text:
Thinking While Teaching
On Fox News, Antifa is a grave threat to freedom of speech, peaceful assembly, and liberal democratic values:
Joey Gibson of Patriot Prayer said he and several "moderate liberals" preaching "love, unity and peace" had to cancel a rally in Berkeley after Antifa "stormed" the public park.
According to a Dartmouth Professor cited in this Vox article, they are nipping fascism in the bud, fighting fire with fire, etc.:
The original fascist groups that later seized power in Europe started out very small. You cannot, they argue, treat these groups lightly. You need to take them with the utmost seriousness, and the way to prevent them from growing is to prevent them from having even the first step toward becoming normalized in society.
Antifa: scourge of free speech or bulwark against the rise of fascism?
Posted by Bill Jordan at 10:56 PM No comments:
Labels: Free Speech
Is Democracy Worth Saving?
Pundits and scholars have been wringing their hands of late over what they see as the decline of Democracy. The rise of authoritarian populists in many democratic nations is seen as a warning sign that democracy is in deep trouble. Opinion polls including a World Values Survey have shown a global decline in support for democracy. According to Freedom House, 2016 was the 11th consecutive year of decline in global freedom. Maybe the 24 percent of millennials who said that "having a democratic political system is a bad or very bad way to run this country" have a point. Perhaps democracy is not worth saving.
In his best-selling book, Between the World and Me, Ta-Nehisi Coates pins the blame for the plight of African-Americans in this country on democracy. Like slavery and Jim Crow, our contemporary race problems "are the product of democratic will. . . . The problem with the police is not that they are fascist pigs but that our country is ruled by majoritarian pigs" (6-7, 79). Do the police shoot black men because that is what a majority of the American electorate want them to do?
Coates seems actually to be in agreement with the founding fathers, who also did not have a high opinion of majoritarian democracy. As James Madison, the main author of the Constitution said, "in a pure democracy, there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual." Thus, he and his cohorts at the Philadelphia convention inserted many features into their new frame of government to thwart rule of the majority and these features have worked as planned. Consider the electoral college. In the past 17 years it has given us two presidents who lost the popular vote. The Three Fifths Clause gave extra power to the slave holding class who made up a distinct minority of white voters in the antebellum South (as of 1860, 75 percent of white Southerners owned no slaves at all), but who controlled Southern politics. And while the House of Representatives is the only federal body based on proportional representation of the population, the Constitution gives veto power to three other less democratically selected branches of the government: the Supreme Court, the President, and the Senate, none of which was directly elected by the people in the original Constitution.
For an essay on Madison's purpose in writing the Constitution, as outlined in Federalist Paper #10, see this piece by Richard Kreitner.
Surely, Coates is correct, that the white majority cannot always be counted on to protect the rights of racial and other minority groups. But would a more democratic system of government have been any worse for African Americans? Consider the Tallmadge Amendment. In 1819 James Tallmadge, a Congressman from New York proposed an amendment to a bill admitting Missouri to the Union. It
provided, that the further introduction of slavery or involuntary servitude be prohibited [in Missiouri], except for the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been fully convicted; and that all children born within the said State, after the admission thereof into the Union, shall be free at the age of twenty-five years.
Even though slave states had extra representation because of the Three Fifths Clause, the motion passed in the House of Representatives by a narrow vote of 82 to 78. But because slave states and free states had equal representation in the undemocratic Senate, the bill failed there. The 18 Northern Congressmen who supported admission of Missouri as a slave state a year later under the Missouri Compromise "fared badly in the next election" (See What God Hath Wrought, 152).
According to Columbia economist Jeffrey Sachs, the problem with American democracy today is not polarization or an evil electorate, but that the people don't actually control the government. "On every issue, the dominant reality is not public polarization, but broad public consensus," he writes. Healthy majorities (60-40 or greater) support progressive policies on issues ranging from climate change to inequality. In a poll taken in 2016, 61 percent of voters supported requiring a special prosecutor to investigate killings by police—apparent support for the agenda of Black Lives Matter.
So why do we have a government dominated by conservative Republicans at virtually every level of state and federal government? Sachs blames lobbying and propaganda. Lobbyists from the finance, oil, military, and health care industries, he notes, spend about $1.5 billion annually in lobbying and another $1.5 billion funding campaigns. If Sachs is right, instead of raising doubts about democracy, advocates for racial justice like Coates should focus on supporting reforms that would make the system more responsive to the actual will of the people.
And the problem is not just the Senate, the most malapportioned legislative body in the world, but also a host of other undemocratic elements built into the Constitution--like a court made up of nine unelected judges with lifetime appointments who can invalidate any law that has passed the House and Senate and gotten the president's signature. Here is a book that looks at how the Supreme Court, the least democratic branch of the federal government, has been the most hostile to the rights of African Americans and the values of democracy: Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted. The title says it all.
Posted by Bill Jordan at 10:59 AM No comments:
Labels: Human agency in history
Free Speech or "Free Speech"?
In their reporting on the rally and counter-protest on Boston Common Saturday (Aug. 19, 2017), the Boston Globe and local TV stations covering the event put quote makes around "free speech" as in "free speech" rally (Fox News, by the way, didn't bother with the quote marks).
In the lead-up to the Rally I had been reading stories in the Globe about the 23-year-old organizer who insisted that it really was going to be a free speech rally, not a white supremacist rally. But when I tuned in to watch coverage on Saturday I couldn't tell if it was a free speech or a "free speech" rally, because reporters and video crews were not allowed into the cordoned off area where police had contained the speakers.
In this country there has never been an absolute right to freedom of speech--but there has been an ever-expanding circle of protected speech. You can still be sued for libel, but political opinions now enjoy almost complete protection--at least from limits imposed by the government. In the past, restrictions on speech have been used most often against activists on the left--socialists and pacifists during and after World War I, liberals and other leftists during the McCarthy era. We look back on those persecutions and prosecutions now as mistakes we have learned from. We believe that in a democracy it is essential to listen to our political opponents. In their influential book on the Political Classroom, Diana Hess and Paula McAvoy write "political discussions are an essential part of learning to live in a democracy. Mastering the ability to talk across political and ideological differences helps create an informed citizenry--an essential component of a democratic society--by teaching students to weigh evidence, consider competing views, form an opinion, articulate that opinion, and respond to those who disagree" (4-5).
Have Americans lost the ability to talk across political difference? Where is the line between valid conservative opinion and racist hate speech? When should we listen to our political opponents and when should we just try to shut them up?
