. A collection of highly unusual information which you might never hear about from mainstream news sources.
According to the official 9/11 story 19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked 4 commerical passenger jet airliners. They steered two airplanes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, one airplane into the Pentagon and the last airplane crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
This summary will point out key issues, why the official story has severe flaws which do not add up :
1. World Trade Center 7
World Trade Center 7 was a 47-level building located next to the Twin Towers in New York. During the collapse of the Twin Towers the south face of WTC7 was hit by debris which caused minor fires on selected floors. On the afternoon of September 11th at 17:20 the entire building collapsed within seconds.The mainstream media never covered this topic except on that day. Starting September 12th the collapse of WTC7 was not mentioned on mainstream media. When watching the following video footage of the collapse of WTC7 ask yourself the following question :
Is a collapse due to "structural failure caused by small office fires" likely to be perfectly symetrical, occur at nearly free-fall speed and turn the entire building into a dust cloud ?
A group of over 1900 architects and engineers researched the video footage and the available evidence (debris and dust samples) and came to the conclusion that office fires could not have caused this form of a symetric collapse at free-fall speed. The fact that they found thermite - a special form of explosive used for the controlled demolition of buildings - in all dust samples they investigated raises serious questions. A scientific paper published by several of their researches as well as university professors describes their findings in detail.
Another serious questions concerns the fact that BBC World television "accidentially" announced the collapse of WTC7 20 minutes before it actually happened (check out this footage from BBC World -This recording starts at 5:08pm and ends at 5:15pm - You can see WTC7 directly right of the correspondents head because the building did not collapse until 5 minutes later at 5:20pm).
This leaves any rationally thinking person with a lot of unanswered questions. How could BBC World have known about the collapse in advance ? The explaination from BBC World is that they only picked up on a news report from Reuters and repeated that report on the air. There is no statement from Reuters on their "early reporting" on the collapse of WTC7. The most significant question probably remains : Why was the collapse of WTC7 not even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report, which until this day is the official writing of history.
2. Damage at the Pentagon lacking evidence of an airplane crash
Several pictures were taken during the 30 minutes after an airplane allegedly hit the Pentagon and when parts of the wall of the Pentagon collapsed. These pictures only show a hole that is too small for a Boeing 757-200 to fit in. One would also expect two holes nearby where the two Rolls Royce RB-211 engines had to strike the Pentagon.
This pictures shows the size of the airplane in comparison to the size of the Pentagon :
The pictures taken before the collapse, do not show any impact holes for the engines :
The following picture shows a close-up of the hole in which allegedly the entire airplane disappeared. It is also interesting to see that the windows right above the hole are still intact and show foam from the fire department trying to extinguish nearby fires :
It is also noticeable that almost no traces of any commercial airplane were ever found at the Pentagon, only some minor pieces which were carried away by hand showed up. Most of the airplane just vanished including its Rolls Royce RB-211 engines.
For further information on this subject it is highly recommended to watch the documentary "National Security Alert" mentioned in the following bulletin point.
3. Flight path of American Airlines 77 before hitting the Pentagon
Concerned US citizens founded the Citizens Investigation Team and started to interview eye witnesses who were located close to the Pentagon on 9/11. Amongst the eye witnesses they interviewed are two police officers and a Pentagon Helicopter Air Traffic Controller.
The key aspect of investigation was the flight path of the airplane. The picture below shows the flight path drawn by the eye witnesses during their interview as yellow lines and the flight path claimed by the government in green. The yellow dots indicate where one or several witnesses were located :
In order to knock down the 5 light poles (red dots) the airplane had to be on the official (green) flight path given by the government which is inconsistent with the eye witnesses. Non of the eye witnesses were able to see the airplane actually hit the Pentagon due to a small hill located between them and Pentagon, some were able to see the explosion. One eye witness located at the other side of the Pentagon saw an airplane at low altitude flying away seconds after he heard the explosion.
The Citizen Investigation Team produced a free documantary called "National Security Alert" to summarize their findings. It includes interviews with the witnesses aswell as an analysis of who saw what from which location :
On their website they provide additional evidence. For example all witnesses are listed in detail.
4. No response from US military & Strange orders from Dick Cheney
One of the open questions regarding 9/11 is : Why did the US military not react when the 4 airplanes got off their determined flight path and radio communication was lost. An investigation regarding this matter showed that in the year 2001 alone this process of "air policing" had happen more than 50 times until 9/11 and every single time jet fighters were in the air within minutes and were then directed to where the suspicious airplane was located.
This is an excerpt from the "official story" of what happened on 9/11 :
At 8:14 flight AA11 ignored a command from air traffic control to change altitude, radio contact was lost and shortly thereafter the transponder was turned off. At 8:25 the air traffic controller reported having heard an announcement probably by a hijacker that was broadcasted on the air instead of on the onboard announcement system.
Protocols require air traffic control to inform the military in case of a suspected emergency, this did not happen until 8:40. At 8:46 AA11 crashed into the World Trade Center. By 8:53 two fighter jets started but without any orders on where to fly. By 9:01 air traffic control informed the military about flight UA175 heading for New York. By 9:03 UA175 crashed into the World Trade Center.
By that time AA77 and UA93 both had been hijacked as well and started to deviate from their course. AA77 allegedly crashed in the Pentagon at 9:37, UA93 allegedly crashed in Shanksville at 10:03 The military did not check on both airplanes by fighter jets.
Norman Mineta (Transportations Secretary) gave public testimony in May 2003 about his experiences on 9/11 : He was at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center with Dick Cheney on the morning of 9/11 and gave the following testimony :
How does all this add up to a consistent storyline ?
The testimony of Norman Mineta is not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report at all, but even worse : The video of his testimony has been removed from the video archive of the 9/11 Commission. If his testimony was not broadcasted on live television, nobody would have even heard about it.
5. Pentagon announced 2.3 trillion dollars have gone missing on September 10th 2001
The wing of the Pentagon where AA77 allegedly crashed into was the only wing that had been structurally strengthened during a renovation that year. Thus this wing was still almost empty except for parts of the accounting office that just moved in again.
On September 10th 2001 Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense at that time) gave a press conference at the Pentagon where he admitted that 2.3 trillion dollars went missing at the Pentagon. One day later all evidence that would have allowed to track where this money went conveniently disappeared when the accounting office area was destroyed. Suddenly there were more important issues on the radar than fighting corruption.
Here is a clip from the press conference where Donald Rumsfeld makes the staggering announcement :
6. Official aircraft speeds "technically impossible"
The National Transportation Safety Board released a report on February 7th 2002 documenting the speed of United Airlines Flight 175 before it hit the World Trade Center. The following graph is directly taken from this report. The top diagram shows the altitude, the bottom diagram shows air craft speed in knots :
An analysis of the radar data from 9/11 showed that United Airlines Flight 175 was flying at 510 knots when it hit the World Trade Center. This speed equals 944 km/h or 586 mph. UA175 was a Boeing 767-200 which has a maximum operating speed at ground level of 360 knots. Commercial airplanes are not designed to fly at high speeds at ground level because the air pressure at ground level compared to travel altitude is so high that the created air resistance could destroy the entire airplane.
Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of pilots who have looked into the contradictory evidence for all four airplanes which ranges from too high speed to flight maneuvers which they consider impossible especially if performed by un-experienced pilots. The US government is unwilling to acknowledge the existence of contradictory evidence and is not making any statements on the subject.
They produced the 45-minute documentary "World Trade Center Attack" to summarize the contradictions they discovered when analyzing the officially available data from their viewpoint of being professionals in aviation :
In the recent years Pilots for 9/11 truth have released several other documentaries all covering different contradictory aspects of the events on that day. You find all of their documentaries in the Resource section.
7. The Shanksville Crash - a crash site lacking evidence of a crash
According to the official story passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 tried to enter the cockpit to regain control from terrorists. This resulted in the airplane to crash at a location near Shanksville. Most of the evidence does not support the official story :
The debris from the crash was found in an area that is 7 miles long :
How could the debris be spread this widely if the airplane crashed in one location ?
Hardly any evidence of larger parts from the airplane was found. The "official crash site" is shown in the photos below :
Does this look suspicious to you ? Where is the airplane ?!?
In the following video from a news broadcast from September 11th you can see video footage taken from a helicopter of the area surrounding the crash site. There is a lot of miniature debris ("nothing larger than a phone book") spread over an "area of 3-4 miles". How could this be if the airplane crashed in one location ?
8. Cell phone calls
Immediately after 9/11 happened about 15 cell phone calls were reported from passengers that were on the hijacked airplanes. These calls were essential in shaping the "official story" of hijackers with knives and box cutters by "eye witnesses" onboard the airplanes.
In the aftermath it became apparent that the cell phone calls from airplanes that fly higher than 8000 feet are almost impossible. This was experimentally confirmed by "Project Achilles – Low altitude cell phone call experiments" in 2003 performed by A.K. Dewdney
Here is a summary of the officially recognized cell phone calls :
Flight UA 175 : Departed 8:14, reached 31.000 feet at 8:33 and maintained altitude until 8:51
First cell phone call by Peter Hanson at 8:52 (caller ID identified his cell)
Flight AA 77 : Departed 8:10, reached 35.000 feet at 8:46 , transponder turned off at 8:56, several cell phone calls starting 9:12, autopilot disengaged at 7000 feet at 9:29
On board was also CNN commentator Barbara Olson. She called her husband between 9:16 and 9:26 (according to 9/11 commission report on an air phone). In 2006 it became apparent that AA77 had no onboard air phones installed at all. So how did she call her husband ?!?
Flight UA93 : Departed 8:42, reached 35.000 feet at 9:02, hijacking at 9:28, cell phone calls start at 9:32, transponder turned off at 9:41, Tom Burnett calls his wife at 9:58 telling her "We are going to do something", crash in Shanksville at 10:03
Flight AA11 : No cell phone calls reported on this flight, Betty Ong called from an air phone
There has been no official reaction from the US government to the findings of research of the last years which contradict the 9/11 Commission Report released in 2004.
9. The 9/11 Commission Report (and what is NOT in it)
It does not mention the collapse of World Trade Center 7
It does not mention that if the official "pancake collapse"-theory was true the steel-frame should have remained standing and 110 floors in pancake formation should be found at the bottom after the collapse. Both expectations have turned out untrue.
It does not mention that the entire rubble of 9/11 was shipped to China before any proper examination of the evidence could take place.
It does not mention that several FBI agents have gone on record claiming that they knew about the plans for 9/11 in advance but their warnings remained unheard.
It does not mention the discrepancies of George W. Bush's statement that he saw the first airplane hit the WTC before entering the school. This impact was not shown on TV on 9/11. (see extra bulletin point further down the list)
To read the report yourself, just click on the image of it, this will open the PDF version of the report.
Three members of the 9/11 commission have recently made interesting public statements :
