text:
A Made-in-China Pandemic
I believe that China wanted to torpedo the world economy to become the dominant country, read below: It also show in their ruthless actions of burning people near death of covid 19, just to achieve their goals, no matter the obstacles before them. In all the countries around the world where this pandemic exist, the main origin of the virus is from China.
'Rare' genome sequencing almost certainly proves Covid WAS deliberately made in a Chinese lab before it leaked to the world: Another expert study makes bombshell claim
Two U.S. experts have penned a damning essay saying the genome sequencing of COVID-19 strongly suggests that the virus was manufactured inside a Chinese laboratory. Dr. Stephen Quay (top right) and Richard Muller (bottom right), a physics professor at the University of California Berkeley, made the claim in The Wall Street Journal on Sunday, amid growing speculation that the coronavirus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). 'The most compelling reason to favor the lab leak hypothesis is firmly based in science,' the experts wrote, stating that 'COVID-19 has a genetic footprint that has never been observed in a natural coronavirus.' A graphic (left) shows how the coronavirus' genetic code varies to its closest known relative
The COVID-19 pandemic should be a wake-up call for a world that has accepted China's lengthening shadow over global supply chains for far too long. Only by reducing China's global economic influence. Now China is spreading lies to deflect world opinion against them.
Two U.S. experts have penned a damning essay saying that science strongly suggests the novelcoronaviruswas manufactured inside a Chinese laboratory.
The claim was made by Drs Stephen Quay, CEO of biopharmaceutical company Atossa Therapeutics Inc, and Richard Muller, a physics professor at the University ofCaliforniaBerkeley, inThe Wall Street Journal on Sunday.
In the op-ed, the men say their proof lies in genome sequencing, or analyzing the DNA, of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.
There are 36 DNA segments - made up of three-letter 'words' - that viruses use to make an amino acid known as L-arginine.
L-arginine helps make proteins but is also often used in so-called 'gain of function' research, which alters viruses to make them more transmissible and more deadly.
The new virus contains a segment called CGG-CGG, which is considered rare even in experiments in which researchers are trying to manipulate virus.
But even more telling is that this combination has never been found naturally in any other type of coronavirus, including in SARS and MERS, both of which are cousins of the new virus.
'A virus simply cannot pick up a sequence from another virus if that sequence isn't present in any other virus,' Quay and Muller wrote.
'The CGG-CGG combination has never been found naturally. That means the common method of viruses picking up new skills, called recombination, cannot operate here.'
The essay comes after an explosive study last week claimed that Chinese scientists created COVID-19 in the Wuhan lab, then tried to cover their tracks by reverse-engineering versions of the virus to make it look like it evolved naturally from bats.
SARS-CoV-2, which causes Covid, carries all the information needed for it to spread in around 30,000 letters of genetic code, known as RNA. But it is the only coronavirus of its type to carry 12 unique letters that allow its spike protein — which it uses to bind to human cells and infect people — to be activated by a common enzyme called furin, which in turn makes it better at invading neighbouring cells. The top bar shows the section of the 30,000 letters that accounts for the spike protein (purple). The middle purple bar is the spike protein section, with the white line highlighted being the location of the 12 letters: CCUCGGCGGGCA. The bottom bars show how that specific section of the virus differs ever so slightly to RaTG13, the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2
Dr. Stephen Quay and Richard Muller have penned a damning essay claiming the genome sequencing of COVID-19 strongly suggests that the virus was manufactured inside a Chinese laboratory
COVID-19 has the genome sequencing 'CGG-CGG' - one of 36 sequencing patterns. That combination is commonly used by scientists in gain-of-function research, but is otherwise considered extremely 'rare'. Researchers are pictured inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology in January 2020
Chinese military scientist 'filed a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine BEFORE the virus was declared a global pandemic and worked closely with 'bat woman' at Wuhan institute'
A Chinese military scientist with ties to the United States reportedly filed a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine well before the disease was declared a global pandemic.
Yusen Zhou, who worked for the People's Liberation Army (PLA), lodged the paperwork on behalf of the Chinese political party on February 24 2020, according toThe Australian newspaper.
That date was just five weeks afterChinafirst confirmed human transmission of thecoronavirus.
Zhou is also said to have 'worked closely' with scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), including Shi Zhengli - the deputy director of the lab who is famous for her research on coronavirus in bats.
Their relationship is likely to strengthen speculation that the virus leaked from the lab and that China was aware that it was spreading between humans long before they alerted the international community.
Zhou mysteriously died less than three months after he filed the patent.The New York Postclaims his death was only reported in one Chinese media report, despite the fact he was one of the country's most prominent scientists.
Zhou had previously worked on research linked to the US institutions, including the University of Minnesota and the New York Blood Center, the newspaper reported.
In the new essay, Quay and Muller go on to state that those who believe COVID-19 began by being transferred from animals to humans 'must explain why it happened to pick its least favorite combination: CGG-CGG. Why did it replicate the choice the lab's gain-of-function researchers would have made?'
The pair conclude: 'Yes, it could have happened randomly, through mutations. But do you believe that? At the minimum, this fact—that the coronavirus, with all its random possibilities, took the rare and unnatural combination used by human researchers—implies that the leading theory for the origin of the coronavirus must be laboratory escape.'
In recent weeks, many of the world's top scientists have pushed to determine whether the virus was leaked from the WIV.
The lab leak theory was initially dismissed by many in the media and academic communities.
President Joe Biden last week ordered intelligence agencies to launch a probe into whether COVID was man-made after all.
Circumstantial evidence has long raised questions about the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where researchers were known to be conducting experiments on bat coronavirus strains similar to the one responsible for COVID-19.
China insisted early and often that the virus did not leak from the lab, claiming that crossover to humans must have occurred at a 'wet market' in Wuhan that sold live animals.
Perhaps driven by animosity for Donald Trump, who embraced the lab leak theory early on, the mainstream U.S. media and academics heaped scorn on the possibility, calling it an unhinged conspiracy theory.
But new evidence, including reports of three workers at the Wuhan lab who fell seriously ill with COVID-like symptoms in November 2019, has forced a sober reassessment among doubters.
Frustration with China increased this week after Beijing said that it would not participate in any further investigations by the World Health Organization.
Biden rebuked China in his announcement of the new intelligence review, calling on allies to help 'press China to participate in a full, transparent, evidence-based international investigation and to provide access to all relevant data and evidence.'
Meanwhile, the former head of the Food and Drug Administration, Dr Scott Gottlieb, has said Fauci told world leaders in the spring of 2020 that the coronavirus may have escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China.
U.S. researchers around that time still were considering whether the virus came from a lab break, and Fauci told the health leaders gathered that the newly identified strain of the coronavirus 'looked unusual,' according to Gottlieb.
The disclosure from the former FDA chief comes as an increasing number of mainstream scientists and media figures no longer are parroting the line from the Chinese Communist Party that the virus came from a bat.
Even President Joe Biden has ordered government agencies to investigate the possibility that it might have come from a lab.
Now, Gottlieb says Fauci last year at least considered that COVID-19 could have come from a lab - before closing ranks around the idea that it occurred naturally.
Gottlieb, who served under President Donald Trump, said a former senior member of the Trump administration told him at the time of Fauci's 2020 talk. Gottlieb said he'd recently reconfirmed with that person that Fauci had given the talk.
'I think early on, when they looked at the strain, they had suspicions,' Gottlieb recalled Sunday onCBSFace the Nation, speaking of U.S. scientists. 'And it takes time to do that analysis, and that dispelled some of those suspicions,' he added.
A worker is seen inside the P4 laboratory in Wuhan back in 2017
While China has tried to insist the virus originated elsewhere, academics, politicians and the media have begun to contemplate the possibility it escaped from the WIV - raising suspicions that Chinese officials simply hid evidence of the early spread
Scientists conduct research at the controversial Wuhan virus lab
Covid 'has NO credible natural ancestor' and WAS created by Chinese scientists who then tried to cover their tracks, explosive study claims
An explosive study last week claimed that Chinese scientists created COVID-19 in a Wuhan lab, then tried to cover their tracks by reverse-engineering versions of the virus to make it look like it evolved naturally from bats.
The paper's authors, British Professor Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen, wrote that they have had 'prima facie evidence of retro-engineering in China' for a year - but were ignored by academics and major journals.
Dalgleish is a professor of oncology at St George's University, London, and is best known for his breakthrough creating the first working 'HIV vaccine', to treat diagnosed patients and allow them to go off medication for months.
Sørensen, a virologist, is chair of pharmaceutical company, Immunor, which developed a coronavirus vaccine candidate called Biovacc-19. Dalgleish also has share options in the firm.
The shocking allegations in the study included accusations of 'deliberate destruction, concealment or contamination of data' at Chinese labs, and it noted the silencing and disappearance of scientists in the communist country who spoke out.
And it's also important, Gottlieb said, to look at the virus beyond a scientific perspective: It also needs to be examined from a national security lens, he said.
'A scientific mindset looks at the virus and the virus' behavior and draws a conclusion,' he said.
'A national security assessment looks at that and then looks at the behavior of the Chinese government, the behavior of the lab, other evidence around the lab - including the infections we now know took place - and that changes the overall assessment,' he said.
Although some experts still believe the virus was transmitted from a bat to some other species of animal, then to humans, its origins remain unproven.
It comes after study last week claimed that Chinese scientists created COVID-19.
That paper was authored by Professor Angus Dalgleish, an oncologist at St George's University, London, and Dr Birger Sørensen, a Norwegian virologist and chair of pharmaceutical company Immunor.
The journal article, exclusively obtained by DailyMail.com, is set to make waves among the scientific community, as the majority of experts have until recently staunchly denied the origins of COVID-19 were anything other than a natural infection leaping from animals to humans.
While analyzing COVID-19 samples last year in an attempt to create a vaccine, Dalgleish and Sørensen discovered 'unique fingerprints' in the virus that they say could only have arisen from manipulation in a laboratory.