The conservative Globe columnist, Jeff Jacoby, argued that the rally on the common really was a free speech rally and that police and counter demonstrators were wrong to stifle it. "It was not a 'good thing' that people with a right to speak were effectively silenced by the operations of the police. The ralliers did nothing wrong. They followed the city's rules. They absorbed the slanders flung at them by the mayor and others. They didn't try to shut their critics down, and they weren't the ones hurling 'urine, bottles, and other harmful projectiles.'" Some of these Globe photos show counter demonstrators violently confronting free speech ralliers. Joan Vennochi accepted the "free speech" interpretation of the rally, but she reminded us that the Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment to mean that "speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend." And the tactics of the counter protesters worried her. She wrote: "the sight of a young man wearing a red, white, and blue helmet, encircled by a crowd of protesters screeching 'shame, shame, shame,' raises questions about tactics. The last thing an anti-hate movement should want to do is stoke sympathy for those they identify as haters."
This piece in the New York Times by a critical race theorist took the ACLU to task for representing Unite the Right in their court battle for a permit to assemble in Charlottesville. The organization should focus its attention on more significant threats to free speech on behalf of more worthy subjects, the author says. That reminded me of something I had read a while back by Adam Gopnick in the New Yorker. In "Two Views on Speech" he compares America with other western nations in their approach to free speech.
The absolutist American view, let's stipulate at once, still has much to be said for it. It says that once the state gets into the business of distinguishing acceptable dissent from unacceptable dissent then what we have is no longer dissent. Instead, we have state-sponsored and defined dissent, like that of the tiny "dissident" parties that were allowed to persist, once upon a time, in Eastern Europe, pendant to the chief Communist one. As John Stuart Mill said, in what is still the greatest defense of freedom of speech ever written, the free contest of ideas, even bad ones, is necessary to discover the truth of things. Or, to borrow a turn of phrase from the N.R.A.: it takes a good man with a pencil to stop a bad man with a pen.
But the view that governs the opposite position, in Canada and Europe alike, is not irrational or truly hostile to liberty. The laws and rules vary, but all have a simple distinction at their core, which is that criticizing an ideology, including a religious ideology, however vociferously, is different from inducing hatred of a people or persons. In plain English, hate-speech laws are based on the simple truth that there is a huge difference between an insult and a threat, and that it isn't actually that hard to tell one from the other.
Should we move toward a more European approach? Before we do, we might want to look back at the source of our view, Oliver Wendell Holmes' famous dissent in Abrams v. United States, in 1919:
Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power, and want a certain result with all your heart, you naturally express your wishes in law, and sweep away all opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think the speech impotent, as when a man says that he has squared the circle, or that you do not care wholeheartedly for the result, or that you doubt either your power or your premises. But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out. That, at any rate, is the theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment. Every year, if not every day, we have to wager our salvation upon some prophecy based upon imperfect knowledge. While that experiment is part of our system, I think that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country.
A recent book on Holmes' famous free speech manifesto/dissent is favorably reviewed in this Atlantic piece. Holmes' quote asks us to consider the question that I think is the most important question for citizens in a democracy to ask themselves every day: "Could I be wrong?" It's a question too many people seem increasingly unwilling to consider.
After the election, my liberal friends and I were shocked that so many of our fellow Americans could vote for Donald Trump, who just seemed so obviously unqualified and so retrograde in his views. Many of us pledged to get out of our bubble and try to understand what was going on in Trump's America. But Charlottesville suggests we are all still safely ensconced in our separate bubbles. Diane Hessan has been in weekly contact with 200 Hillary voters and 200 Trump voters since the election. A Clinton voter reflecting on Trump's response to the violence in Charlottesville, said "there is just no one who can defend his behavior at this point." Wrong. Trump voters think the "media and elites" have blown Trump's comments out of proportion and that they assume "anyone wearing a 'Make America Great Again' cap is to blame for all the hatred." Of her 200 Trump voters, only 4 now regret their vote and most of them feel that Trump is doing a good job of honoring his promises.
More views on free speech and the Boston Common protests from Globe letter writers.
Posted by Bill Jordan at 11:09 AM 3 comments:
Our Divided Working Class
One of my favorite reads this summer was Sheryll Cashin's Loving: Interracial Intimacy in America and the Threat to White Supremacy. She builds on Edmund Morgan's American Slavery, American Freedom, which argues that slavery and racism were invented by the ruling planter class of Virginia to prevent interracial working class rebellions like the one that ended in the burning of Jamestown in 1676. Cashin focuses on just one of the many types of laws that were passed to elevate the status of poor landless whites and degrade blacks and to keep the races apart--laws banning interracial sex and marriage. She carries the story forward and shows how those laws stayed on the books after emancipation and helped to keep the working class divided by race in the Jim Crow era. What is great about Cashin's book is that it ends on a hopeful note. Since the Loving v. Virginia case ruled those laws unconstitutional, more and more white and black people are getting married and forming mixed-race families. These families and their friends and relatives, she argues, become "culturally dexterous" and she predicts that "the dexterous class will lead America to confront what most ails us in race relations: the social and spacial isolation of poor black and brown people" (187). It's already happening in a number of integrated enclaves around the country, she says.
But the non-dexterous are still strong enough to elect a president.
The well-respected political scientist Larry Sabato suggested in an interview with the Boston Globe that Trump's reluctance to criticize neo-Nazis and other white supremacists comes from a desire to maintain support of "the large block of racially resentful white voters." "'Nobody is making this distinction,' Sabato said. 'Neo-Nazis aren't big enough as a voting group. But whites with racial resentment, you better believe that's a big block."'
Since the election there has been a spirited debate about what motivated white people, especially working class whites, to vote for Trump. Some credit economic motives and frustration with two mainstream parties that failed to halt the outflow of good manufacturing jobs and presided over 40 years of stagnant wages. Others argue that white voters were responding to Trump's subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to resentment and fear of various minority groups, including Mexican and other immigrants, Muslims, and blacks. The two things are related.
The Republican Party has used dog whistles and Southern strategies to redirect white economic anxiety toward racial resentments during this era of wage stagnation. But Democrats, too, have helped to divide the working class. I was shocked by comments this week by Daniel Loeb, a hedge fund manager and big Democratic donor, suggesting that teachers unions had "done more damage to people of color than anyone who has ever donned a hood." In fact, the decline of unions has harmed blacks more than whites, since black people have had a higher rate of union representation than members of any other race (see the chart below).
But in the 1970s, Democrats started backing away from policies that helped workers generally at the same time that they embraced policies advancing racial justice. Jefferson Cowie documents this process in his wonderful book, Stayin' Alive: The 1970s and the Last Days of the Working Class. "Many could see that placing affirmative action onto a world of declining opportunity was little more than a zero-sum game--and most likely a fast track to further racial resentment," he writes. Cleveland Robinson, a black union leader, was one of those who saw the problem. "The basic ingredient to successful affirmative action is full employment," he said. If not, "you will have both blacks and whites fighting for the same jobs" (268). Recall that the March on Washington in 1963 was called a March for Jobs and Freedom. Democrats failed to pass the full employment bill sponsored by Augustus Hawkins, an original member of the Congressional Black Caucus, in the 1970s. They also failed to enact strong labor law reform that might have prevented the decline of labor unions then just beginning, and now nearly complete. Cowie lays the blame for those failures at the feet of newly elected neo-liberal Democrats in Congress, but especially President Jimmy Carter. In the defeat of the labor bill, Cowie writes, "one could hear the death rattle of American working class power." (298).