John Farmer - Senior Council for the 9/11 Commission – wrote a book on his experiences of being a member of the 9/11 Commission. In this book "The Ground Truth - The untold story of America under attack on 9/11" he documents false testimony by the White House, CIA, FBI, and NORAD. The following two quotes are from his book :
"At some level of government, at some point in time, a decision was made not to tell the truth about the national response to the attacks on the morning of 9/11. We owe the truth to the families of the victims of 9/11. We owe it to the American public as well, because only by understanding what has gone wrong in the past can we assure our nation's safety in the future."
"A government that conceals the truth puts the nation at risk"
Thomas Kean – Republican governor of New Jersey and head of the 9/11 Commission – has given the following statement :
"We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . "
In January 2008 Kean wrote an article in the New York Times titled "Stonewalled by the CIA" in which he describes how CIA director George Tenet told the 9/11 Commission point blank that certain areas of research were off limits for them.
Max Cleland was US Senator for the State of Georgia from 1997 until 2003. He was appointed to serve on the 9/11 Commission but is the only person who resigned from the commission because the Bush administration was stonewalling and blocking the committee's access to key documents and witnesses.
In November 2003 Cleland said "I cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims and say the commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised"
10. George Bush saw the first airplane hit the World Trade Center "on TV" on 9/11
About 3 months after 9/11 Bush gave a speech, during which he says that before he went to the class room at the school event he was "waiting outside" and while waiting he saw "on TV" how an airplane hit the World Trade Center. The problem with this statement is that there was no video footage of the first airplane on TV until September 12th. So which "station" was he watching ?
When Bush was asked during a press conference if he had "advanced knowledge of 9/11" his reaction is rather odd :
11. The collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 identified 14 key points regarding the collapse of both towers which raise severe questions :
Constant acceleration through what was the path of greatest resistance — no time for "crushing"
Unnaturally symmetrical debris distribution
Extremely rapid onset of destruction
Over one hundred first responders reported explosions and flashes of light
Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 50 mph
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, metal decking, and floor trusses
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
1200-foot diameter debris fields: no "pancaked" floors found
Isolated explosive ejections seen 20-40 stories below cascadingdemolition canopy
Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
Several tons of molten iron found under all 3 high-rises
Evidence of thermite found in previously molten metal, WTC dust and steel
Sophisticated energetic nano-thermite chips found in WTC dust samples
No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire
A few more details regarding the collapse should be pointed out :
When World Trade Center 1 collapsed the upper section first telescopes in on itself for about half of its size :
This is a significant observation because if the upper section is supposed to perform the "work" of destroying the building section below itself and it vaporizes half of itself at the beginning of the collapse, then it also lost half of its potential energy.The physical law of conservation of energy says energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only be transformed. In the case of a collapse of a bulding potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy (for the downward acceleration) and somehow the process of destroying the building structure also has to be energized by the potential energy of the building itself. Interestingly enough both towers collapsed practically at free-fall speed which can only happen if all potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy. So where does the energy to destroy the building structure come from ?
When World Trade Center 2 collapsed, the upper section tilts while it start moving downwards. A technical analysis of the available video footage calculated the maximum tilt angle before the building disappears in the dust cloud at 25 degrees :
This video shows the tilting quite well :
Also pay attention to the violent lateral ejections of building material uniformly on both fronts of WTC2 as documented in this video :
Even though this tilting occured, the collapse itself was perfectly symetrical as the debris field after the collapse showed. This is rather strange since theoretically the upper section has to perform the "work" of destroying the building below itself and if it starts tilting it should rather tip over the side where it is tilting towards and fall off the side than to continue through the path of greatest resistence.
Additionally it should be considered that in a structural collapse the upper section of the building should remain at least partly in tact and not pulverize to dust. It might be interesting to compare a failed building demolition from 1985 to see what happens to the upper part of a building if a controlled demolition goes wrong :
It might also be insightful to take a look at the physics based analysis of the collapse of the World Trade Center performed by David Chandler which is available in the Resources section
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 have done extensive scientific research into the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7. It is highly recommended to visit their website and on it especially the evidence section.
Addictionally there are interviews with members of the group as well as a lecture by the founder Richard Gage in the Resources section.
12. Eye witnesses of the events at the World Trade Center
There is a long list of eye witnesses who were in the World Trade Center on September 11th. This section only points out the most important ones :
Barry Jennings was deputy director of emergency services department. When the first airplane hit WTC1 he immediately headed for WTC7 in which the Office of Emergency Management was located on the 23rd floor. When he arrived, the emergency center was abandoned. Together with a second witness he took the stairway to leave the building. When they were somewhere between the 6th and 8th floor an explosion happened below them and destroyed the entire stairway. This happened before WTC1 and WTC2 collapsed. Barry was trapped in WTC7 during the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 and was rescued before WTC7 collapsed. He witnessed multiple explosions in WTC7. He also noticed that - when he was rescued around 1 p.m. - the lobby of WTC7 was completely destroyed and he left WTC7 through a "huge hole in the wall". Directly after his rescue Barry was interviewed by ABC7. Barry died in 2008 under mysterious circumstances at age 53.
In this interview he describes his experiences during 9/11 :
William Rodriguez was a janitor in the World Trade Center's north tower. He risked his life on 9/11 to help people who could not help themselves by using his masterkey to open locked doors so people could get out of the building. For his heroic behaviour he received praise by many people including George W. Bush.
On 9/11 William arrived at work around 8:30 and went into the basement level B1 where his office was. While talking to his supervisor a major explosion happened in the basement level below them. Shortly after this explosion happened he heard the impact of the first airplane hitting the top of the building.
This is his 3-minute eye witness report :
Two firefighters were interviewed in the morning of 9/11. Both witnessed multiple explosions in the lobby area of the World Trade Center. The explosions were so severe that they were seriously injured. The interview itself starts at 1:30 :
Firefighter John Schroder was in the lobby of the World Trade Center when he witnessed that the elevators exploded :
The following video shows a 30 second video clip from the lobby of the World Trade Center before it collapsed. Several firefighters had already stated on record that the destruction of the lobby looked to them like it was hit by a bomb. Take a look at the footage yourself :
If you start investigating for yourself you will find tons of additional eye witnesses. Most of them have one thing in common, they report on secondary explosions on different levels of the World Trade Center. The best available compilation of eye witness reports and media reports is almost 30 minutes long. The first two minutes are the interview with the two firefighters embedded before so you can start watching at 02:00 :
13. Epilogue
You have been presented with 12 different topics regarding 9/11. If you have never researched this kind of information it might be the first time that you heard about any of this. You have to ask yourself, why the mass media has not covered these kind of topics and you have to decide for yourself, what you are going to do next now that you know. The best thing to do might be to first start researching the whole topic for yoursef. You will be amazed how many websites have been created and how much information is available if you're only willing to take a look. The second step might be to tell other people about what you have learned but be aware that the majority of the population does not want to know about any of this and you can not force anybody to face a reality that might shatter their entire world view.
From my personal experience I can only recommend to face the "dark side" of our reality because you can only understand how things add up if you acknowledge the existence of the "dark side" and understand its role in the "big picture". Doing research on these forces and understanding their influence on our lifes ultimately leads to far deeper questions than "What really happened on 9/11 ?"
If you took the time to read upto this point, you might want to invest at least 4 additional minutes and watch the following video. It summarizes the content of the article with a humerous wink. Even though the topic is actually quite serious, it is sometimes easier to approach the truth through humor :
One can not reflect in streaming water. Only those who know internal peace can give it to others
(philosopher)
Our Sun
Latest SOHO Image
Robert Monroe was a successful radio producer when he suddenly had out of body experiences. He spent the following 40 years of his life to explore human consciousness and how it can leave the body
Link to short biography
What about money?
Bernard Lietaer is a former Central Banker, fond manager and university professor with more than 30 years of experience in the monetary system. In this interview he speaks in plain English about money, the Euro, the US Dollar and their future.
Churnalism & Flat Earth News
Nick Davies worked as an investigative journalist for over 35 years. In this lecture he shares his insights on how the world of the press really works. He dismantles the golden rule of "objective reporting" and points out conflicts of interests which increasingly hinder truthful reporting.
Money & the Turning of the Age
In this lecture author Charles Eisenstein talks about how money changed the relationship between humanity and the world. He shares his vision of a society, which rediscovered its relationship to nature and where appreciation is expressed in other ways than just money.
Corporatocracy and global empire
John Perkins worked as Chief Economist at a major consulting firm. Over the years he became more and more aware of the massive amout of corruption the US empire is based upon but played along for a while. Finally he left his job and spoke out. A highly recommended interview !
9/11 - Investigation of a Swiss historian
Dr. Daniele Ganser is a Swiss historian who teaches at Basel University. In this English lecture he presents a Swiss historian's view on the evidence on 9/11. A highly recommended overview of subjects and evidence usually not covered by the mass media.
Chris Martenson's "Crash course" from 2009 explains the inbuilt problems of the global economy, the financial system and society as a whole in easily understandable terms. Chris advocates to use common sense and prepare for what is coming.
The Story of Stuff is a 20 minute documentary that takes a critical look at Western consumer culture and the hidden costs in the process of producing cheap goods.
Problema - 100 deep questions
In September 2006 over 100 great thinkers gathered for a round table discussion in Berlin. During this 9-hour day all participant were asked 100 deep questions and their responses were filmed simultaneously.
In this series of lectures Mark Passio gives an excellent insight into his quest for truth. Mark covers a wide range of topics, he is an eloquent presenter and his lectures are clearly laid out. Highly recommended viewing !
Link to lectures in the Resource section
Propaganda in a democracy
The documentary Psywar takes a close look at how propaganda and public relations have grown into a most powerful tool in shaping western democracies. Perception management replaced balanced reporting of events in the news and you should understand how you are being manipulated.
9/11 - Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out
The group "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" created a documentary in which they interview 53 experts about the scientific facts regarding 9/11. The result is a compelling collection of evidence why the official government story can not be true.
Architects on 9/11
Richard Gage worked for over 20 years as an architect and constructed several high-rise buildings. In this lecture he informs about research he conducted on 9/11 together with 1900 other architects. They discovered severe inconsistencies in the official story.
Web safety check
Matrixwissen.de is checked regularly for malware to ensure a safe surfing experience for all visitors:
Agreement to using cookies