They said they tried to publish their findings but were rejected by major scientific journals which were at the time resolute that the virus jumped naturally from bats or other animals to humans.
Even when former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove spoke out publicly saying the scientists' theory should be investigated, the idea was dismissed as 'fake news.'
How China's fake news machine is rewriting the history of Covid-19, even as the pandemic unfolds
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson's retweet of an article blaming the U.S. for infecting Wuhan with coronavirus went viral, viewed 160 million times within hours. But where did the story come from?
A traveler wearing a face mask walks past displays showing flight information at Beijing Capital International Airport in Beijing on March 6, 2020. | Mark Schiefelbein/AP Photo
By now, the early history of Covid-19 is well known, if not clear in its details. The virus was first detected somewhere around Wuhan, in Hubei province, then appears to have entered the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, from where it infected many others. Doctors in Wuhan first noticed the novel coronavirus in December and began exchanging urgent warnings. Local government authorities set out to silence them; some were detained and made to sign documents admitting wrongdoing.
Meanwhile, Wuhan officials went about business as usual, which included a disastrous Lunar New Year banquet attended by about 40,000 families. Soon, many more thousands around Wuhan were infected, with hundreds dead or dying, including ophthalmologist Li Wenliang, who had been punished for trying to raise the alarm.
Realizing it was in the firing line not just for running the nation that had unleashed the deadly virus on the world but also for ignoring, covering up and denying its spread, China's Communist Party moved into damage-control mode. This included suggesting it was the United States that was responsible for the virus.
Chinese state media regularly tweet propaganda and what many describe as "fake news". Global Times has 1.7 million followers on Twitter; China Xinhua News, 12.6 million; People's Daily, 7.1 million; China Daily, 4.3 million; and China Global Television Network (CGTN), 14 million.
Zhao Lijian, spokesman and deputy director general of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' information department, had 287,000 followers when he tweeted a link to a conspiracy website alleging the U.S. was responsible for the virus. (Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying had 146,700 followers; the ministry's "spokesperson" account, used by Geng Shuang, had 61,000; and Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of Global Times, had 175,000.)
With the outbreak of an epidemic, one of the first jobs of scientists and doctors, even while they fight to save lives, is to identify its source. This is critical in the search for medicines to combat a virus and a vaccine to prevent its spread.
On January 24, an article written jointly by 29 Chinese medical doctors and scientists was published in The Lancet, one of the world's leading medical journals. The authors shared their findings from a study of patients who were suspected of having been infected with 2019-nCoV and had been admitted to a Wuhan hospital. The report said that by January 2, 41 of them had been "laboratory-confirmed" as infected with the virus – which causes Covid-19 – and two-thirds of those infected "had been exposed to the Huanan market".
The findings appeared to support anecdotal evidence that the source of the virus was the market, which had been closed by city officials on January 1. This had been often repeated by Chinese authorities and reported widely in the global media. The Lancet article gave scientific currency to this narrative.
Then, on February 19, another study – this time published on ChinaXiv.org, an open repository and distribution website used by scientific researchers – suggested the market was likely not ground zero for the virus, but rather that it had been "imported"from outside.
The study was by a team of scientists from several institutions: Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden of Chinese Academy of Sciences; South China Agricultural University; and the Chinese Institute for Brain Research. It was revised on February 21. Neither version of the study suggested Covid-19 had originated outside China.
But the fake news machine was about to go to work.
On February 23, the People's Daily's English-language site reprinted a February 22 Global Times article titled, "Japanese TV report sparks speculations in China that Covid-19 may have originated in US". The original Global Times article, which is no longer available online, began: "A report from a Japanese TV station that suspected some of the 14,000 Americans died of influenza may have unknowningly [sic] contracted the coronavirus has gone viral on Chinese social media, stoking fears and speculations in China that the novel coronavirus may have originated in the U.S.
"The report, by TV Asahi Corporation of Japan, suggested that the US government may have failed to grasp how rampant the virus have gone [sic] on the US soil."
The article continued: "The story sparked various conspiracy theories on [sic] Chinese cyberspace.
"The Military World Games were held in Wuhan in October. 'Perhaps the US delegates brought the coronavirus to Wuhan, and some mutation occurred to the virus, making it more deadly and contagious, and causing a widespread outbreak this year,' a user posted on China's Twitter-like Weibo.
"[An] international relations professor at the Shanghai-based Fudan University, noted that global virologists are working to track the origin of the virus, including the intelligence agencies. Netizens are encouraged to actively partake in discussions, but preferrably [sic] in a rational fashion."
The original Global Times article appears to have been replaced with one about the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's denial of the TV Asahi report.
On March 4, the People's Daily reprint of this article was used as the basis for a piece published on conspiracy website GlobalResearch.ca, titled "China's Coronavirus: A Shocking Update. Did The Virus Originate in the US?" It was the first of two articles on the website that would lead to Zhao's tweet nine days later suggesting the U.S. Army had brought the virus to Wuhan.
The March 4 article begins: "The Western media quickly took the stage and laid out the official narrative for the outbreak of the new coronavirus which appeared to have begun in China, claiming it to have originated with animals at a wet market in Wuhan."
This omits a few salient facts: that China's state-controlled media had also "laid out the official narrative"; that reporters had received that narrative from the Chinese government; and that in the early days of the outbreak, the majority of evidence, including the Lancet article by 29 Chinese doctors, pointed to the Wuhan market.
The Global Research article continues: "In fact the origin was for a long time unknown but it appears likely now, according to Chinese and Japanese reports, that the virus originated elsewhere, from multiple locations, but began to spread widely only after being introduced to the market.
"More to the point, it appears that the virus did not originate in China and, according to reports in Japanese and other media, may have originated in the U.S."
The article then presents a subheading that inflates "may have originated in the US" to "Chinese Researchers Conclude the Virus Originated Outside of China". Underneath, it quotes two reports – a February 22 article in Global Times and a February 23 article in CGTN – both about the ChinaXiv study, which did not suggest the virus originated outside China.
But Global Research wanted readers to draw the conclusion that it did, and so it created some dots to be connected: "Chinese medical authorities – and 'intelligence agencies' – then conducted a rapid and wide-ranging search for the origin of the virus, collecting nearly 100 samples of the genome from 12 different countries on 4 continents, identifying all the varieties and mutations. During this research, they determined the virus outbreak had begun much earlier, probably in November, shortly after the Wuhan Military Games.
"They then came to the same independent conclusions as the Japanese researchers – that the virus did not begin in China but was introduced there from the outside."
That was not the "conclusion" of the scientists who posted their research on ChinaXiv.
Next, citing a February 27 story on Xinhuanet, Global Research invokes a Chinese national hero, Zhong Nanshan, who led the fight to contain severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2003. "China's top respiratory specialist Zhong Nanshan said on January 27 … 'Though the Covid-19 was first discovered in China, it does not mean that it originated from China'."
Global Research translates this for its readers: "But that is Chinese for 'it originated someplace else, in another country'."
Zhong did not say that. Neither did Xinhuanet. And the "Japanese researchers" Global Research refers to are never identified. The only reference to a Japanese source is: "In February of 2020, the Japanese Asahi news report (print and TV) claimed the coronavirus originated in the US, not in China …"
Global Research offers no link to Asahi, only a link to the February 23 People's Daily article, which also has no Asahi link but was a reprint of the Global Times story, which appears to have been revised on February 22, and – you guessed it – provides no Asahi link.
An online search for "Asahi news coronavirus originated in the US" from February 1 to 29 reveals no link to any such Asahi article. Neither does a search of the Asahi news website, which returns 688 articles containing the word "coronavirus" through March 4. But not this one.
Global Research also cites the Fudan University quote in Global Times: "[The professor] stated that global virologists 'including the intelligence agencies' were tracking the origin of the virus. Also of interest, the Chinese government did not shut the door on this. The news report stated: 'Netizens are encouraged to actively partake in discussions, but preferably in a rational fashion.'
"In China, that is meaningful. If the reports were rubbish, the government would clearly state that, and tell people to not spread false rumours."
The final piece of "evidence" in Global Research's March 4 article is headed "Taiwan Virologist Suggests the Coronavirus Originated in the US", and includes an embedded video of a Taiwan television show, identified as This! Is Not News, and a screenshot of a man with a pointer giving a colourful lecture about the origins of the virus. "The man in the video is a top virologist and pharmacologist who performed a long and detailed search for the source of the virus," claims the article.
Except the man in the video – whom the report does not name – is not a virologist at all. He is a politician from the pro-Beijing New Party and a member of the Taipei City Council, who, before entering politics full time in 2002, was a pharmacology professor.
The clip opens with an introduction from a man in a crew cut, who talks about China and Russia and Georgian defectors carrying American biowarfare secrets, and mosquitoes and bats developed by the U.S. for diabolical purposes. As he talks, tabloid-sized purple characters scroll along the bottom of the screen, punctuated with question marks and exclamation marks, and the one English acronym every conspiracy theorist worldwide knows: "CIA!"
Capping his performance is a 1981 analysis purported to have been carried out by the U.S. Army that showed the attraction of "entomological warfare" to the U.S. military and American taxpayers: 50 per cent of a city of 1.2 million people could be wiped out at a per-corpse cost of 29 cents.
Up next, "the man in the video"notes that, while the man with the crew cut had been talking in terms of Cold War-style geopolitics where everybody fears and loathes everybody else, he is there solely to discuss science. Then he waves a pointer with a plastic yellow index finger at its tip, indicating diagrams of multicoloured circles. As the most complex diagram arrives on screen, he reassures the show's hostess, "The next slide will make it very clear."
Such was Global Research's Taiwan "expert evidence". Undaunted, the article continues: "The Taiwanese doctor then stated the virus outbreak began earlier than assumed, saying, 'We must look to September of 2019'.