In a segment on the PBS NewsHour this week, James Bessenger of the South Carolina Secessionist Party and Jonathan Thrower of the Charleston Black Nationalist Movement said they were getting together to talk things out and work together for the public good. They looked and spoke like decent working class guys. Thrower, somewhat cryptically, said that in discussions about racial tensions in Charleston, "There are people who don't actually see it as a race issue, it is also looked at as a class issue, because classism is an issue also, more-so as race." Cedric Johnson, who teaches in the African American Studies Department at Maryland University, argues that the best hope for black progress is an interracial working class alliance for common interests. He cites historical examples such as the Readjuster Party in Virginia during Reconstruction, the Populist Party, and the Knights of Labor. Perhaps Bessenger and Thrower will find some common class interests and a cause more significant than flags and statues to unite behind. After all, as Thrower said, "taking down a statue does not end systematic oppression, whether it's classism or racism."
Posted by Bill Jordan at 11:03 PM 1 comment:
Labels: Human agency in history, Race
Should We Remove Confederate Monuments?
A facebook friend posted an article, critical of those who want to take down Confederate statues and saying it amounted to erasing history. I replied like so:
I think I found a typo in this article. It says: 'It would appear that said group who didn't wish to see the statue of Virginian, General Robert E. Lee, who was a commissioned U.S. Army officer, graduate of West Point, and served the nation in the Mexican War, * taken down did apply for a permit to hold a rally." It left out the most important part of Lee's biography: *"and was a dirty rotten traitor." Benedict Arnold was also a part of American history. Should we put up a statue of him?
Well, as it turns out, there IS a monument to Arnold, though it's not a statue with his likeness, just a relief sculpture of the boot of the leg he broke in a heroic battle when he was still fighting on the American side.
I later wrote this on another post: Monuments are not erected to provide history lessons. That's what books and classes are for. Monuments are erected to identify heroes. Most of the Confederate monuments were put up during the "nadir" of American history when the North and South came to see the Civil War through the eyes of the Confederacy as a Noble Cause and white people North and South conspired to take away most of the rights black people had gained during Reconstruction. The erection of these statues also happened to coincide with the height of the lynching phenomenon. Not a coincidence. I say, take down every last monument to every dirty rotten racist traitor.
The Comedy Channel's Jim Jeffries made this point in a much more entertaining way, and added that the Germans don't have any statues of Hitler. I assume that's true, but then I discovered, via Google, that Germans DO have a monument to the German World War II General Erwin Rommel, the "desert fox" who fought the British in North Africa. The Germans are divided over whether Rommel deserves a monument, even if it's not a heroic statue. Some say he was chivalrous and brave, and not a Nazi. Others cite evidence of anti-Semitism. The monument has been vandalized and covered with a banner saying "No more monuments for Nazi generals."
The case for Confederate monuments is more difficult to make than for Arnold or Rommel. Both of those guys were fighting on the side of their own country. Arnold's monument celebrates something he did before he became a traitor. The equivalent would be a statue depicting Robert E. Lee during the Mexican-American War. And while it seems that we don't know for sure whether Rommel was a an anti-Semite, Robert E. Lee, like most of the Confederate heroes, did own slaves and was fighting to maintain a system of human bondage based on white supremacy. Of course that doesn't stop Confederate apologists from trying to throwing doubt on those truths.
Posted by Bill Jordan at 2:10 PM No comments:
Labels: History, Race
Charlottesville and the Violent Left
If you want to know what was going through Trump's mind when he condemned the actions of groups on "many sides" for the events in Charlottesville, look no further than this account in Breitbart. Steve Bannon's old publication blamed the violence on poor policing and provocative counter protesters bent on using violence to stifle free speech and disrupt what would otherwise have been a peaceful gathering. Critics have been rightly blasting Trump for drawing a false equivalence between neo-Nazis and anti-racist activists (see this Boston Globe piece on the cynical strategy of whataboutism). But . . . what about those counter-demonstrators? This month's Atlantic includes a good essay on the activities of left wing anti-fascist groups that have been using violence against right wing extremists. The author poses this provocative question:
"If you believe the president of the United States is leading a racist, fascist movement that threatens the rights, if not the lives of vulnerable minorities [and I would add, the survival of democracy itself], how far are you willing to go to stop it?"
I pondered this question in an earlier post, when I was in Germany contemplating the history of the Weimar Republic and reading about the violent reaction to Charles Murray back home, at Middlebury College. Looking back, you wish the German liberals had used a little bit of violence against the Nazis.
In his excellent memoir of growing up in Oxford, North Carolina, during the turbulent waning years of the Civil Rights Movement when Black Power was ascendant, historian Timothy B. Tyson leaves the impression that the success of civil rights reforms depended on violent riots and protest. One black militant told him: "When nonviolence did work, mostly it was because white people were afraid we was gon' burn the place down" (166). Tyson adds: "The indisputable fact was that whites in Oxford did not even consider altering the racial caste system until rocks began to fly and buildings began to burn" (Blood Done Sign my Name, 204; see also, 250, 252).
So maybe the anti-fascists have a point. Maybe political violence is justifiable in a good cause. As the political scientist, James C. Scott, said in his book, Two Cheers for Anarchism, "Most of the great political reforms of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries have been accompanied by massive episodes of civil disobedience, riot, lawbreaking, the disruption of public order, and, at the limit, civil war. Such tumult not only accompanied dramatic political changes but was often absolutely instrumental in bringing them about" (16).
Then again, it seems that polarization has gotten to a dangerous point when groups on opposing sides are seeking to prevent each other from exercising First Amendment freedoms. In the lead-up to Saturday's rally, the ACLU of Virginia supported Unite the Right in resisting the city's attempt to move the rally to a different location. Glen Greenwald said this in defense the ACLU's support of Unite the Right against state censorship:
How can anyone believe that neo-Nazism or white supremacy will disappear in the U.S., or even be weakened, if it's forcibly suppressed by the state? Is it not glaringly apparent that the exact opposite will happen: by turning them into free speech martyrs, you will do nothing but strengthen them and make them more sympathetic? Literally nothing has helped [Milo] Yiannopoulos become a national cult figure more than the well-intentioned (but failed) efforts to deny him a platform. Nothing could be better designed to aid their cause than converting a fringe, tiny group of overt neo-Nazis into some sort of poster child for free speech rights.
Could the same be said of the efforts of left wing counter-protesters' efforts to silence white supremacists? And which is more troubling—the rise of a more vocal (and sometimes also violent) white supremacist movement or attacks on free speech, not only by anarchists, but also college students and administrators?
Labels: anarchism, anti-racism, Black history, democracy, Free Speech, History, Race
Bill Jordan
Teaching history gets you thinking. Some of my thoughts end up here—about history, about teaching, about the relationship between the study of history and democratic citizenship.