text:
The One Podcast Network
The One Podcast Network is a group of podcasts that feature topics ranging from sports, comedy, pro wrestling and anything else people are talking about. This network aims to entertain, create conversation, and have fun.
Are the Brooklyn Nets this good? - The Box Out
Jason and KT look at whether the Nets are contenders or a product of their current schedule during their nine-game winning streak. The guys also examine how the Knicks can make the playoffs and if Luka Doncic is the NBA... more
by The One Podcast Network
in Basketball
Patrice O'Neal - Live Free, Laugh Hard
KT and Tom look back at the career of the late Patrice O'Neal, going back to his upbringing and how he developed into the comedian that so many current comics look up to. The guys also look at what made him so great and why... more
in Comedy
Did Kyrie Irving find a scapegoat in Cowboys owner Jerry Jones - The Box Out
On the latest edition of The Box Out, Jason and Kahlil look at how the WNBA is still struggling to pay players after Kelsey Plum's honest comments. The guys will also compare the Kyrie Irving saga to the Jerry Jones picture... more
The Box Out with Jason and Kahlil
On the latest episode of The Box Out, Jason and Kahlil look at the state of the Brooklyn Nets after a blowout loss to the Kings on Tuesday night. Kevin Durant is making negative comments regarding the team's makeup as Kyrie Irving inches... more
On the latest episode of The Box Out, Jason and Kahlil look at the Lakers' 2-5 start to the season and whether LeBron James regrets his decision to sign an extension with the team. Also, when will the ugly marriage between LA and... more
It's an emergency podcast of The Box Out as Jason and Kahlil discuss the breaking news from Tuesday afternoon. After over two seasons as head coach, the Brooklyn Nets and Steve Nash "mutually agreed" to part ways after some... more
On this new, live edition of The Box Out, Jason and Kahlil review the first two nights of the NBA season, where some weird things happened. The Brooklyn Nets fell to the Pelicans at home in their opener, where Kevin Durant did what... more
The Box Out returns as Jason and Kahlil preview the 2022-2023 NBA season on the eve of a new campaign. As is customary annually, the guys look at the over/under for every team and predict where they will land this season. Will the... more
The Moody Irish Guy
Tom and KT discuss why people complain so much, the stupidty of the Roe v. Wade decision against abortion and why people are just not curious anymore.
in Pop Culture
The Box Out with Kahlil and Jason
"The takeover, the break's over." The sixth season of The Box Out with Kahlil and Jason begins as there is a lot to talk about after the guys' final weeks of vacation. The big news in the NBA has been the suspension of Boston Head Coach Ime... more