"He stated the case in September of 2019 where some Japanese travelled to Hawaii and returned home infected, people who had never been to China. This was two months prior to the infections in China and just after the CDC suddenly and totally shut down the Fort Detrick bio-weapons lab claiming the facilities were insufficient to prevent loss of pathogens."
The introduction of the U.S. Army's Fort Detrick bio-weapons lab is a solid piece of conspiracy theory craftsmanship. The "man in the video" had not mentioned Fort Detrick – Global Research did, in an apparent attempt to tie the Taiwanese "virologist's" Japanese travellers who visited Hawaii in September to a U.S. Army bioweapons lab.
The Fort Detrick facility had not been "suddenly and totally shut down" – it ceased research in mid-July (and not in September). And how one of the most contagious viruses in history travelled from Maryland to Hawaii over a six- to eight-week period, leaving no trail of illness and death, goes unexamined by Global Research.
For good measure, the article closes by listing six outbreaks in 2018, 2019 and 2020 of "pandemics" that "sickened" and "killed" people, chickens and pigs in China. Each includes notes such as, "China needs to purchase U.S. agricultural products," suggesting that as part of the trade war, the U.S. has been unleashing pathogens in the mainland for more than two years in order to make China buy American.
In summary, the March 4 article invokes mainland hero Zhong, the "Japanese" and the "Taiwanese" – two American allies with no reason to lie – and adds the "CIA" and a leaky U.S. bioweapons research lab for spice. All independent and none really confirming the others while appearing to come close. Perhaps most impressive of all, the author produced almost 2,000 America-bashing words, and not one of them was "Trump".
On March 5, without citing the Global Research March 4 piece or any of the underlying Chinese media articles, Zhao tweeted: "Confirmed cases of #COVID19 were first found in China, but its origin is not necessarily in China. We are still tracing the origin."
On March 11, Global Research published a follow-up: "COVID-19: Further Evidence that the Virus Originated in the US".
The story begins by recapping the March 4 article, upgrading the never-found Japanese Asahi broadcasters and the "man in the video" to "Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists and pharmacologists [who] have determined that the new coronavirus could have originated in the US". The "man in the video" was now also a "physician" and a "scientist".
Recalling his attempt to place the first Covid-19 case in the U.S., Global Research again points out, "immediately prior to that, the CDC totally shut down the U.S. Military's main bio-lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland, due to an absence of safeguards against pathogen leakages, issuing a complete 'cease and desist' order to the military".
As evidence, Global Research had posted a screenshot of an August 5 New York Times headline, "Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concerns; Problems with disposal of dangerous materials led the government to suspend research at the military's leading biodefence centre".
In fact, the New York Times article had not stated the centre had been "totally shut down". It had reported that 900 people worked at the facility and, "Although many projects are on hold, [a facility spokeswoman] said scientists and other employees are continuing to work, just not on select agents". Both The New York Times and a local newspaper that first reported the cessation of the research noted that no pathogens had escaped the facility.
Global Research's March 11 story continues: "We also had the Japanese citizens infected in September of 2019, in Hawaii, people who had never been to China, these infections occurring on US soil long before the outbreak in Wuhan but only shortly after the locking down of Fort Detrick.
"Then, on Chinese social media, another article appeared, aware of the above but presenting further details. It stated in part that five 'foreign' athletes or other personnel visiting Wuhan for the World Military Games (October 18-27, 2019) were hospitalised in Wuhan for an undetermined infection."
That other article is a blog on Chinese social media, identified only by a QR code, that began: "Because there have been so many American dogs recently, in consideration for my account's safety, [I must write] 'some country' or 'M Country' [when referring to America]."
The blog entry, which appeared to be a work in progress and is no longer online, recycled much of Global Research's March 4 article, adding screenshots of local news stories about U.S. military personnel in Wuhan for the October military games who were hospitalized.
According to Global Research: "The article explains more clearly that the Wuhan version of the virus could have come only from the US because it is what they call a 'branch' which could not have been created first because it would have no 'seed'. It would have to have been a new variety spun off the original 'trunk', and that trunk exists only in the US."
So there it was. A post on "Chinese social media" about "'foreign' athletes or other personnel visiting Wuhan for the World Military Games" in October completed the conspiracy's journey. The fake news world had rewritten the origin of Covid-19: it was not due to a catastrophic natural occurrence somewhere in or around Wuhan, as the world's scientists believed, but to a bioweapon brought to Wuhan by the U.S. Army.
At the end of its March 11 article, Global Research returned to January, citing two articles in Science magazine for further "evidence" of its conspiracy – neither of which states the origin of the virus was, as Global Research puts it, "Not in Wuhan" – tying a bow around the package Zhao would soon forward to hundreds of thousands, who would forward it to hundreds of millions.
On the morning of March 13, Zhao tweeted links to the Global Research articles: "This article is very much important to each and every one of us. Please read and retweet it. COVID-19: Further Evidence that the Virus Originated in the US. It would be useful to read this prior article for background: China's Coronavirus: A Shocking Update. Did The Virus …"
Followed by: "Just take a few minutes to read one more article. This is so astonishing that it changed many things I used to believe in. Please retweet to let more people know about it. China's Coronavirus: A Shocking Update. Did The Virus Originate in the US? – Global Research: The Western media quickly laid out the official narrative for the outbreak of COVID-19 which appeared to have begun in China …"
By late afternoon, the South China Morning Post reported that the hashtag topic "Zhao Lijian sent out five consecutive tweets questioning the US" had been viewed more than 4.7 million times on Weibo. Twelve hours later, The New York Times reported it had been viewed more than 160 million times.
Zhao's Twitter followers have increased from 287,000 to more than 500,000. Media worldwide carried stories about his tweets, putting them in front of millions more readers, most of whom would never have seen them on Twitter or Weibo. Fake virus news had gone viral.
In October, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence noted in the first line of its report on Russia's use of social media to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, that "information warfare [is] designed to spread disinformation and societal division". Zhao's tweets accomplished both. The disinformation was obvious. Critical thinking in abeyance, plenty of people will believe a claim that the U.S. Army planted Covid-19 in Wuhan; even more will want it to be true.
When President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and others began fighting back by loudly and repeatedly calling Covid-19 "the Chinese virus", social division in the U.S. grew, if that is possible. The media accused Trump of being racist and xenophobic, and inciting more of the same towards Chinese-Americans. This only caused Trump to say it louder and more often.
One wonders how much longer Washington will continue fighting the information war against Beijing with one arm tied behind its back. Chinese media enjoy free run of the U.S., including on Twitter. The U.S. has no such freedom in China.
Not a few pundits in these past few weeks have predicted Covid-19 will end globalisation, or even "life as we know it". That seems unlikely, given the short-term nature of people's memories and how profitable "life as we know it" has been for so many. But given the mischief Zhao's tweets caused, Beijing's days on Twitter might be numbered.
NEW DELHI – The new COVID-19 coronavirus has spread to more than 100 countries – bringing social disruption, economic damage, sickness, and death – largely because authorities in China, where it emerged, initially suppressed information about it. And yet China is now acting as if its decision not to limit exports of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and medical supplies – of which it is the dominant global supplier – was a principled and generous act worthy of the world's gratitude.
Witnessing Wuhan
When the first clinical evidence of a deadly new virus emerged in Wuhan, Chinese authorities failed to warn the public for weeks and harassed, reprimanded, and detained those who did. This approach is no surprise: China has a long history of "killing" the messenger. Its leaders covered up severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), another coronavirus, for over a month after it emerged in 2002, and held the doctor who blew the whistle in military custody for 45 days. SARS ultimately affected
more than 8,000 people in 26 countries.
This time around, the Communist Party of China's proclivity for secrecy was reinforced by President Xi Jinping's eagerness to be perceived as an in-control strongman, backed by a fortified CPC. But, as with the SARS epidemic, China's leaders could keep it under wraps for only so long. Once Wuhan-linked COVID-19 cases were detected in Thailand and South Korea
, they had little choice but to acknowledge the epidemic.
About two weeks after Xi rejected scientists' recommendation to declare a state of emergency, the government announced heavy-handed containment measures, including putting millions on lockdown. But it was too late: many thousands of Chinese were already infected with COVID-19, and the virus was rapidly spreading internationally. US National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien has said
that China's initial cover-up "probably cost the world community two months to respond," exacerbating the global outbreak.
Beyond the escalating global health emergency, which has already killed thousands
, the pandemic has disrupted normal trade and travel, forced many school closures, roiled the international financial system, and sunk global stock markets. With oil prices plunging, a global recession appears imminent.
None of this would have happened had China responded quickly to evidence of the deadly new virus by warning the public and implementing containment measures. Indeed, Taiwan and Vietnam have shown the difference a proactive response can make.1
Taiwan, learning from its experience with SARS, instituted
preventive measures, including flight inspections, before China's leaders had even acknowledged the outbreak. Likewise, Vietnam quickly halted flights from China and closed all schools. Both responses recognized the need for transparency, including updates on the number and location of infections and public advisories on how to guard against COVID-19.
Thanks to their governments' policies, both Taiwan and Vietnam – which normally receive huge numbers of travelers from China daily – have kept total cases under 50. Neighbors that were slower to implement similar measures, such as Japan and South Korea, have been hit much harder.
If any other country had triggered such a far-reaching, deadly, and above all preventable crisis, it would now be a global pariah. But China, with its tremendous economic clout, has largely escaped censure. Nonetheless, it will take considerable effort for Xi's regime to restore its standing at home and abroad.
Perhaps that is why China's leaders are publicly congratulating themselves for not limiting exports of medical supplies and APIs used to make medicines, vitamins, and vaccines. If China decided to ban such exports to the United States, the state-run news agency Xinhua recently noted
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the costs of Xi's increasing authoritarianism. It should be a wake-up call for political and business leaders who have accepted China's lengthening shadow over global supply chains for far too long. Only by loosening China's grip on global supply networks – beginning with the pharmaceutical sector – can the world be kept safe from the country's political pathologies.