Wonderful, oversized lot in Brant Point with existing 1 car garage with accessory apartment. The property can support approximately 2000 square feet of ground cover providing many options for expansion or the addition of a main house. Abutting property on 7 swain street is also listed for sale; buy both and create your own compound.
Second Floor: 1 bedroom apartment with open kitchen, living and dining room.


It is no longer news that Plateau State has lost illustrious sons and daughters and property to the violent attacks being meted on them by Fulani herdsmen.
The unprovoked attacks across the State is a clear indication that no part of Plateau State is safe and free of the attacks. It is therefore, on account of the unabated killings that we are calling on the Plateau State House Assembly and the Government of Plateau State to courageously put in place mechanism for the enactment and full implementation of the Anti-open Grazing Law in the State.
In this case, those rearing livestock should imbibe the modern culture of cattle breeding by securing their ancestral lands close to their residence to keep their cattle so as to avoid cases of cattle rustling and encroachment on farmlands to minimize clashes between farmers and herdsmen.
Emma Zopmal needs your help with "Plateau State House of Assembly: Petition to Ban Open Grazing in Plateau State". Join Emma and 4,415 supporters today.


text:
Das Arrondissement Trou-du-Nord (kreolisch: Twou dinò) ist eine der vier Verwaltungseinheiten des Départements Nord-Est, Haiti. Hauptort ist die Stadt Trou-du-Nord.

Lage und Beschreibung
Das Arrondissement liegt im Westen des Départements Nord-Est. Es grenzt im Norden an den Atlantischen Ozean. Benachbart sind im Osten die Arrondissements Fort-Liberté und Vallières sowie im Süden das Arrondissement Saint-Raphaël und im Westen die Arrondissements Saint-Raphaël und Cap-Haitien.

In dem Arrondissement gibt es vier Gemeindebezirke:

 Trou-du-Nord (rund 49.000 Einwohner),
 Sainte-Suzanne (rund 28.000 Einwohner),
 Terrier-Rouge (rund 30.000 Einwohner) und
 Caracol (rund 8.000 Einwohner).

Das Arrondissement hat rund 115.000 Einwohner (Stand: 2015).

Die Route Nationale 6 (RN-6; Cap-Haitien – Ouanaminthe/Dajabón, Dominikanische Republik) verläuft durch das Arrondissement.

Siehe auch

 Liste der Arrondissements in Haiti

Einzelnachweise

Troudunord
Département Nord-Est

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Himachal Pradesh DGP D S Manhas has leveled serious charges against Congress Leader Virbhadra Singh. DGP Manhas accused Singh of threatening police officers during investigations of the corruption case against him.
The DGP said that Virbhadra Singh has threatened the director general and SPs of the vigilance bureau and the anti-corruption bureau. The DGP said he had enough evidence to prove his accusations.
Earlier, Virbhadra Singh had given a statement that a DGP has made false case against him at the behest his political rival Prem Kumar Dhumal. Virbhadra had also alleged that the DGP had been given an out-of-turn promotion by Dhumal, barely to frame him in a false case.
However in retaliation to the Singh accusation, the police department has made an official statement against Virbhadra Singh claiming that he threatened some of the witnesses with dire consequences. Police head also said that it was wrong to accuse the police for registering false case under the influence of the chief minister. DGP cleared that Initial investigation was done in a professional manner by the SP, SV&ACB and the CFSL report had also confirmed the voices in the CD to be of Virbhadra Singh and his wife Pratibha Singh and on the basis of evidences police had registered case.