Ms Bron Cambareri's principal role is to assist the Cancer Theme Leader & Deputy Theme Leader in the operations of the Leukaemia Research Group and more generally support the Cancer Theme research activities. Within the Leukaemia Group, this includes assistance with grant preparations and progress reports. She also facilitates collaborative & productive relationships with key government, private sector & industry stakeholders in relation to the research of clinical trials with which the laboratory is involved.
Ms Cambareri is also the Project Manager of the ALL (Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia) Flagship for the Australian Genomics Health Alliance (AGHA) Program. This role enables her to help facilitate the management of the Flagship & support the Head of this group, plus the rest of the ALL working group, to improve healthcare outcomes for Australia, through collaborative research.
The preparation and submission of Human Research Ethics (HRE) applications for the many projects in the laboratory is also a large part of Ms Cambareri responsibilities. Included in this is the interpretation of Governance criteria required for the different grants & Institutions involved. This involves liaising with the SAHMRI Legal Team for development and completion of contracts, MIAs, MTAs, CRAs & other related documents that are required to allow the research to be conducted at SAHMRI.
Along with the Clinical Trials Team, she assists in establishing logistics for the correlative studies requirements for all new trial protocols and liaises with trial coordinators of the participating sites around Australia & New Zealand.
In addition to these main roles, Ms Cambareri is the Health & Safety Representative (HSR) for the Cancer Theme, North. This includes participation in the Health Safety & Wellbeing Committee (HSWC) meetings, BLOG meetings (Business Laboratory Operations Group), overviewing incident reports & completing Workplace / Laboratory Inspections. She is involved in developing and maintaining Risk Assessments for the many procedures in the Cancer Theme & uploading these onto the SAHMRI Intelex system.
McClure, B., Hercus, T. R., Cambareri, B., Woodcock, J. M., Bagley, C. J., Howlett, G. J. & Lopez, A. F., 15 Feb 2003, In : Blood. 101, 4, p. 1308-1315 8 p.
Olver, I. N., Hercus, T., Lopez, A., Vadas, M., Somogyi, A. A., Doyle, I., Foster, D. J., Keefe, D., Taylor, A., Brown, M., To, B. L., Cole, J., Rawling, T., Cambareri, B., Myers, M., Olszewski, N., Bastiras, S., Senn, C., Hey, A., Verma, M. & 1 othersWigley, P., 2002, In : Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology. 50, 3, p. 171-178 8 p.
Sun, Q., Jones, K., McClure, B., Cambareri, B., Zacharakis, B., Iversen, P. O., Stomski, F., Woodcock, J. M., Bagley, C. J., D'Andrea, R. & Lopez, A. F., 15 Sep 1999, In : Blood. 94, 6, p. 1943-1951 9 p.
Bagley, C. J., Phillips, J., Cambareri, B., Vadas, M. A. & Lopez, A. F., 1996, In : Journal of Biological Chemistry. 271, 50, p. 31922-31928 7 p.
Hercus, T. R., Cambareri, B., Dottore, M., Woodcock, J., Bagley, C. J., Vadas, M. A., Shannon, M. F. & Lopez, A. F., 1994, In : Blood. 83, 12, p. 3500-3508 9 p.