US Navy Strategy Details War Plan to stop Russia ...
There is no doubt the US will go to war to protec...
CHINA WILL SEIZE THE PHILIPPINES IN A WAR WITH US
Dream of Summer Days Again: U.P...
Design and Construction of Flying Aircra...
CHINA IS A PAPER TIGER LET AUSTIN CHALLENGE TH...
China Lusting Benham Rise The Philippines Departm...
THE GUNS OF BATAN A FUTURE STRATEGIC US MISSILE BA...
For everyone under lockdown orders in the co...
A Made-in-China Pandemic I believe that China ...
TEENAGERS OF MY GENERATION Sandwiched in betwee...
Medieval History of the Thousand Year Old House w...


Wednesday, January 23, 2008 by Dave Winer.
We turned off share.opml.org yesterday, for good, as far as I know. It was a good idea, but we never got it together to make it the powerhouse I wanted it to be.
Now that Google and Bloglines both have discovery mechanisms, based on what you and others like, there would only be a future for SYO if it were a thriving and growing community, and it isn't.
Normally, we'd leave a site like that running indefinitely, but this one needed its own server, and I wanted to cut expenses now that the S3 bill is going up, serving some big JPEGs and generally being the back-end for a community that is growing, the people using FlickrFan.
If there's a big demand to bring it back, we can -- but that's going to require cash flow to go with it. At this point, I don't think it's a good investment for me.


2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manuals Download - Dodge Dakota Service and Repair Manuals. Every Manual available online - found by our community and shared for FREE. Dodge Dakota. Nominated for the North American Truck of the Year award for 2000, the Dodge Dakota is mid size pickup truck from Chrysler. From its introduction in 1986 to 2009, it was marketed by Dodge division and from 2009. 2003 Dodge Dakota Pick-up Parts Manual PDF Download 2004 Dodge Dakota Pick-up Parts Manual PDF Download Dodge Dakota 2000-2001.2003.2005 Full Repair Service Manual Download. pdf download now 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download. INSTANT DOWNLOAD! Pdf file description:This is the most practical Service Repair Manual for the 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download ever compiled by mankind.This DOWNLOAD contains of high quality diagrams and instructions on how to service and repair your car..
Download Dodge Dakota Service Repair Manual 2000 Download. This is the COMPLETE official full factory service repair manual for the Dodge Dakota. Production model years 2000. All pages allow you to print it out in its entirety or just the pages you need!!. 2015 Dodge Neon Sxt Service Manual PDF Kindle. 2000 Dodge Dakota Repair Manual Pdf PDF Download Gives the readers many references and knowledge that bring positive influence in the future. 2000 Dodge Dakota Repair Manual Pdf is a collection of many of the blogs most popular answers Submit a Question.. With this 2000 Dodge Dakota Service workshop Repair Manual Download, you can know how to keep your car run well. In addition, this manual is in PDF format, which is easy to print it out to read the information and notes..
2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Workshop Service Repair Manual PDF DOWNLOAD This is the most practical Service Repair Manual for the 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download ever compiled by mankind. This DOWNLOAD contains of high quality diagrams and instructions on how to service and repair your car. This is a must for the Do-It-Yourselfer!. Download 2000 DODGE DAKOTA SERVICE REPAIR MANUAL – INSTANT DOWNLOAD!. COVERS ALL MODELS & ALL REPAIRS A-Z. Buy and Download Complete repair manual / service manual for 2000 Dodge Dakota. It covers every single detail on your car. All models, and all engines are included!. A free repair manual for 2000 Dodge Dakota 4.7 - Dodge Cars & Trucks question. Search Fixya. Browse Categories A free repair manual for 2000 Dodge Dakota 4.7. Posted by Holly Clendenen on Oct 19, 2017. 2000 Dodge Dakota Service Repair Factory Manual INSTANT DOWNLOAD for the easy solution download the pdf file Mar 08,.
Tradebit merchants are proud to offer auto service repair manuals for your Dodge Dakota - download your manual now! With over 67 years in the industry, Dodge has been building high quality automobiles such as the 184 horsepower, 1995 Dodge Aspen and the 2006 Viper.. Instant Download (ID 158341446) 2000 Dodge Dakota Service Repair Manual . Complete service repair manual for the 2000 dodge dakota . This manual contains deep information about maintaining,assembly, disassembly and servicing your 2000 Dodge Dakota.. 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download This is the most practical Service Repair Manual for the 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download ever compiled by mankind. This DOWNLOAD contains of high quality diagrams and instructions on how to service and repair your car. This is a must for the Do-It-Yourselfer!.
2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download. £14.99. VIEW DETAILS. 2000 Dodge Dakota Workshop Manual. £15.99. DODGE DAKOTA 97 98 99 2000 Repair Service Manual Download. Dodge Dakota, 1997-2004, workshop, repair, service, manual. 1999 DODGE DAKOTA Service and Repair Manual.. 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual DOWNLOAD DODGE DAKOTA WORKSHOP REPAIR MANUAL DOWNLOAD ALL 2005-ONWARDS MODELS COVERED DODGE DAKOTA WORKSHOP REPAIR MANUAL DOWNLOAD ALL 2001 MODELS COVERED. Dodge Dakota 2000-2001.2003.2005 Full Repair Service Manual Download. This manual may contain attachments and optional equipment that are not available in your area. Please consult your local distributor for those items you may require. Materials and specifications are subject to.
Aug 23, 2006 · 2nd Gen Dakota Tech 1997 - 2004 Dodge Dakota Tech - The ultimate forum for technical help on the 2nd Gen Dakota. Sponsored By: 2000 Factory Service Manual, PFD Download. dodge ram 1500 2500 3500 truck service repair manual 1999 2000 2001 download!!! 1999 Chrysler/Dodge Ram Pickup 1500 Workshop Repair Service Manual BEST DOWNLOAD Dodge Ram Pickup 1500 Service & Repair Manual Manual 1999. Official Dodge Owners website. Your source for Dodge Owner Manuals and Dodge Service Manuals..
Dodge Dakota 2000-2005 Service Manual Free Download GO TO DOWNLOAD ! This Dodge Dakota 2000-2005 Service Manual Free Download is a complete factory service and repair manual for your Dodge Dakota.. By applying the knowledge in this 1997-2000 Dodge Dakota repair manual, any owner should be able to make the right decisions about what they need to do to maintain and repair the 1997-2000 Dodge Dakota truck. This 1997-2000 Dodge Dakota manual covers all aspects of repair.. Do you own 2000 Dodge Dakota? If so, here is a complete service/repair manual for 2000 Dodge Dakota. It contains detailed instructions and step by step diagrams for all workshop procedures..
Buy and Download COMPLETE Service & Repair Manual.It covers every single detail on your vehicle. All models, and all engines are included. Home › 1997-2000 DODGE DAKOTA PICKUP REPAIR MANUAL DOWNLOAD. Paul B. 16 Nov 2018. Great first time buyer experience. TIM B. 1997-2000 DODGE DAKOTA PICKUP REPAIR MANUAL DOWNLOAD. 8 95 Add to. Dodge Durango 2000-2003, Dodge Dakota 2000-2004 (Hayne's Automotive Repair Manual) [Haynes] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Haynes offers the best coverage for cars, trucks, vans, SUVs and motorcycles on the market today.. Find great deals on eBay for 2000 dodge dakota repair manual. Shop with confidence. Skip to main content. eBay: Shop by category. Shop by category. Enter your search keyword 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Shop Service Repair Manual DVD Engine Drivetrain Wiring. Brand New. 3.0 out of 5 stars..
View and Download Dodge Dakota Sport 2001 service manual online. Dakota Sport 2001 Automobile pdf manual download. Also for: Dakota 2001, Dakota 4x4 2001, Dakota slt 2001.. Sign in to your Dodge owner account now to gain knowledge of your vehicle with how-to videos, tips, your owner's manual and more, all tailored to you.. Dodge RAM Service and Repair Manuals. Every Manual available online - found by our community and shared for FREE. Dodge RAM 2000 Workshop Manual 2500 Truck 2WD V8 5.9L (10,949 Pages) (Free) 2012 Dodge Ram Owners Manual (730 Pages) (Free) Misc Document. Dodge Ram 1986 Misc Documents Wiring Diagrams (12 Pages).
2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download Ebook 2000 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download currently available at. Service & repair instructions specific to your 2000 Dodge Dakota. Unlimited access to your 2000 Dodge Dakota manual on a yearly basis. 100% No Risk Guarantee. We'll get you the repair information you need, every time, or we'll refund your purchase in full. 2000 Dodge Dakota repair manual. Yearly Access $ 19.95 / yr.. Service and repair manuals for Dodge Dakota. Model specific coverage with simple step-by-step procedures for the service, repair, and maintenance of your vehicle. Free shipping on all repair manuals..
CLICK ON IMAGE TO DOWNLOAD 2000 Dodge Dakota Service Repair Workshop Manual Download. CLICK ON IMAGE TO DOWNLOAD 2000 Dodge Dakota Service Repair Workshop Manual Download Leaf Spring, Repair Manuals, Dodge Trucks, Mopar, Oem, Transportation, Autos. Charles E. MOPAR Trucks. Dodge Dakota Quad Towing Vehicle Small Trucks Back Seat Ox Repair. Haynes Dodge repair manuals cover your specific vehicle with easy to follow pictures and text, save thousands on maintaining your vehicle. Dodge is also a popular brand when it comes to pickup trucks. They are manufactured under the Ram brand, which is well-known for models like the 2500, the 3500 and the 5500. Dakota (2000 - 2004. By applying the knowledge in this 1997-2000 Dodge Dakota repair manual, any owner should be able to make the right decisions about what they need to do to maintain and repair the 1997-2000 Dodge Dakota truck. This 1997-2000 Dodge Dakota manual covers all aspects of repair..