text:
About Keoghs
Casualty Fraud
Complex & Catastrophic Loss
Corporate & Sector Risks
Counter-Fraud
Credit Hire Fraud
Enforcements
Fraud Rings
Fraud Screening: Mass Data Analysis
Gadgets & Mobile Fraud
HAVS
Healthcare Enabled Fraud
Insurance Contract Wording & Drafting
Intelligence Services
Local Authority/Public Sector
Marine Ports & Offshore - Fraud
Marine, Ports & Offshore
Motor Crime
Motor Fraud
NIHL
Occupational Cancer
Pet and Animals
Policy Coverage
Professional and Financial Risks
Property Fraud
Property Risks and Coverage
Subrogated Recoveries
Subtle Brain Injury
WRULD
Forgotten Password Technical Issues*
* If you're experiencing technical issues click to contact our support team by email
Home Keoghs Insight Client Alerts Government answers questions on whiplash reform
Keoghs Insight
Samantha Ramen
Government answers questions on whiplash reform
Client Alerts06/11/2020
A Labour MP has received responses from Government to several Parliamentary Questions – what do the answers tell us about the Ministry of Justice and the whiplash reforms?
It's been something close to radio silence from the MoJ on the whiplash reforms for several months. Once again we find ourselves approaching the Government self-imposed deadline for their implementation but with little information available on the roadmap for getting there.
MPs interested in the progress of the reforms have an advantage when it comes to discovering information - they can put questions directly to the minister of the relevant department. The Government is obliged to answer any such questions.
Andy Slaughter is a Labour MP who is a member of the Justice Committee and was previously a Shadow Minister for Justice. He has always taken a keen interest in civil justice issues – some readers may recall that he attended a Keoghs roundtable on the Jackson reforms/LASPO many moons ago.
Mr Slaughter's interest in civil justice is still evident through his tabling of several such Parliamentary Questions (PQs) recently. Full questions and answers are set out in the table below.
Keoghs viewpoint
There are some interesting elements to unpack in the Government's responses. The first being the claim that "We intend to engage with the public, third sector, representative organisations and professional users during the pre-launch, launch and post launch periods" of the small claims portal. Should the implementation be on track to be delivered on time, we would expect to see some progress on this shortly.
The second is the identity of the Minister who responded. When Andy Slaughter asked a related batch of PQs in June, these were answered by Alex Chalk, whereas the latest grouping was answered by Chris Philp. This could suggest that Chris Philp has taken on the civil justice portfolio and is now the minister with overall responsibility for whiplash reform, which was previously held by Lord Keen until his resignation. Notwithstanding his current role in Government, we know that Chris Philp is a huge supporter of these reforms from his previous comments and interventions as a backbench MP.
With only five months to go before the re-arranged deadline, whoever now holds ministerial responsibility for the reforms will be looking to move it up their priority list, to give the industry enough time to adapt to the changes before implementation.
PQs and Answers in full (tabled 20 October 2020; answered 28 October 2020)
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether the small claims portal will be launched to the general public in 2021; what resources he has made available for communications to the public on how to make a minor injury claim under that new regime; and if he will he make a statement.
As confirmed in a Written Ministerial statement on 21 April 2020 the Government remains committed to implementing the Whiplash Reform Programme by April 2021.
The Portal will be accompanied by comprehensive and clear guidance for the public and if at any stage users need assistance, they can call a dedicated Portal Support Centre.
We intend to engage with the public, third sector, representative organisations and professional users during the pre-launch, launch and post launch periods to ensure that those who need to access the service know how to do so.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he is making an assessment of the potential effect on (a) the backlog of civil cases and (b) access to justice of a mechanism for the alternative dispute resolution of minor personal injury cases for the new small claims portal.
Civil claims backlog data is not held by the Department. However, a revised impact assessment in relation to the forthcoming Statutory Instruments will be published in due course.
The Official Injury Claims portal is designed to be simple and easy to use. However, there will be occasions where claimants will need to be able to resolve disputes with the at-fault compensator. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) was initially proposed to resolve these, but as announced in a written Ministerial Statement published on 27 February 2020 no practicable solution for ADR could be found and it would not form part of the service. The full statement can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/implementation-of-the-whiplash-reform-programme
The Government remains committed to ensuring access to justice, and unrepresented claimants will have access to a new accessible bespoke court process to enable any such disputes to be settled.
We are also working closely with Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to understand the operational impacts of these new processes on the civil justice system and we will keep this matter under review, following implementation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what modelling he has undertaken on the potential effect of changes in trends in the number of low-value personal injury cases coming before HM Civil Courts in the event that an alternative dispute mechanism is not available through the small claims portal before April 2021.
(Answer identical to the question above)
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many civil cases are awaiting a hearing in (a) each and (b) all civil courts in England and Wales; and what the quarterly increase was in cases awaiting a hearing between January and March, April and June and July and September 2020.
The information requested is not held.
We use a variety of management information to measure the work in the civil courts, including but not limited to, the volume of incoming receipts and defences along with timeliness of case progression. However, specific data relating to backlog is not held. Quarterly statistics are held at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics-quarterly
© Keoghs 2021

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
download kashan map app for Andoird
Kamal-ol-Molk
Written by	Super User
K2_VOTES_ZERO
Mohammad Ghaffari, better known as Kamal-ol-Molk, born in Kashan in 1848, to a family with a strong artistic tradition, tracing their origins back to notable painters during the reign of Nader Shah.Kamal's uncle, Mirza Abolhassan Khan Ghaffari, known as Sanee-ol-Molk, a 19th-century celebrated painter, was highly notable for his watercolor portraiture. His father, Mirza Bozorg Ghaffari Kashani, was the founder of Iran's painting school and a famous artist as well. His brother, Abutorab Ghaffari, was also a distinguished painter of his time. Mohammad developed an interest in calligraphy and painting at a young age. In his childhood eagerness, he drew charcoal sketches on the walls of his room. Upon completion of his primary education, Mohammad moved to Tehran. To further his studies, he registered in Dar-ul-Funun School, a modern institute of higher learning in Persia, where he studied painting with Mozayyen-od-Doleh, a well-known painter who had visited Europe and studied Western art. He studied there for a period of three years. In his school days, the young Ghaffari was given the name Mirza Mohammad Kashi. During his education he began to attract public attention as a talented artist. In his visits to Dar-ul-Funun, Naser al-Din Shah Qajar came to know Mohammad Ghaffari and invited him to the court. Mohammad further improved his technique, and Nasereddin Shah gave him the title "Kamal-ol-Milk" . During the years he stayed at Nasereddin Shah Qajar's court, Kamal-ol-Molk created some of his most significant works. The paintings he did in this period, which lasted up until the assassination of Nasereddin Shah, were portraits of important people, landscapes, paintings of royal camps and hunting grounds, and various parts of royal palaces. In this busiest period of Kamal-ol-Molk's artistic life, he created over 170 paintings. However, most of these paintings have either been destroyed or taken abroad.The works he created in this period indicate his desire to develop his oil painting technique. He advanced so much that he even acquired laws of perspective by himself and applied them to his works. His mastery in the delicate use of a brush was as well as bright and lively colors distinguished him from his contemporaries. Visit to Europe
Read 399 times	Last modified on Thursday, 27 April 2017 13:25
Published in Painting and Calligraphy
KamalolMolk
Iranian painter
End Word
Tourist sights
Especial Events
https://kashanmap.ir/en/component/k2/item/2672-kamal-ol-molk#sigProId446abf12db
Kashan Map reference site of historic sites and tourism is the city of Kashan
Ashid Group, Andishe 25 alley, Ayatollah Kashani St. , Kashan, Iran
Web Design , Graphic Design , Ashid Group


text:
Service Center reopens
The city of Leavenworth has reopened another building that was closed to the public as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Leavenworth Municipal Service Center, 790 Thornton St., reopened Monday, according to Melissa Bower, public information officer for the city government.
The Municipal Service Center serves as the home for various public works activities including street and stormwater maintenance as well as park operations.
A different entrance has been set up for the building because of construction work on Thornton Street.
The temporary entrance is located near Pennsylvania and Lawrence avenues.
Signs and cones are being used to guide motorists as they visit the Municipal Service Center, according to Bower.
The recycling center is still available on the south side of the property at Lawrence and Halderman Street.
Following the weekend, the Leavenworth County Health Department reported three additional cases of COVID-19 in the county.
Two of the new cases are what Health Department officials call community cases. An update released Monday also indicates one additional case among inmates at the Lansing Correctional Facility.
The total number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Leavenworth County has reached 1,109. That number includes 836 cases involving LCF inmates and 67 cases involving inmates and staff at the Grossman Center halfway house in Leavenworth.
Of the 208 community cases in the county, only 15 are considered active, according to the update released Monday by the Leavenworth County Health Department.
Of the 836 cases involving LCF inmates, eight are considered active. None of the Grossman Center cases are considered active.
No Leavenworth County resident currently is in the hospital because of COVID-19. Thirty-two residents of the county have been hospitalized because of COVID-19 during the course of the pandemic.
COVID-19 is blamed for the deaths of seven Leavenworth County residents, including four LCF inmates.