Moonbeam (LBS) - 3.5g • Wiid Boutique Inc.
Moonbeam is an indica dominant strain with a unique aroma and was personally selected by Snoop Dogg during his tour of Tweed Farms in October 2016. Moonbeam has fruity and sweet smelling flowers with nice trichome coverage. This strain's buds are lighter green, dense, and medium to large in size. Some might roll out of bed to this strain in the morning, but for most of our customers Moonbeam will be best for the afternoons and evenings.
Moonbeam is a nice quality bud with a great mellow high. Not your typical indica it definitely can be used as an evening, pleasant night in! No burn out which is always a plus with a heavy nighter like Moonbeam.


You will see me refer to Pure Pastures as Natural Local Food Express and vice versa. The current company name is Natural Local Food Express, but is being changed to Pure Pastures.
Pure Pastures is a natural and organic grocery store. But, it isn't a grocery store. I find it hard to explain what the store is. To me, the term "grocery store" makes me think of the mega supermarkets. This is a small store packed to the brim with good, wholesome, local food.
There are two locations for Pure Pastures. The flagship store is in Plymouth on 1192 Ann Arbor Road. It's a little hard to see exactly where the store is, so I took some pictures of the landmarks.
The second location for Pure Pastures is at 6870 N. Telegraph in Dearborn Heights. The location is just south of Warren, next to the Red Lobster restaurant.
There is a sign on Telegraph that says "Pure Pastures" that I forgot to snap a picture of.
I use Pure Pastures for the bulk of my meat purchases, eggs, some dairy, and many other local items. I'm currently in the process of buying a quarter cow via Pure Pastures. I will be sure to update once that process is completed!
I asked my husband for a few sound bites since he's a "tell it like it is" sort of guy. He says that Garry (Plymouth) and Su (Dearborn Heights) are very helpful and have your best interests at heart. There is never any pressure to buy, and it is a very comfortable atmosphere. They have a large selection of many different items. They can tell you where your food came from. Garry has a big Michigan map at the Plymouth store, and can point to where your items are from.
Because the store is packed with good food, it can sometimes be a little difficult to find a specific item.
Always ask for help if you can't find something!
Sometimes things are hidden in a freezer or haven't been brought out to the front yet.
The aisles are small at the Plymouth store, I don't recommend bringing a gigantic stroller inside.
They are open to suggestions and special orders, don't be shy!
They recently had a LivingSocial coupon, $15 coupon gets you $30 of food. I got a bunch of good stuff including noodles and granola bars and chicken and beef pasties (frozen). I haven't had the pasties yet, but I'm told they are delicious.
We ate the chicken pasties the other day, so yummy!


My garden is difficult to get to, will that be an issue?
In terms of road access, we use a removals company.They use large vans (typically Ford Transits) that can access all but the smallest roads. Our delivery team will carry your commision to your chosen spot and if required assemble .
Delivery is always itemised separately from the product. It is based on postcode, you can find out the cost of delivery by adding a product to the basket and inputting your details.You can choose deliver or deliver and assemble at that point.
Do you deliver to outside the United Kingdom?
Absolutely, delivery can be arranged for anywhere in the world. Although the shipping of large products in a container may initially seem expensive, this can be offset against the VAT which won't be payable.
Delivering to Australia may in fact cost no more than delivering to Scotland.
Given the incredibly bespoke nature of our products, delivery is costed on an individual basis so please don't hesitate to get in touch.
Will you deliver and assemble my garden furniture on site?
Yes, we use a local removals company called Saturn Removals who will take your swing seat and frame from the workshop and deliver to your door. They'll assemble the frame in position for you before inviting you to sit on the seat for testing and adapt it to your personal height.
For larger items such as swing seats , our delivery team will deliver your in a small van and assemble the product on-site for you. Pergolas come as self assembly. We try and minimise our carbon footprint by avoiding using large HGV's.
If we're delivering abroad, the product will be delivered in a protected crate and delivered to your door.
Is assembly an extra cost?