Original Chrysler Factory Repair Manuals, written for Chrysler Service Technicians and Dealer Shop Mechanics. Facebook; 1948-1950 Dodge Truck Factory Service Manual Reprint All 1948 1949 1950 Dodge B-1 and B-2 Series Trucks Including Pickups, Panel, Power Wagon, Vans, Stake-beds and Big Trucks - 1/2 Ton, 3/4 Ton, 1 Ton, 1 1/2 Ton, 2. With Chilton's online Do-It-Yourself Dodge Dakota repair manuals, you can view any year's manual 24/7/365. Our 2000 Dodge Dakota repair manuals include all the information you need to repair or service your 2000 Dakota, including diagnostic trouble codes, descriptions, probable causes, step-by-step routines, specifications, and a. 2000 Dodge Dakota Pickup Factory Service Manual Original Shop Repair × ×.
pdf download now 2001 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download. INSTANT DOWNLOAD! Pdf file description:This is the most practical Service Repair Manual for the 2001 Dodge Dakota Truck Service Repair Manual Download ever compiled by mankind.This DOWNLOAD contains of high quality diagrams and instructions on how to service and repair your car. .you can download. Dodge Pickup Truck, SUV Repair & Service Manuals. Dodge Dakota Trucks 2005-2011 Repair Manual Dodge Durango & Dakota Online Service Manual 2004-2011 Dodge Durango 2001-2003, Dakota Pickups 2001-2004 Repair Manual Dodge Durango 2000-2003, Dakota Pick-Up 2000-2004 Repair Manual. Dodge Dakota Repair Manual Online. Dodge Dakota repair manuals are available at the click of a mouse! Chilton's Dodge Dakota online manuals provide information for your car's diagnostics, do-it-yourself repairs, and general maintenance. Chilton's Dodge Dakota repair manuals include diagrams, photos, and instructions you need to assist you in do-it-yourself Dakota repairs..
This need for work can be forestalled or at least delayed by the presence of a good service manual. If you have a repair guide for your Dodge, you will be able to recognize when it needs work and whether that work is something you can do yourself or something for which it will need to be taken to the garage. Viper GTS 2000 - Dodge - Avenger. Kind of tough to do that with a paper manual. All our repair manual downloads come with a Lifetime Protection Policy if lost or damaged, simply contact us and we'll replace it free of charge for life We Provide Various Repair Service Manual / Workshop Manual / Repair Manual / Owners Manuals / Parts Catalogs and other Various Download. Download Service Manual For Free | See more ideas about Repair manuals, Ram trucks and Autos. "CLICK ON IMAGE TO DOWNLOAD 2006 DODGE RAM TRUCK SERVICE REPAIR MANUAL DOWNLOAD!!!" See more "CLICK ON IMAGE TO DOWNLOAD 2000 Dodge Dakota Service Repair Manual INSTANT DOWNLOAD" See more.
1994 dodge ram truck 1500 3500 service manual.pdf 1994 Ram Truck 1500 - 3500 Service Manual. Repair manuals 90.6 MB: English 1 702 JOURNEY JC49: 2008 - 2010 fiat freemont dodge journey 2008 2009 2010 workshop service manual.pdf Parts list + owner's manual + workshop manual. Repair manuals 182 MB. Find great deals on eBay for Dodge Dakota Repair Manual in Dodge. Shop with confidence. Find great deals on eBay for Dodge Dakota Repair Manual in Dodge. 2002 DODGE DAKOTA TRUCK Service Shop Repair Manual CD DVD # 81-370-02056CD OEM. $159.95. Buy It Now. or Best Offer. "Haynes Repair Manual --HAYNES REPAIR MANUAL, FOR 2000-03 DODGE. Vehicle Repair Manuals. www.HotManuals.com Page 2 Honda Trx350 Tm Te Fe Fm Atv 2000- 2003 Service Repair Manual . Honda Trx350 Tm Te Fe Fm Atv 2004- 2006 Service Repair M anual Honda Trx400ex Fourtrax Atv 1999- 2002 Service Repair Manual . Honda Trx400ex Trx400x Atv 2005- 2009 Service Repair Manual.
Equip cars, trucks & SUVs with 2000 Dodge Dakota Repair Manual - Technical Book from AutoZone. Get Yours Today! We have the best products at the right price.. 2005 dodge ram truck service repair manual-pdf download 2006 dodge ram truck service repair manual-pdf download 2001 dodge dakota service repair manual-pdf download 2004 dodge neon service repair manual-pdf download 2004 dodge srt-4 and neon service repair manual-pdf download 2000 dodge dakota truck service repair manual-pdf download.


Today my kids went off to primary school wearing orange t-shirts.
Because in Australia, it's Harmony Day, a day the government says, celebrates Australia's cultural diversity.
So it took incredible comedy timing to decide that today would be the day the government should move to amend Section 18C in the Racial Discrimination Act.
the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.
There is a safeguard under Section 18D, that states that: conduct that prima facie breaches 18C will not be unlawful if it is done "reasonably and in good faith" for artistic, academic, scientific or other public interest purposes (or in reporting on any such conduct), or presumably in the form of hilarious social commentary in cartoons etc.
It appears to me that 18D gives people plenty of get-out-of-jail cards if they get caught being a little racially intolerant by those pesky politically correct nut-jobs.
The Federal government backed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act that retain the offence of "intimidate" on the basis of race, but replace the words "insult", "offend" and "humiliate" with "harass".
Let's look at that word… Harass, and how it might open Pandora's Box.
You can call someone the "n-word" at work but how many times do you have to call them that before we can say you're doing it persistently?
Or if you inform someone on the bus: "F-off, we're full!" If it's only now and then… what's the problem?
I'm not sure why the government would want to make such changes, although I feel in some way it's a move to firm up support from the right of their party. The right is the new black after all – or maybe not.
And I've always wondered exactly what it is that those who have campaigned for changes to Section 18C feel they are unable to say or do. But I get the sense we're about to find out after the decision made today.
Because in Australia, it's Harmony Day, and it appears the government is more interested in token gestures on days like this rather than looking after the interests of our most vulnerable, oppressed members of society.


"Unique challenges accompany thick-shell CdSe/nCdS (n > 10) nanocrystal" by Yijun Guo, Kyle Marchuk et al.
Thick-shell CdSe/nCdS (n >10) nanocrystals were recently reported that show remarkably suppressed fluorescence intermittency or "blinking" at the single-particle level as well as slow rates of Auger decay. Unfortunately, whereas CdSe/nCdS nanocrystal synthesis is well-developed up to n < 6 CdS monolayers (MLs), reproducible syntheses for n > 10 MLs are less understood. Known procedures sometimes result in homogeneous CdS nucleation instead of heterogeneous, epitaxial CdS nucleation on CdSe, leading to broad and multimodal particle size distributions. Critically, obtained core/shell sizes are often below those desired. This article describes synthetic conditions specific to thick-shell growth (n> 10 and n> 20 MLs) on both small (sub2 nm) and large (>4.5 nm) CdSe cores. We find added secondary amine and low concentration of CdSe cores and molecular precursors give desired core/shell sizes. Amine-induced, partial etching of CdSe cores results in apparent shell-thicknesses slightly beyond those desired, especially for very-thick shells (n >20 MLs). Thermal ripening and fast precursor injection lead to undesired homogeneous CdS nucleation and incomplete shell growth. Core/shells derived from small CdSe (1.9 nm) have longer PL lifetimes and more pronounced blinking at single-particle level compared with those derived from large CdSe (4.7 nm). We expect our new synthetic approach will lead to a larger throughput of these materials, increasing their availability for fundamental studies and applications.
Reprinted (adapted) with permission from Journal of Physical Chemistry C 116 (2012): 2791, doi: 10.1021/jp210949v. Copyright 2011 American Chemical Society.
Guo, Yijun; Marchuk, Kyle; Sampat, Siddharth; Abraham, Rachel; Fang, Ning; Malko, Anton V.; and Vela, Javier, "Unique challenges accompany thick-shell CdSe/nCdS (n > 10) nanocrystal synthesis" (2011). Chemistry Publications. 133.


What can you build with ?
interlocking panels are unique and simple to use, with applications throughout the residential and commercial construction industries.
Since its early inception as one of the very first steel structural insulated panel systems, the Panel was designed to become the most efficient and universally viable structural building material available; not only from the standpoint of energy efficiency and disaster resistant strength, but also from a green building, enviro-friendly, socially responsible and sustainable standpoint.


text:
By James Southall Wednesday April 23, 2014
Composed by John Ottman
La-La Land Records / 2012 / 112m
After the (deserved) success of Bryan Singer's X-Men, a sequel was inevitable and X-Men United duly arrived, and was almost as entertaining (and successful, ensuring life would continue in the franchise). John Ottman was unavailable for the first film but Singer got to work with his favourite composer (and editor) second time around. The score that Michael Kamen provided for X-Men was produced in very trying circumstances but was actually very impressive; so while Ottman is curiously dismissive of Kamen's work in the interview extracts in the liner notes for this album, he did actually have something to live up to. Sadly, he didn't. The original hour-long album for X2 was a real mixed bag – some highlights for sure, but as an album it didn't work at all, sounding like a disparate collection of orchestral pieces rather than anything resembling a coherent narrative structure. The same is true but on a larger scale for this considerably-extended special edition.
Many people seem to love it so clearly I'm in the minority but I can't find much of anything to get excited about here. The main theme is decent, but essentially a thinly-veiled rewrite of Henry Mancini's theme from Lifeforce and never particularly developed. An early cue "Nightcrawler Attack" is intriguingly based on Mozart's Requiem, but sadly that is never taken anywhere either. Much of the rest is either very dull brooding underscore or more fast-paced but seemingly entirely unfocused action – ideas are there, certainly, but remain frustratingly underdeveloped. This is very much a literal "score to picture", a bar or two of one thing before a 180-degree turn to something else – for almost two hours. If you love big-budget mickey-mousing then there are far superior examples; but quite what big-budget mickey-mousing is doing in a film of this magnitude is beyond my comprehension. I'm missing something, obviously, because everyone else speaks so highly of it; and for sure there are some moments of entertainment (and certainly more of them on the expanded album than the original one). It's just all far too incoherent to work for me as a listening experience, with the strangest kind of temp-track influence where it isn't hard to guess what the music's inspired by (a whole load of Elfman and Goldenthal in here) but the personality has been removed. I hadn't intended this to be such a short "review" but there's just so little truly interesting here to write about; the music sounds like the well-intentioned product of an enthusiastic amateur rather than a real film score for a film of this scale.