So someone should post a VIPM IE topic here: http://ideas.jki.net/ We, like NI, also use idea exchanges as a guage for interest in a particular feature for VIPM. However this has a higher importance in the context of VIPM than LabVIEW because this hits the core of what VIPM is all about. If you install a package and cannot see the result of the install, then we get support calls and it's VIPM's fault regardless of how much we blame LabVIEW or the package developer (we don't really do that ).
So I think having a LV restart dialog could work and it obviously should be ignorable by the end user because like Daklu wrote, they might be in a state where a restart doesn't make sense.


text:
Q: $f_{n}$ converges uniformly on compact sets to a 1-1 function implies $f_{n}$ 1-1? Say we have a region $D$ and a sequence of functions $f_{n}$ holomorphic in $D$, which converges uniformly on compact sets to a one-to-one function $f$.
Can we say that for each compact set $K \subset D$ there is a number $N(K)$ such that $f_{n}$ is one-to-one for all $n >N(K)$?
Thank you for any help or suggestions.

A: How about using Hurwitz theorem, this gives you a ball around each point in $K$ in which $f_n$ and $f$ have the same zeroes, now use compactness of $K$.
Edit: False if global injectivity of the $f_n$ is required: $f=z$, $f_n=z+(z^2/n)$.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


The food makes the neighborhood famous, but the friendships keep it tight.
Pasta and marinara, wine, crusty bread ... on Saturday evenings, the Hill's 30-plus restaurants keep the narrow streets lined with cars.
But at 9 o'clock on Sunday mornings, the traffic's gone, the stores and restaurants closed. Except for the footsteps of last-minute churchgoers, the streets are quiet. A crisp wind whips around the buildings, causing women to hold their skirts in place. The bells toll, sending echoes through the streets and quickening the pace of the latecomers. As the heavy wooden doors close behind the last member, the neighborhood returns to silence.
Inside, light streams through the stained-glass windows, sending a bright yellow glow throughout the church. The service is in English, but many in the congregation converse in Italian. St. Ambrose church, its exterior walls of brick and terra cotta modeled after those of Sant' Ambrogio Church in Milan, has been an integral part of the Italian community since 1903.
Many who travel to the Hill for a favorite meal at Zia's or Gian-Tony's are oblivious to the close-knit community so evident at St. Ambrose each Sunday. The food is known nationwide: Saveur magazine and Mario Batali of the Food Network have both recognized the Hill for its culinary excellence, and Batali considers the Hill one of the country's top "Little Italy" neighborhoods. But, according to the residents, it's the relationships that set the neighborhood apart.
With a warm smile, Armando Pasetti, owner of Volpi Italian Salami and Meat Co., greets his customers by name. "I've been here since I was 14 years old," he says. Nephew of the late John Volpi, an immigrant from Milan, Pasetti takes great pride in his family business.
Only a third of the Hill's 3,000 residents claim Italian ancestry—but that doesn't stop the rest from loving Italian culture. Brick bungalows and shotgun houses dot the streets; Italian and American flags fly side by side; fire hydrants are painted in the famous red, white and green stripes of Italy; and banners boldly mark the boundaries of the neighborhood.
After church, members stand on the steps of St. Ambrose, discussing their plans for the day—and arranging to meet later at the bocce club.
Numi listens quietly, apologizing to the women in the room whenever the group cusses at a bad call. Touchdown! Everyone cheers. "Numi's a celebrity around here," Zona whispers during a commercial. "Show us your ring," he tells Numi, who proudly lifts his hand, displaying the souvenir from the year he coached the St. Louis soccer players who competed in the 1950 World Cup.
Numi has spent most of his life on the Hill. He did move around during his younger years but says, "The Hill has always been home in here," placing a fist over his heart.


$7, $5 members, FREE students with RSVP.
Can architecture and design maximize happiness? Join author and former BMW Guggenheim Lab Team member Charles Montgomery for a night of fun experiments in trust and play, exploring the striking relationship between the design of our minds and the design of our cities. Then celebrate the launch of Montgomery's book, Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013), which explores how cities can be turned into machines for happiness using new insights from neuroscience, psychology, and design activism. The exhibition gallery will be transformed into a laboratory for testing the effect that design has on the way we feel. Prepare to feel surprised––and surprisingly happy. Happy City will be available for purchase at the event. Cash bar.


text:
The men's 5000 metres at the 2019 World Athletics Championships was held at the Khalifa International Stadium in Doha from 27 to 30 September 2019.

Summary

The semi-final heats were held on Friday, in which all three Ethiopian athletes qualified for the final. All three Norwegian athletes also qualified, after European Champion Jakob Ingebrigtsen successfully appealed a disqualification for stepping past the curb of the track during his heat. In the first heat, Aruba's Jonathan Busby was struggling to finish the distance. Braima Suncar Dabó of Guinea-Bissau, who had already finished the race, returned to help his fellow competitor over the finish line, winning applause from the crowd and a nomination for the International Fair Play Award.

During the final, the Ethiopians employed effective team tactics by taking early control of the race, setting a strong pace, and switching leaders once every two laps. Defending Champion Muktar Edris darted out to the front, with his teammates Selemon Barega and Telahun Haile Bekele following closely. Olympic silver medalist Paul Chelimo and his teammate Hassan Mead of the U.S. stayed close as well, along with Canadian-record holder Mohammed Ahmed, Kenyans Jacob Krop and Nicholas Kimeli, and Bahraini athlete Birhanu Balew. Initially, the Ingebrigtsen brothers stayed towards the rear of the leading group, and even briefly lost contact with the front - presumably to conserve energy until the swift early pace had settled down.

The Ethiopian team aggressively defended their lead throughout the first 4000m of the race and switched leaders once every 800 meters like clockwork. Edris took the lead for the first two laps, running the first lap in a quick 61.5 seconds, and a slower second lap of 65.9 seconds. At 800 meters, his teammate Bekele took over the lead and increased the pace. At 1600m, Barega went to the front and continued pushing the fast pace that his teammates had set. After 2400m, Bekele took the lead again. The pace began to decrease slightly, despite that it was still quick enough for Bekele to bring the pack through 3 kilometers in 7:53.0. This allowed the Ingebrigtsen brothers to catch up to the leading group and start moving up through the pack. Chelimo (and briefly, Filip Ingebrigtsen) led for less than one lap, before Barega recaptured the lead around 3400m. The fast pace was continuing to slightly decrease as Barega led the pack for one more lap. With three laps to go, and as the pace slowed, Ahmed moved to the front and tried make a long run for the finish line.