text:
"There is no way to criminalize our way to utopia."
My First Attack on the War on Terror October 2001
By Jim on September 9, 2021
Pixabay image by skylarvision https://pixabay.com/cs/photos/phoenix-photoshop-orel-ohe%c5%88-2877486/
Investor's Business Daily October 2, 2001
Government Trust Grows Despite Its Inability to Protect
by JAMES BOVARD
Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, Americans' trust in government is soaring after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The number of people who trust the government to do the right thing has doubled since last year, and now is more than three times higher than in 1994. According to a Washington Post poll released on Sept. 27, 64% of Americans now "trust the government in Washington to do what is right" either "just about always" or "most of the time."
Ronald Brownstein, a Los Angeles Times columnist, declared on Sept. 19: "At the moment the first fireball seared the crystalline Manhattan sky last week, the entire impulse to distrust government that has become so central to U.S. politics seemed instantly anachronistic." Brownstein's headline – "The Government, Once Scorned, Becomes Savior" – captured much of the establishment media's response to the attacks.
It is puzzling that trust in government would soar after the biggest intelligence/law enforcement failure since the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. At least in the first weeks after the attack, the federal government's prestige appears higher than at any time since the start of the Vietnam War.
The Post poll also revealed that the disastrous attacks of Sept. 11 greatly increased Americans' confidence that government will protect them against terrorists. From 1995 through 1997, the results consistently showed that only between 35% and 37% of Americans had "a great deal" or "a good amount" of confidence that the feds would deter domestic attacks by terrorists. In hindsight, the public was far more prescient than were the Washington policy-makers who chose not to make defending against such attacks a high priority. In the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, confidence in government's ability to deter terrorist attacks has soared – clocking in at 66%, almost double the percentage in the most recent previous Washington Post poll on this question in June 1997.
The bigger the catastrophe, the more credulous many people seem to become. The worse government failed to protect people in the past, the more certain most people become that government will protect them in the future.
Prominent liberals are capitalizing on the new mood to call for razing the restraints on government power. Wall Street Journal columnist Al Hunt says it's "time to declare a moratorium on government-bashing…. For the foreseeable future, the federal government is going to invest or spend more, regulate more and exercise more control over our lives," he rejoices.
"There is no real debate over expansion (of government power) in general." Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland snipped, "Ideologues on the right saw government as an evil to be rolled back." In a breathtaking leap of logic, he reasons: "The terror assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon … should profoundly shake the less-is-more philosophy that was the driving force for the tax-cut politics of Bush and conservative Republicans."
But there is no evidence that Osama bin Laden targeted the U.S. because of ire over George Bush's proposal to reduce the estate tax. Hoagland's effort is reminiscent of liberal efforts after the assassination of John F. Kennedy to paint right-wingers everywhere as unindicted co-conspirators in Kennedy's killing.
It is difficult to understand how the failures of the CIA, the FBI, and the Federal Aviation Administration could generate a blank check for all other federal agencies to exert more control over 270 million Americans. The success of the disastrous attacks of Sept. 11 were due far more to gross negligence and a shortage of competence than to a shortage of power. The federal government needs sufficient power to protect Americans against terrorist attacks and to harshly punish the perpetrators of the recent attacks. But such power shouldn't place a golden crown on the head of every would-be bureaucratic dictator, from the lowest village zoning enforcer to the most deluded federal agency chieftain.
The blind glorification of government, now popular, puts almost all liberties at grave risk. At least for the time being, people have lost any interest in government's batting average – either for actually protecting citizens or for abusing power. The best hope for the survival and defense of liberty is that enough Americans will recall the type of history lessons that public schools never teach.
At this time of national crisis, we must forget neither our political heritage nor the inherent limits of any governmental machinery. Government has a vital role in defending Americans from deadly foreign threats. But nothing that happened on Sept. 11 or since changed the fundamental nature of American government.
James Bovard is the author of "Feeling Your Pain: The Explosion & Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years"(St. Martin's Press, 2000).
bootlicking, CIA, FBI, George W. Bush, media, Osama Bin Laden, September 11, Terrorism, trust in government
20 Years of Epigrams on the War on Terror
Red Light Robberies Across America
My First Attack on the War on Terror October 2001 - United Push Back - September 9, 2021
[…] post My First Attack on the War on Terror October 2001 appeared first on James […]


text:
The New People is a 1969 American television series on ABC that focused on a group of young college students who were returning from a trip in Southeast Asia when their plane crashed on an island in the south Pacific Ocean. This program is an extremely rare example of a regularly scheduled network television series with 45-minute-long episodes; it aired immediately after The Music Scene, another 45-minute program.

Plot

The crash killed several of the college students, and all but one of the adults, who was badly injured and later died.  The surviving students were the only human life remaining on the island.  The island was unusual in that it had been built up as a site for a potential above-ground nuclear test which never took place, leaving all of the buildings and (improbably) supplies untouched and ready for use by the survivors. The trip to Southeast Asia was a goodwill tour arranged by the State Department showcasing what American youth were like, but it went awry when one of the students disrupted it, feeling that what they were doing was fake and a way to gloss over what was going on in the country and with relations to the Vietnam War.

The New People reflected the youth-oriented counterculture of the 1960s. All people over 30 were now dead, and it was up to the young people to start a new society on the island.  The pilot episode was written by Rod Serling, credited as "John Phillips."

Similar programs
The concept of having all the adults killed off leaving only the young people to survive was not a new one, nor was this to be its last appearance.  This concept had also been used in William Golding's 1954 novel and subsequent film, Lord of the Flies, and in the 27 October 1966 Star Trek episode "Miri".

In 2004 ABC premiered the hit series Lost which also featured a group of plane crash survivors stranded on a strange island. Producer Damon Lindelof later joked that if he had heard of the series, he would have used the name New People for the band of character Charlie Pace. In October 2005, NBC began broadcasting a Saturday morning series with a similar premise, Flight 29 Down.

Episodes

Original paperback novel tie-in
They Came from the Sea, an original tie-in novel based on the TV series was published in 1969 by Tempo Books, the young adult paperback imprint of Grosset & Dunlap. The author was the prolific tie-in specialist William Johnston, writing under the pseudonym "Alex Steele."

References

External links

 Television Obscurities – The New People

1969 American television series debuts
1970 American television series endings
1960s American drama television series
1970s American drama television series
American Broadcasting Company original programming
English-language television shows
Television series by CBS Studios
Television series created by Aaron Spelling
Television series created by Rod Serling
Television series set on fictional islands

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
La communauté de communes du canton de Pissos est une ancienne communauté de communes française, située dans le département des Landes et la région Nouvelle-Aquitaine.

Historique

La communauté de communes a été créée le 14 septembre 1993 pour une prise d'effet immédiate.

Elle fusionne avec la communauté de communes du Pays d'Albret et la communauté de communes de la Haute Lande pour former la communauté de communes Cœur Haute Lande au .