Rating: **
facebook.com/moviewave | twitter.com/MovieWaveDotNet | amazon.com
Tags: John Ottman, La-La Land, X2: X-Men United soundtrack review
orion_mk3 (Reply) on Thursday 24 April, 2014 at 00:03
Ah, going through each of the old X-Men scores in order as a lead-up to the new movie, the first time any composer has written two scores in the franchise?
I think you undersold this one a tad in leaving out any mention of Ottman's fine themes for Jean Grey (which seems unlikely to be reprised in the new film) and Mystique (which probably will be), but I can see where you're coming from to a certain extent. There's a lot of neat motifs that really should have been present throughout the work but just aren't.
Daniel Henderson (Reply) on Thursday 24 April, 2014 at 01:29
I'm hoping your re-review of X-Men: Last Stand is bit more re-evaluated. It wasn't so much John Powell copying Elfman as much as Powell having fun in another style. It is literally everything this score wasn't, and unlike Superman Returns, he didn't have John Williams to borrow themes from.
Michael McDaid (Reply) on Friday 9 May, 2014 at 17:08
There are lots of cool moments in the score. Surprised you couldn't fnd enough here to give at least a 3 star rating. To me it is a solid 4 star score. Lots of great moments like Main Titles, Nightcrawler Attack, Cerebro, Sneaky Mystique, Storm's Perfect Storm/Missiles, God Among Insects, Rogue earns Wings, Goodbye/We're Here to Stay, Evolution Leaps forward and of course the Suite at the end is a must have.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Author Barry W. North was born and raised in New Orleans. He worked twenty-eight years as a refrigeration mechanic for the St. Charles Parish Public Schools in Louisiana. Since his retirement in 2007 he has won the 2009 Long Story Contest International and the 2010 A.E. Coppard Prize for Fiction. More recently, he won Honorable Mention in the 2011 Allen Ginsberg Poetry Awards. He has been nominated twice for the Pushcart Prize. In addition, his poetry and fiction has appeared or is forthcoming in numerous literary magazines, including Slipstream, The Hawaii Pacific Review, The Louisiana Review, The Paterson Literary Review, The Dos Passos Review, Blue Lake Review, Green Hills Literary Lantern, Serving House Journal, Ancient Paths, and others. In conjunction with the A. E. Coppard Prize, a fiction chapbook, Along the Highway, was published in 2010 by White Eagle Coffee Store Press. Terminally Human is his first poetry chapbook. Barry North lives with his wife Diane in Hahnville, Louisiana where they enjoy their retirement and their wonderful families, who teach them every day that only love can give this fleeting life its saving grace. Author Barry W. North was born and raised in New Orleans. He worked twenty-eight years as a refrigeration mechanic for the St. Charles Parish Public Schools in Louisiana. Since his retirement in 2007 he has won the 2009 Long Story Contest International and the 2010 A...
Barry W. North
Barry W. North was born and raised in New Orleans. He worked twenty-eight years as a refrigeration mechanic for the St. Charles Parish Public Schools in Louisiana. Since his retirement in 2007 he has won the 2009 Long Story Contest International and the 2010 A.E. Coppard Prize for Fiction. More recently, he won Honorable Mention in the 2011 Allen Ginsberg Poetry Awards. He has been nominated twice for the Pushcart Prize.
In addition, his poetry and fiction has appeared or is forthcoming in numerous literary magazines, including Slipstream, The Hawaii Pacific Review, The Louisiana Review, The Paterson Literary Review, The Dos Passos Review, Blue Lake Review, Green Hills Literary Lantern, Serving House Journal, Ancient Paths, and others.
In conjunction with the A. E. Coppard Prize, a fiction chapbook, Along the Highway, was published in 2010 by White Eagle Coffee Store Press. Terminally Human is his first poetry chapbook.
Barry North lives with his wife Diane in Hahnville, Louisiana where they enjoy their retirement and their wonderful families, who teach them every day that only love can give this fleeting life its saving grace.


An I/O bus sequencer for providing a data path between an execution Unit (EU-10), a register file (14) and devices connected to a bus (28). A programmable logic array (PLA-18) stores a program which controls a service table (20). The service table includes a plurality of entries divided into fields. One of the fields when decoded instructs the PLA as to what kind of operation the bus sequencer is to perform. Line selection (priority) logic (22) connected to I/O request lines (30) and to the service table (20) determines which service table entry the PLA is to use. A bus interface connected to the I/O bus ports (26) and to the PLA (18) routes data between the I/O bus ports (26) and the register file (14), entries of which are controlled by use of register sets. The service table fields include register set descriptors for storing the status of register set buffers. The PLA decodes an ACCESS instruction to start an operation by loading the first register set descriptor, and then decodes sequential SUPPLY instructions to the entry. Each SUPPLY instruction loads an empty register set descriptor field to be used when the current register set descriptor field is exhausted.
Copending patent application Ser. No. 921,313 filed Oct. 21, 1986, of Bain et al., entitled "Memory based interagent Communication Mechanism" and assigned to Intel Corporation, the assignee of the present invention.
Copending patent application Ser. No. 942,608 filed 12/17/86, of Cox et al., entitled "Execution Unit With Multi-tasking Capability" and assigned to Intel Corporation, the assignee of the present invention.
The present invention relates to data processing systems, and more particularly to apparatus for controlling data flow between an input/output bus and a local memory of an input/output processor.
The above identified copending patent application Ser. No. 921,313 addresses the basic I/O problem of how to couple two different bus types and provide for data flow between these two buses. One of the busses is an I/O bus. On the I/O bus different devices having a spectrum of data rates generated by different peripherals must be handled. Some devices have the added problem of quiet periods followed by very busy periods with sharp transitions between the two periods.
In the past the I/O bus data transfer problem has been solved by using buffers for the data. For example, in the Capowski, et al. U.S. Pat. No. 3,699,530 granted to IBM on Oct. 17, 1972, multiple dedicated buffers are provided for each channel to ensure that all channels have an individual receptacle for receiving data which cannot be made unavailable due to transfers by other channels. Prior resolution of requests from channels control the use of the bus from the channel independently of subsequent priority resolution for use of the main storage. Once a channel transfers its storage address and data into its assigned dedicated buffer, that buffer, based on the storage address contained within it, enters storage priority for the particular logical storage unit desired. In this manner, the single queue of channel requests is rearranged into four independent request queues based on logical storage addresses.
This approach has the advantage that it does smooth out input/output transfers, but at the expense of requiring dedicated resources which are expensive. In modern very large integrated (VLSI) technology, chip space is at a premium and pin connections are limited. It therefore becomes important to reduce the amount of buffering provided on the chip while still maintaining data throughput efficiency. This is best achieved by providing shared rather than dedicated resources.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide an input/output sequencer to handle transfers between an I/O bus and a shared register file.
Briefly, the above object is accomplished in accordance with the invention by providing an I/O bus sequencer including a programmable logic array (PLA) and a program service table including a plurality of entries divided into fields, one of the fields containing means for instructing the PLA as to what kind of operation the bus sequencer is to perform. Line selection (priority) logic connected to I/O request lines and to the service table determines which service table entry the PLA is to use. A bus interface connected to I/O bus ports and to the PLA routes data between the I/O bus ports and a shared register file, entries of which are controlled by use of register sets. The service table fields include register set descriptors for storing the status of register set buffers. The PLA includes means for decoding an access instruction to start an operation by loading the first register set descriptor, and means for decoding sequential supply instructions to the entry. Each supply instruction loads the empty register set descriptor field to be used when the current register set descriptor field is exhausted.
The invention has the advantage that the register file is a shared resource; a pool of buffers which can be allocated and deallocated as the demands of the bus require. This results in less space needed on the chip. Further, speed is increased by passing register set descriptors rather than the data itself.
The foregoing and other objects, features, and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following more particular description of the preferred embodiments of the invention as illustrated in the accompanying drawings.
FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating the access instruction operation to the I/O service table of FIG. 2.
Referring now to FIG. 1, the I/O bus sequencer matches the I/O channel processor (CP) to the I/O bus.
The execution unit (EU-10) is a programmed processor with a pipelined instruction sequencer. The execution unit provides multitask dispatching, message passing, register set passing, and an instruction cache. The I/O bus sequencer (12) and execution unit (10) share a common memory, a register file (14). The register file is uniformly addressed and is composed of a number of multiported register sets. The register file provides the basis for logical and physical synchronization and mapped-task access. Byte, half-word, and word accessing is provided. Different tasks are mapped to use different register sets over time. The mix of tasks executing can change over time. The register sets being employed by a given task can change during the task execution, either under its control by changing its own mappings or with other tasks by passing register sets back and forth as messages or by being swapped. More detail about the execution unit can be found in the above-identified copending patent application Ser. No. 942,608. More detail about the register file can be found in the above-identified copending patent application Ser. No. 921,313.
As described in the above referenced application Ser. No. 921,313, there are two modules to accomplish communication with other devices: the Local Bus Sequencer (LBS) and the I/O Bus Sequencer (IOS). They facilitate communication with the CS (Computational Subsystem) and the I/O subsystem, respectively.
1. The EU executes an access instruction. This instruction issues a request to one of the sequencers. The task may block until the sequencer can accept the request.
2. The sequencer performs the requested operation. This instruction usually results in data being transferred into or out of the register file.