The final kilometer of the race was extremely hectic. The athletes were positioned far too close to each other, considering how quickly and aggressively they were running. For the next two laps, the athletes consistently bumped into one another, clipped each other's heels, and lost their balance - with some competitors pushing and almost falling over each other. Between 1000 and 600 meters remaining, Ahmed attempted to escape the chaos by injecting a brutal 59.9 second lap. The other athletes, however, were unrelenting and stuck to Ahmed like glue. Ahmed visibly threw his arms up in frustration after the other athletes continued to clip his heels and prevent him from running the inside line despite his vicious sub-60 lap. Heavily affected by the fast pace and physical contact with other athletes, Filip Ingebrigtsen  dropped out with 550m remaining, which left Jakob Ingebrigtsenas the remaining Ingebrigtsen sibling in contention for a medal. As he chased Ahmed on the penultimate straightaway, he clipped Ahmed's heels once more, causing him to almost trip and fall.

On the final lap, Jakob Ingebrigtsen made an early, aggressive move to the front. Chelimo attempted to stay with him. Ahmed, Barega, and Edris were all wise to this error, and did not challenge Ingebrigtsen as aggressively as Chelimo did. Barega and Edris passed Ahmed as they began winding up their pace in preparation for their final attack. As Ingebrigtsen and Chelimo began running out of steam off of the final bend, Barega passed them first, with Edris coming wide on the outside. Edris sprinted past Barega to defend his title, with a final lap of 55 seconds. Ahmed and Bekele passed Ingebrigtsen and Chelimo for the third and fourth place, respectively. Evidently suffering from his early move, Jakob Ingebrigtsen was slowing rapidly, and dove at the finish line for a very close fifth place. He then laid on the track, visibly exhausted.

Records
Before the competition records were as follows:

Qualification standard
The standard to qualify automatically for entry was 13:22.50.

Schedule
The event schedule, in local time (UTC+3), was as follows:

Results

Heats
Qualification: First 5 in each heat (Q) and the next 5 fastest (q) advanced to the final.

Final
The final was started on 30 September at 21:20.

References

5000
5000 metres at the World Athletics Championships


text:
(Spatula clypeata)
© Jukka Jantunen (flickr.com/photos/jukka_jantunen)
For additional photos and vocalizations, visit Dendroica. (Link opens in a new window.)
In Canada, the core breeding range of the Northern Shoveler is the Prairie Pothole and Parkland Region of Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Manitoba. The continental population has seen a significant increase since the 1990s, following a period of drought in the Prairies in the 1980s. Despite an increase in this species' population size, the Canadian harvest of this species has remained relatively stable. This species has been identified as a priority for conservation and/or stewardship in one or more Bird Conservation Region Strategies in Canada.
Main designations for the species
Subspecies, population
IUCN (Global) Least concern 2018
Wild Species (Canada) Secure 2015
Bird Conservation Region Strategy Priority Species 2013
Population status
Geographic area or population
Population change relative to ~1970
Status in relation to goal
Canada Large Increase High At an Acceptable Level
Population estimate
Canada 1,000,000 - 5,000,000 birds
Distribution maps
BirdLife International / NatureServe
North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS): Relative Abundance and Breeding Distribution (1970-2016)
Migration strategy, occurrence
Short-distance migrant
Responsibility for conservation
Responsibility based on % of global population
Canada High
General nesting period in Canada
Nesting period starts between mid-April and late May and ends between early July and late July, depending on the region. Before or after this period, the probability of an active nest is lower.
Conservation and management
The Northern Shoveler population appears to be in good health. Primary conservation concerns, as for other duck species, are habitat loss and degradation. The majority of the Canadian harvest of Northern Shoveler occurs in Saskatchewan; however, most Shovelers are harvested in the United States. Despite a steady population increase, the Canadian harvest of the Northern Shoveler has been relatively stable.
Bird conservation region strategies
Environment and Climate Change Canada and partners have developed Bird Conservation Region Strategies in each of Canada's Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs). In these strategies, selected species are identified as priorities for one or more of the following reasons:
conservation concerns (i.e., species vulnerable due to population size, distribution, population trend, abundance, or threats)
stewardship responsibilities (i.e., species that typify the regional avifauna or have a large proportion of their range or population in the sub-region)
management concerns (i.e., species that require ongoing management because of their socio-economic importance as game species, or because of their impacts on other species or habitats)
other concerns (i.e., species deemed a priority by regional experts for other reasons than those listed above or because they are listed as species at risk or concern at the provincial level)
Select any of the sub-regions below to view the BCR strategy for additional details.
BCRs, marine biogeographic units, and sub-regions in which the species is listed as a priority
Sub-region and priority type
Boreal Taiga Plains Boreal Taiga Plains, sub-region and priority type: Prairie and Northern -- Conservation
Great Basin Great Basin, sub-region and priority type: Pacific and Yukon -- Other
Northern Pacific Rainforest Northern Pacific Rainforest, sub-region and priority type: Pacific and Yukon -- Other
Northwestern Interior Forest Northwestern Interior Forest, sub-region and priority type: Pacific and Yukon -- Stewardship
Prairie Potholes Prairie Potholes, sub-region and priority type: Prairie and Northern -- Other
Canadian Wildlife Service Waterfowl Committee. 2014. Population Status of Migratory Game Birds in Canada: November 2014. CWS Migratory Birds Regulatory Report Number 44. Canadian Wildlife Service Waterfowl Committee. 2014. Population Status of Migratory Game Birds in Canada: November 2014. CWS Migratory Birds Regulatory Report Number 44. (Link)
North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 2012. North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2012: People Conserving Waterfowl and Wetlands. Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. xii + 48 pp. North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 2012. North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2012: People Conserving Waterfowl and Wetlands. Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. xii + 48 pp. (Link)