Composition

Elle est composée des 6 communes du canton de Pissos :

Démographie

Compétences

Voir aussi

Intercommunalités des Landes

Liens externes

 Le splaf - (Site sur la Population et les Limites Administratives de la France)
 La base ASPIC des Landes - (Accès des Services Publics aux Informations sur les Collectivités)

Canton de Pissos


text:
I read this article and found it very interesting, thought it might be something for you. The article is called Interview: Alan Davies and is located at https://www.totallydublin.ie/more/comedy/interview-alan-davies/.
Interview: Alan Davies
Julia O'Mahony
Posted November 12, 2012 in Comedy
It's been over ten years since Alan Davies last went on tour, but as the beloved Jonathan Creek, and QI's most berated guest, he certainly couldn't be accused of having kept quiet in the meantime. In advance of making his debut on the Dublin stage this November, he told us why this resplendent return was so long in the making.
So Alan, you're touring at the moment, how's it going thus far?
It's been good, I've only done two shows but so far so good. I'll be on tour till Christmas, but I'm only doing three or four a week so it's quite manageable in that respect. When I do the show at Vicar Street, it'll be my first ever show in Dublin, believe it or not. I love Dublin – I've been to Dublin many times. It's a wonderful place but for some reason there was never a comedy club there. When I used to go to Ireland we'd do Belfast and go round to Derry and then down to Galway and Cork, or you'd do the Kilkenny Comedy Festival, which I did for four years in a row, but never Dublin – so I'm really looking forward to it! An old girlfriend of mine knew a couple of Irish actors, and we went over to Dublin to see them in a play. We watched the play and it was very good, but then when the play finished, there was an announcement in the theatre along the lines of "Please could you, clear the auditorium quickly because The Proclaimers are doing a concert in the theatre, and we need to get their audience in". And I couldn't quite believe my ears, I thought I must've misheard. So I hid in the bar and sure enough, all these young people started filing in – this is in about 1995 – and the Proclaimers came on. I love the Proclaimers, and they did a fantastic gig – I went to the bar, everyone at the bar was drinking Guinness – I decided I'd better drink Guinness to fit in and I've drunk it ever since – I loved the Guinness! And when they did the song where the line is and Irish girls are pretty, I thought the roof was going to come off! It was a really fantastic night,; that's my Dublin highlight. I don't think I'll have quite the same effect on the crowd as The Proclaimers but I'll try and get some laughs.
We live in hope! Ever had a reception quite like the one they managed?
I think – the last time I toured was in 1999 – quite a long time ago, but I remember on that tour I went down to Southend, which is in Essex where I grew up. I did the Cliffs Pavillion in Southend, and of course they -I mean, wherever you go in the country people like to laugh, and they laugh at your jokes, but in Southend they laughed at absolutely every single word that came out of my mouth because it was all so familiar to them – all the nuances , and the little euphemisms – so you know so that was one of my greatest gigs.
And what made you decide to make a return to stand up then, after all this time?
I'd missed doing it. I had fallen out of love with it a bit – perhaps from doing it too much, but I never expected to be away from it for ten years.
I was going to Australia to do QI Live with Stephen Fry and because I was doing all these shows down there a friend of mine from Australia suggested I do some stand up. And they nagged me and nagged me until I agreed. And then he booked some theatres, so then I had to get a show together. That was the biggest obstacle – not having the material, so being pushed to get the material together and doing it was the thing that tipped me over into it. And then when I was down in Australia, I had a really great time touring, and because I enjoyed it so much, that was the clincher in terms of putting together a tour over here.
And how do you go about getting the material together in the end? Did you find yourself meticulously scripting your shows?
What I used to do, was just try new bits when I was doing gigs. And so I always thought how am I going to get a show together if I'm not doing gigs – it was like a Catch-22. So instead, about a year ago I did some work-in-progress shows at my local studio theatre, which I think was torment for the audience because I was probably desperately unfunny for the first few shows. But gradually, it started to come together, and that was how I did it.
And having got back in to stand up, what do you think its advantages are over your television work?
I think stand up gives you the freedom to really express your opinion; it's really about you, and what you've got to say, and it doesn't really matter what the subject matter is so long as you're being truthful about how you feel about things. You can be talking about anything at all and so long as it's truthful it will resonate with the audience – I talk quite a lot now about being a father and I talk about being a child. There's a fair amount of scatalogical nonsense and filfth but it's a mixture of topics. And it's a personal thing, it has to be about you. If someone's in a theatre watching you for an hour and three quarters, there's got to be a reason for you standing up there. Television certainly lends itself much more to collaboration with other people, and on a show like QI, you can get four or five comedians all working together – that's a hard thing to get in a live show – you have to pay them all and get them all there for a start.
A logistical nightmare! And with QI then, how did it come about that you assume the role of the much-loved dunce? Was that created for you, or did that just form organically?
Well a bit of both I think. I was a bit surprised when John Lloyd said to me, "I'm going to have you as my only regular, alongside Stephen". That's very much against the convention of Panel Shows where there are normally two team captains – like on a show like Would I Lie to You for example, or Have I Got News For You, in fact they all function like. So I didn't quite realise exactly what a patsy I was going to be, until about series three; that's when it really sunk in – that I'd been set up! [Chuckles] There's a very enjoyable relationship between Stephen and I that gives it a sort of sitcom feel sometimes, and it allows the other guests to relax – they don't have to worry about being stupid because there's always someone more stupid around, you know.
Any pre-show rituals?
I like a bit of peace and quiet and access to a lavatory.
Any contemporary comic heroes?
Well I always like to see John Hegley – he's always worth seeing. I like Daniel Kitson's stand up, though I haven't seen him do any for a long time. And I really like Isy Suttie, who's a friend of mine from doing the BBC show Whites together; she's a really fantastic persona and very funny. So yeah, that would be my ideal bill if I was going to a comedy club.And any advice for a next generation of fledgling comedians?
Just go and do gigs and be funny, I mean really – you have to work hard and be turning over material, and you have to be quite hard on yourself. Of all my contemporaries, the ones that are hugely successful are the hardest working ones, whether it's Eddie Izzard, or Lee Evans, or Jack Dee – they all work the hardest. With stand up you get nervous, because with stand up there's always a possibility of failure. If you don't go about it the right away you know, you can find yourself struggling. So you do have to apply yourself every night – and there's always a little anxiety but that's the nature of live performing.
Illustrations: Tim Smart


They have some great ideas for the show like the Webgains Speed Networking event which is running each day. 10.30-12 in the Networking Bar and people can sign up at www.oaa-expo.com/speednetworking. It's specifically for affiliates to meet merchants and vice versa!
TFM&A is packed full of reasons why you should leave the desk behind for a day. Here's just a few….