3. A task executes an instruction which blocks until the sequencer signals completion. This task may or may not be the task that issued the request.
4. The sequencer signals the completion of the operation.
5. The task unblocks and resumes execution at the synchronizing instruction.
The sequencer code informs the hardware which sequencer the access is bound for. Codes from 0 to 9 specify a line in the I/O Service Table. Codes 13, 14, and 15 are to the LBS.
The reply method bit tells the sequencer how to signal the completion of a request. The supply bit is used only by the IOS (it is ignored by the LBS). It tells the IOS that the access is part of a block transfer. Length tells how many bytes to move in the transfer. Command tells the sequencer what it is supposed to do. Reply task tells which task is to be replied to. Reply register set tells which register set in the reply task is to be replied to. The physical address is the location on the I/O bus where the transfer will begin. The data pointer is the register file physical address of the first byte of data.
The information described above is generated from parameters and fields of the ACCESS instruction. The instruction contains a pointer to a 32-bit parameter register which holds some of the information necessary for the sequencers. FIG. 6 shows a typical ACCESS instruction and parameter register and how the information needed by a sequencer is generated.
The first six pieces of information described above come directly from either the instruction or the parameter register. The data pointer is generated by taking the logical byte in the parameter register and passing it through the Register Set Mapper to produce a register file physical address.
The 32-bit physical address needed by the sequencers can be generated in three different ways.
FIG. 6 shows the physical address being generated by adding a 32 bit displacement to a 32 bit base address. The pointer to the displacement register is in the instruction and the pointer to the base address is in the parameter register.
The physical address can also be generated by using the pointer to the displacement register as a literal value. This 8-bit literal value is added to the 32-bit base address, allowing positive literal displacements up to 255.
The third way is direct physical addressing. The base address pointer in the parameter register is ignored and the 32 bit value in the displacement regiser is used as the physical address.
The way the physical address is generated is chosen by bits in the instruction.
If a sequencer cannot accept an access request, the ACCESS instruction will block and will be retried when the sequencer can accept a request. Conditions that cause a sequencer to not accept a request are described in the sections for each sequencer.
The ACCESS instruction always locks the logical register set that the task is giving to the sequencer. This keeps both the task and the sequencer from operating on the register set at the same time.
There are two methods for synchronizing transfers between the I/O bus sequencer and the EU: register set locking and microport messages. The LB sequencer always synchronizes with the EU using register set locking. Selection of the desired method is made by the EU code that issues the ACCESS instruction for a particular bus operation. The supply variant can not change the method, so a particular data stream either uses register set locking or microport messages, not both.
When this option is chosen the sequencer sends a microport message to the target task. The target task is specified by the task that executes the ACCESS instruction. The message is delivered in the sequencer format which is shown in FIG. 4.
The message is 16 bits long and the high-order bit is always 0. The bottom six bits of the lower byte of the message contain the physical address of the register set that was involved in the transfer. The bit above the register set physical address (bit 6 in the byte) contains the abnormal termination bit. This bit will be set by the sequencer if the sequencer operation terminated abnormally. In the lower byte the top bit (bit 7) is always 1. The bottom four bits of the upper byte identify which sequencer the message came from. The next three bits (the logical register set) contain the value the sequencer was passed as the reply register set.
The message is designed to be compatible with the MOVE POINTER instruction. By putting a MOVE POINTER instruction immediately after the RECEIVE, the register set that just participated in the transfer can be mapped into the logical space of the target task.
When this type of synchronization is requested, the sequencer will write the physical address of the involved register set into the `reply register set` pointer in the mapper of the `reply task`. Both the `reply register set` and the `reply task` were specified to the sequencer when the request was started. When it writes the register set pointer it will also set the abnormal termination bit in that pointer if the access terminated abnormally. In all cases the register set pointer has its valid bit set (i.e., the register set is unlocked).
All communications and transfers to and from the system or local bus side of the I/O processor go through the local Bus Sequencer. The local bus sequencer is more fully described in the above-identified copending patent application Ser. No. 921,313.
The I/O Sequencer (IOS) provides the path to the I/O bus. FIG. 1 shows the position of the IOS (12) relative to the other components that it communicates with. The IOS transfers data between the I/O buses (16) and the register file (14) and is configured to handle different protocols on the I/O bus. It can transfer blocks of data between the register file and a single location or a set of contiguously addressed locations in the address space of the I/O bus. It can also handle interrupts and DMA requests.
The IOS, functionally, transfers the contents of a register set to (or from) the I/O bus, while generating the necessary control signals required by the protocol of the bus. The IOS supports the concept of `block` transfer operations. Large blocks of data are transferred in smaller pieces, each large enough to fill a register set. The ACCESS instruction starts the transfer by passing the first register set from the EU to the IOS. The subsequent register sets, that form part of the same transfer, are passed to the IOS using the supply variant of the ACCESS instruction. The IOS maintains a number of two deep queues to hold the information from ACCESS and subsequent supply variant instructions. This enables the IOS to double buffer the data and maintain a high rate of data transfer without introducing any delays while awaiting the arrival of the next register set from the EU.
Transactions can also be started by events on the I/O bus. This facility is used in servicing interrupts and DMA requests.
The I/O Sequencer (IOS) shown in FIG. 2 contains five major components: The IOS PLA (Programmable Logic Array-18); the I/O service queue or table (20); the line selection logic (22); the reply generation logic (24); and the I/O address and data bus interface (port control-26). The PLA program is stored in ROM cells and it controls the sequencing of the IOS. The service table (20) is the entity through which the EU (10) communicates with the IOS. The service table contains ten entries and each entry is divided into a number of fields. One of the fields tell the PLA what kind of operation the sequencer is to perform. When multiple service table entries have been set up, the line selection logic (22) determines which entry the PLA (18) should use. The bus interface (26) routes the transfer data between the register file (14) and the four I/O bus ports under the control of the PLA.
The sequencer goes through the set of steps shown below. It continually repeats these steps.
1. The bus selection logic selects a valid Service Table Entry (20) for the IOS PLA (18).
2. PLA (18) reads the command field of the selected entry. This command field tells the PLA where to start executing in it's microcode.
3. PLA executes a sequence of operations possibly directing the Bus Interface (26) to move data between the I/O Bus (28) and the register file (14).
4. PLA adjusts address pointers and determines if all the data has been transferred from the register set. If not, operation continues at step 1.
5. The PLA sets a flag in the I/O service queue (20) which triggers the reply generation logic (24) to notify the target task in the EU (10) of the completion of the operation.
The service table (20) is the main part of the IOS that is visible to the EU programmer. It is through the service table that a programmer tells the IOS what operation to perform. The EU can load requests into the service table by issuing the access or SUPPLY instructions. The state of execution of a request can be monitored by reading the service table entries via the ACCESS LOCAL instruction of the EU.
The Service Table (20) in the IOS is made up of ten identical entries or lines. FIG. 5 shows the fields of each entry. An entry can be divided into three sections distributed over four 32-bit words: the static section that holds information that is part of every transfer associated with that entry and two identical Register Set Descriptors (A and B) that can store the status of two buffers that are used in a block transfer. Some of the fields of the various sections of an entry can only be loaded by local accesses, while others are loaded by the access or SUPPLY instructions. All service table fields can be read by local accesses.
The fields of the static section of the entries are: priority- The priority field is a two bit ordinal; it has values 0, 1, 2, and 3 and is loaded by local accesses. The value in this field helps determine when an entry will execute.
timer--The timer field is three bits wide and is loaded by local accesses. The value in this field can be used to govern the durations of the control signals on the I/O bus, when executing a command in the line, and will be determined by the speed of the devices that are addressed by that line. The value in this field will add as many clock periods to the minimum durations of the control signals. The minimum durations are determined by the PLA sequences.
toggle--The toggle bit determines which one of the two register set descriptors is in use.
reply toggle--The reply toggle bit is used by the reply generation logic to determine which one of the two register set descriptors must reply next.
type--The type field is two bits wide and is loaded by local accesses. It can have three values: byte, halfword, and word. This field determines how addresses and lengths are changed when doing transfers. The I/O address and the physical byte pointer are incremented by 1 if the type field has the value `byte`. The value `halfword` increments them by 2 and `word` increments them by 4. The length field is decremented by the corresponding amounts.
suspended--This bit is set by the reply generation logic when during a reply to microport the microport is found to be full. When any microport empties, all suspend bits are cleared and the replies are retried.
faulted--The faulted bit signifies that the entry has returned a reply that was marked `abnormally terminated`. This bit gets set whenever the IOS replies with abnormal termination. If a SUPPLY instruction is executed and this bit is set the instruction will cause a context level fault. The `faulted` bit is reset by the hardware whenever an ACCESS instruction to the line is accepted. This bit is used to implement the block transfer semantics.
I/O address--The I/O address field is twenty-four bits. It is loaded by the ACCESS instruction and contains an address which can be driven onto the I/O bus. This address can be incremented under control of the PLA. The amount that the address is incremented by depends on the setting of the type field (see its description).
immediate--The immediate bit has two values: latent and immediate. It helps to determine how an entry becomes ready to execute. If it is immediate the entry is ready to be selected as soon as the access is issued. Otherwise, the external stimulus with which the entry is associated controls its ability to execute. This bit is loaded by the access local instruction.
IOS command--The IOS command field is four bits wide and is loaded by the ACCESS instruction. The value in this field is read by the PLA and determines what operation the PLA will perform. These operations are defined by the PLA code and may be different from one application to the next.
reply method--The replay method bit has two values, controlled by the access instruction: register set locking and message. It controls which mechanism is used by the IOS to reply to the EU when a transfer has completed.
Each service table entry has two register set descriptors (see FIG. 5). Each descriptor contains all of the information about a piece of the data stream up to sixteen bytes long. While one descriptor is being used to control the transfer, the other can be loaded by the EU. They both have the following fields, of which the first four are loaded by the ACCESS instruction or its supply variant.
physical byte address--The physical byte address field is nine bits long and is broken into two sub-fields. A five-bit sub-field, the data pointer, identifies the register set to be used. The second sub-field is four bits wide and it points to a byte in the register file. This field is incremented under control of the PLA. The amount of the increment is specified by the type field.
reply task--The reply task field is three bits wide. It names the task frame that will be signaled when an operation completes.
reply register set--The reply register set field is three bits. In the case of register-set based synchronization it names the logical register set in the target task's address space to be unlocked when an operation completes. With message based synchronization this field will be returned in the message.
length--The length field is four bits. It contains the value of the number of bytes left for an operation to transfer. The values zero through fifteen represent one through sixteen bytes left to transfer respectively. Thus, there is no value to represent zero bytes to transfer. This indication is instead made by a reset ready bit. The length field can be detcremented by the PLA. The amount of the decrement is specified by the type field (see its description).
lock--The lock bit indicates whether the descriptor in which it lies has useful work to perform. The bit is set when an access or SUPPLY instruction is accepted by the IOS. An access will block if either descriptor's lock bit is set while a SUPPLY will block if they are both set. The lock bit gets reset by the hardware whenever the IOS sends a normal reply for that entry.
done--The done bit indicates that the IOS PLA has completed operating upon the request in the table section, and is used to signal the reply generation logic to send a message to the EU. The lock bit is reset by the reply logic when it has successfully completed its reply. If the reply is rejected, due to a full microport, the lock bit stays set and the suspend bit is also set.
reply code--The reply code is a two bit register. Each bit can be set or reset by the PLA. The encodings of these bits are like the command field; they are determined by PLA programs. Whatever their specific encodings are, however, nonzero values indicate an abnormal condition.
Half-word and word operands must be located at the appropriate type boundaries in the register file. If the operand type and the least significant bits of the physical byte address indicate that this requirement has been violated then no data is transferred. In these cases data read from the I/O bus is not written into the register file while undefined data is placed on the bus for a write operation.
If the length value causes the physical byte address to cross the boundary of the register set, the address will wrap around within that register set and not overwrite the adjacent registers.
1. No I/O address computation is done.
2. The command field in the service table is unchanged and the corresponding field in the parameter register is ignored.
3. The reply method and latent bits in the service table are unchanged.
4. The register set descriptor which is loaded depends on the lock access lock access lock bits (access always loads descriptor A).
5. A context level fault is generated if the faulted bit is access access set when this instruction is executed (access clears the fault bit).
The string of SUPPLY issuances may continue indefinitely. If the supply of register sets ends, because SUPPLY's stop being issued, the supply access transfer will stop until another SUPPLY or ACCESS instruction is issued.
If both descriptors are exhausted before the next SUPPLY instruction is issued, data underrun or overrun may occur in the device being dealt with on the I/O Bus. The IOS, however, is oblivious to this and will start transferring again when it receives another register set to fill up or empty out. If both descriptors are full and a SUPPLY instruction is executed, the issuing task will block until one of the descriptors becomes empty. Thus, the SUPPLY instruction blocks exactly as the ACCESS instruction does.
When a descriptor is exhausted the PLA directs the reply mechanism to reply to the EU. It may take an indefinite period for this to occur. The reply mechanism works in parallel with the rest of the IOS, so the transfer will not be affected right away. If, however, the reply takes a long time (because, for example, the microport of the target task is full) the other descriptor could become exhausted before the first one has completed its reply. The reply mechanism insures that the replies from a given entry will be sent in order. That is, even if the second descriptor specifies a target task with an empty microport to which the reply mechanism could send to, it will wait for the first one to complete successfully. The other entries are unaffected by suspended replies and the PLA is not aware of them. There is no ordering of replies between different entries.
If the IOS replies to a task with a faulted buffer, any further SUPPLY instructions to the particular line that had a problem will be faulted. This supports the `block` transfer semantics of the IOS.
When the EU issues a request to the IOS it specifies whether it should be executed immediately or whether the execution should be blocked until some external request pin becomes active. The immediate bit in the ACCESS instruction is set to indicate an immediate request and reset for a latent request.
The ten service table entries are permanently associated with ten request and acknowledge pairs of signal lines on the I/O bus. The latent requests can either provide a signaling primitive (like interrupts) or a block transfer primitive (like DMA) to the EU programmer. The IOS's response to these requests is controlled by the PLA program. In most applications, the action that this program takes will be determined by the value of the command field in the service table entry that is selected as a result of the active request pin.
Service table scheduling is the process by which one of the ten entries in the service table is selected for execution by the PLA. This section describes this process.
The line selection logic is an autonomous block of logic that continuously monitors all entries in the table and the corresponding request input signals to make its selection. Whenever the IOS PLA completes one transaction, it begins operating upon the entry that has been selected by the selection logic.
In each service table entry there is a bit called lock. This is set whenever an access or SUPPLY instruction loads the entry. It is reset under control of the PLA. The entry selection mechanism uses this bit to determine which entries should participate in the priority resolution. It indicates that an entry is ready to execute. Only entries with set lock bits and reset suspend bits are candidates for selection. The line scheduling logic provides priority selection, with round-robin among lines of equal priority, as follows.
1. A:=set of entries with set lock bits and reset done bits.
where S is the entry that is selected.
The bus interface (26) of the IOS consists of 48 pins, divided into six fields. Four of these are 8-bit wide ports, A through D, and provide bidirectional data paths between the register file and the I/O bus. One of the fields is eight bits wide and comes from the output of the IOS PLA. This set of outputs provides the control signals for the I/O bus. The next field has six bits that are inputs to the PLA and can be used for status and handshake signals from the I/O bus. One request input signal is connected to a dedicated pin. An output control signal, Byte High Enable, is also provided to hamdle byte wide data transfers when the I/O bus is configured to be sixteen bits wide.
Transfer latched incoming data to the register file.
Drive latched output data on to the I/O bus.
Latch incoming data and simultaneously forward it to the register file.
Latch outgoing data and drive it on the I/O bus.
The `I/O address` from the service table entry can also be driven on the I/O bus, via these ports.
A facility is provided whereby the IOS can interface to a synchronous bus and data can be latched in the ports by an external signal. When the IOS is programmed for this mode of operation, one of the PLA input pins changes its function to a latch-in signal. The ports, so programmed, can now be loaded by a strobe pulse on this line. The pulse also sets a latch at the PLA input, indicating that data is available at the ports.
Some of the pins at the bus interface can also serve as DMA or interrupt request/acknowledge signal pairs. Ports C and D, two of the PLA inputs, and two of the PLA outputs can be used for this purpose. Each line in the service table is associated with a request pin and an acknowledge pin at the bus interface. The function of a pin is controlled by a register in the local space. Each pin can either be used as part of the req/ack pair or in its `normal` mode. Pins that are `programmed` to be request pins are also programmed to be either level or edge sensitive. Acknowledge lines are controlled by the PLA. When a service table line gets activated by a request pin, the associated acknowledge pin is marked as the current one. Then if the PLA says to drive the acknowledge, the appropriate pin will be driven in the appropriate direction.
each subsequent SUPPLY instruction being decoded by said PLA to continue said operation by loading said first and second bits of whichever one of said first and second register-set descriptors corresponds to an empty register set buffer.
said reply generator further including means for setting said suspended bit to thereby indicate that an attempt by said reply generator to reply to said destination task has failed.
entry-selection means in said line selection logic (22) responsive to said lock bit and to said suspend bit for determining which entries should participate in priority resolution by said line selection logic (22), such that only entries with set lock bits and reset suspend bits are candidates for selection.


There was an obvious difference between the customs of the ancient Near East, and G_d's design for a healthy family. It has been said that apples don't fall far from the tree, and Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel were (literally) all from the same family tree.
Had Jacob not sinned, Isaac would probably have sent a slave to retrieve a wife for him…as Abraham had done for Isaac. I believe the L_rd would have led the slave directly to Rachel and he would have brought her back to Jacob. Then, Rachel would have learned from Rebekah about waiting on the L_rd. But, that's the whole problem with sin: It separates you from the L_rd Himself, and then radiates to your immediate family, your family in Messiah, your friends….and the list goes on. Sin separates us from healthy community so the Enemy can pick us off individually.
Take a moment to reflect on your life. When was the last time you took an inventory of the sin in your life? How has sin affected you? Doesn't it always push you away from the L_rd and from other believers? Take it from someone who has been there: Leave that sin and come back home!
It may take a while to repair those bridges burned. That's OK, because you're going home, either your literal home or back to your "family of believers", those who love you and will give you wise counsel.
We don't have to follow those patterns of sin that we learned from the cultures we were called-out from. We must simply turn from those Worldly ways and philosophies, trust in the L_rd's grace, and begin following His leading. As He proves Himself faithful, you will grow in faith. Pretty soon, you will realize He is changing your whole value system. You desire to sin less & less, and you seek to please Him more & more.
Remember: It took one day to lead Israel out of Egypt, but it took 40 years to drive Egypt out of Israel! Have faith and keep following the L_rd. He will lead you to the places He has prepared for YOU, both in this life and in the Kingdom to come.


Found a plane Dave won't fly. Very interesting article on a plane you've never heard of, for good reason.
"...the Christmas Bullet was the rare kind of fighter which had a perfect kill ratio: it killed everyone who ever tried to fly it."


Pope Francis has proclaimed a day of fasting and prayer for peace in Syria, the Middle East, and throughout the world on September 7th.
Given that we were not able to notify you in advance, we are inviting you to participate in a day of fasting and prayer on what we are calling "Holy Tuesday", this coming Tuesday, September 10th. Daily Mass begins at 8:30am, followed by Exposition and Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament which will continue until 7pm. Additionally, we encourage everyone to participate in a day of fasting.
Fasting may take many forms: fasting from foods, fasting from anger, fasting from gossip or other things that may keep us from focusing on God.