text:
Business & Charity
VQ day on 4 June but double standards still prevail
I was inivited to write an opinion piece forVQ day and it's now published by FE Week. You can download it here http://feweek.co.uk/2014/05/30/vq-day-2014-spreading-the-vocational-message/ but read on to hear my views
The official TV viewing figures are unequivocal. The great British public admires, applauds and aspires to acquire the vocational skills demonstrated by budding entrepreneurs, clever business people, innovative chefs, creative bakers and successful gardeners! More television viewers - so, that's employers, parents, and students - watch 1The Apprentice, Dragon's Den, MasterChef, The Great British Bake Off, and The Big Allotment Challenge than turn on their TV or iPlayer to pit their wits against the teams of academic geniuses in University Challenge or the lone eggheads of Mastermind.
How different this is from TV viewing in my youth. In a post war education era shaped and divided by the 1944 Butler Education Act, popular displays of skill and intelligence on TV throughout the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's comprised Top of the Form or Top Team, as it was known in Scotland - the latter giving us the first known broadcast appearance, as a young man, of our current Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove. How I envied all those clever kids who knew so many facts and figures and could recall them instantly even under the glare of TV studio cameras! If only I could do this, then I'd get to university, get a good job – and make my parents happy!
How different is it really in 21st century Britain? We celebrate the creativity, knowledge and skills of chefs for whom cooking is their life's ambition. We frequent the successful gourmet pubs, restaurants and bistros they run. We are proud that the United Kingdom, once regarded as a culinary wasteland, now holds its head high in the global firmament of cooks and bakers. We laud the raft of wannabe entrepreneurs who pitch their business ideas to hard-nosed, self made business gurus, and submit their financial acumen and marketing flair to Alan Sugar or Duncan Bannatyne's unremitting and dispassionate scrutiny. And all this in full view of the cameras - with every twist of the chef's knife, turn of the gardener's trowel, and throw of the commercial dice - recorded, tweeted and commented on throughout the media.
But do we really want our children to go to the local Further Education College or training provider to learn a craft, to obtain a vocational qualification, to enter a trade, to make a living by working for himself or herself? When it comes to parents' choices about their offspring's education and future career or employers' judgments about recruiting their workforce, the majority of us still conform to the cultural norms of post war Britain. Parents want their sons and daughters to go to university and get a degree; employers want their employees to be the brightest and the best. Gaining a degree, and proving yourself in the academic world, is still regarded as synonymous with success in society, a guarantee of good long-term employment prospects, earnings and a pension - a route to social mobility in itself.
In what remains, regrettably, still the most class obsessed society in the developed world, having a child who becomes a chef or an entrepreneur in Britain today is not something, on the whole, middle class parents boast about at dinner parties - whilst secretly bingeing on entertainment programmes that elevate vocational skills to their rightful place alongside academic achievement.
So when I am asked to comment on what VQ Day means for Local Enterprise Partnerships - LEPs - I am saddened that I must respond honestly and say that right now it probably doesn't mean that much because as a society we continue overwhelmingly to value brainpower - thinking and recall - over the vocational or technical and practical skills of doing, making, designing and selling.
Could LEPs do more to promote VQ day and do LEPs support vocational qualifications in general? The answer here is categorically yes. LEPs, a creation of coalition government, are here to stay. I believe we can and must play a crucial role going forward in challenging the entrenched culture and in changing the prevailing attitudes to which I have drawn attention in this short piece. In my own LEP, in the South East Midlands, we have taken important steps in this direction through collaborative work with our excellent FE colleges and providers and by working closely with them and our employers on the skills and apprenticeships strategies of our Strategic Economic Plan - and I look forward to developing this significantly with them in the future.
Source Data from BARB
1The Apprentice (9.7m viewers), Dragon's Den (4.3m) MasterChef (6.6m), The Great British Bake Off (6.6m), and The Big Allotment Challenge (3.2) University Challenge (3m) and Mastermind (1.57m)
Copyright © Ann Limb 2013


text:
Search / william ridley
show the most relevant results
show exact phrase matches
go to bio for matching names
all results matching names
search the whole website
search portraits
search portrait story videos
search Portrait magazine
search exhibitions
search About Face articles
search general information
William Johnson
William Johnson was a commercial photographer who operated a studio on the corner of Pitt and Market Streets in Sydney from the 1890s to the 1920s.
4 portraits in the collection
William Buckley
William Buckley (1780-1856), known as 'the wild white man', was transported for life in 1802 for receiving stolen cloth.
1 portrait in the collection
William Hodges
William Hodges (1744-1797) trained from an early age at William Shipley's drawing school at Castle Court in the Strand, and was afterward apprenticed to a landscape painter.
William Dickinson
William Dickinson (1746-1823) was a London-born draughtsman, engraver and print publisher.
William Walford
Francis William Barnard Walford (1821–1896), businessman and landowner, was born in Hobart, the son of Barnard Walford (1801–1846), a publican and victualler; and the grandson of Barnard Walford senior (c.
William Burman
William Insull Burman came to Victoria in 1853 and worked as a painter and decorator before establishing his own photography business in Carlton in about 1863.
William H. Bardwell
William H. Bardwell, photographer, worked at various premises in Ballarat from 1858 until 1895.
William Howitt
William Howitt (1792–1879), author, arrived in Victoria in 1852 having worked as a farmer, druggist, alderman and writer in England.
William Owen
William Owen moved to London from his native Shropshire in 1786 and was apprenticed for seven years to the coach-painter Charles Catton.
William P. Dowling
William Paul Dowling (1824–1877) is thought to have studied art in his native Dublin before settling in London, where he worked as a draughtsman while trying to establish himself as a portraitist.
Rev. William Singleton
The Reverend William Singleton (c. 1804-1875), Anglican clergyman, graduated from Trinity College Dublin in 1826 and was ordained in the city's Christ Church Cathedral in 1841.
William Wentworth
William Wentworth (1790-1872) was a landowner, barrister and statesman.
Sir William Ashton OBE
Sir William (Will) Ashton OBE (1881-1963) was the son of James Ashton, who founded Adelaide's Norwood Art School in 1885 and its Academy of Arts in 1895.
William Robinson AO
William Robinson AO (b. 1936) is one of Australia's most distinguished and influential contemporary painters, known for his distinctive and prolific output as landscape painter in particular.
William Strutt
William Strutt arrived in Melbourne in 1850 having undertaken his training in art in Paris in the late 1830s.
William B. Latimer
William Latimer (life dates unknown) was a portrait photographer who worked in Melbourne in the latter part of the nineteenth century.