text:
Porsche Speedsters: California dream machines
By Simon Hucknall
For the latest classic car news, features, buyer's guides and classifieds, sign up to the C&SC newsletter here
Less is more. It's a simple premise, and one that over the years the car industry has increasingly ignored to sate our appetite for ever more convenience, luxury and safety.
But in the early 1950s, one inspired individual truly embraced the principle and gave what was then the fledgling Porsche brand a lasting foothold in a major market, as well as influencing a series of now rare and collectible models.
Max Hoffman was America's European-car import supremo, handling the likes of Jaguar, Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz through his Park Avenue showroom in New York City.
Each Porsche represents a different approach to the Speedster concept
In 1950, Hoffman met Ferdinand Porsche at the Paris motor show and agreed to sell Porsche's recently launched 356 model in the United States.
Porsche stated that he'd be happy if five cars a year found American buyers, to which the ambitious Hoffman remarked: "If I can't sell five a week, I'm not interested."
By 1952, Hoffman's somewhat gushing claims that the 356 was 'One of the World's Most Exciting Cars' had started to bear fruit, and sales numbers had begun to grow.
Nimble balance and exquisite steering make the Porsche 356A Speedster the driver's favourite
Porsche's first production car had originally been launched in Europe in 1948, its streamlined two-seater body penned by company designer Erwin Komenda.
Borrowing the basic engine design – and some of its trailing-arm front and swing-axle rear suspension architecture – from the humble Volkswagen, the 356 was built on a bespoke steel platform and initially powered by a 1.1-litre, horizontally opposed air-cooled 'four' mounted behind the rear axle.
However, by adding its own design of cylinder heads, cams, crankshaft and intake/exhaust manifolds, as well as dual carburettors, Porsche liberated 35bhp from the engine, 40% up on the first Beetles.
The 356A's spartan cabin features a non-standard three-spoke steering wheel
The light and nimble package had also started to cause shockwaves among the West Coast's weekend racers, after John von Neumann – one of Hoffman's customers, and owner of North Hollywood's Competition Motors – purchased a car and started to campaign it at circuits around California.
This led to Hoffman lobbying Porsche for a lightweight version of the 356, to which the manufacturer's reluctant response was the 356 America Roadster.
But this model, with its handbuilt aluminium body, was far too rich for the impecunious weekend racers Hoffman and Neumann were targeting, adding a 20% premium to the already costly $4500 Cabriolet.
In the end, just 16 examples were sold.
Porsche's 356A Speedster introduced a shorter windscreen with rounded tops, which could be removed for racing
What was needed, Hoffman believed, was a sub-$3000 Porsche, shorn of all but essential equipment to keep the price and weight to an absolute minimum.
The 356 Speedster was Porsche's answer, and it was an instant hit with the 'race on Sunday, commute on Monday' fraternity – as well as Hollywood stars such as Steve McQueen and James Dean.
Costing $2995 when it was launched in 1954, the Speedster took the 356 Cabriolet's steel body, but did without such niceties as sound-deadening, carpets and even window-winding mechanisms.
The handsome 911 (behind) is a caricature of the focused 356
Visually, the regular 356's windscreen was replaced by a cut-down item (removable for racing), with a steeper rake and rounded top corners, adding even more emphasis to the Porsche's already sleek and curvaceous shape.
And in poor weather, a rudimentary single-skin hood could be deployed, along with separate sidescreens that plugged into the door-tops via small steel posts.
While the latter arrangement did help achieve a c150lb (68kg) weight-saving versus the 356 Cabriolet, it also became known as 'the bathtub' not only because of its appearance, but also for its propensity for leaking when it rained.
The 356A Speedster became known as 'the bathtub', partly due to its appearance and also its leaky single–skin hood
Since the first Speedsters were based around the pre-A generation 356, power was initially from either a 54bhp 1.5-litre air-cooled unit, or a mildly uprated version with 69bhp, known as the Super Speedster.
'Our' car, belonging to Mark Sumpter from Porsche specialist Paragon, is a later 356A-generation Speedster from 1956 (356B and C models did not spawn Speedsters).
Imported from California in 2015, Sumpter's matching-numbers car would have originally produced 59bhp from its raised-capacity 1.6-litre engine, which had become standard fare for the A model.
Losing the hubcaps only adds to the classic Porsche 356A's sense of purpose
However, when it was restored by Willhoit Auto Restoration in Long Beach, engine displacement was upped to 1.9 litres thanks to new barrels and pistons. Twin-plug heads were also added, along with electronic fuel injection and performance camshafts.
As a result, today the car is producing 140bhp, making it more representative of the 99bhp 1500 GS Carrera GT Speedster, which would probably have been the desired option if you were taking to the track back in the day.
We'll discover what this shiny, jewel-like black machine is like to drive later, but first we need to jump forward more than three decades to continue the Speedster lineage, represented by the Carrera 3.2 and 964-series models that are currently dwarfing the 356.
The Porsche 356A Speedster's original 1600 engine (left) has been stretched to 1.9 litres and a heady 140bhp
So, why did it take so long to bring back the Speedster name? The new-for-1963 Porsche 911 effectively replaced the 356, which soldiered on until 1965, though the Speedster variant had ceased seven years earlier.
It's strange to think that the 911 – still on sale after nearly 60 years and 11 generations – was under threat by the 1970s, with some senior management seeing it as a dinosaur in light of technically more advanced front-engined models such as the 924 and 928.
And, had it not been for a dramatic Speedster-inspired, Carrera 3.2-based concept created by Porsche's technical director, Helmuth Bott, and the foresight of a new CEO, Peter Schutz, the 911 might never have survived beyond the 1980s.
Porsche's 'bathtub' 356A has a delightful purity to its design
Unveiled at the 1987 Frankfurt motor show, the 911 Speedster Clubsport concept was based on the narrow-bodied Carrera Cabriolet and, the firm claimed, was intended to: 'Represent Porsche's pure pleasure in driving sporty and "topless".'
Weighing 154lb (70kg) less than the cabrio, the Speedster concept was a two-seater with a basic, single-lined roof stowed beneath a double-humped cover, with wind-up windows and even a removable 'screen.
As a statement of confidence in the 911 brand it was powerful, so no surprise that the following year the Speedster name once again entered Porsche's lexicon.
After the 356A (front), more than three decades passed until the Speedster name reappeared on the 911 Carrera 3.2
Based on the standard 227bhp variant of the outgoing Carrera 3.2 model, Porsche's second take on the Speedster was available in the UK with a choice of either a narrow or wide body, the latter mirroring the design of the 930 turbo from which it also took its more focused chassis set-up.
As with the original Speedster, there was no change to the mechanicals, the 3164cc flat-six having already been uprated when it replaced the 3-litre SC in 1984.
Delivering drive through the then relatively new five-speed G50 manual gearbox, Porsche claimed a top speed of 152mph and 0-60mph acceleration of 6 secs – almost identical to the standard Cabriolet, which was hardly surprising since it weighed in at 1210kg, just 10kg less than that model.
The wider 'Turbolook' body style is by far the most common on the Porsche 911 Carrera 3.2 Speedster, but there were also 171 narrow-body cars
If you were being cynical, you could argue that, despite preserving the back-to-basics essence of the original – manual windows, rudimentary rain cover (customers had to sign a disclaimer acknowledging that the car was not weatherproof!), a lowered 'screen raked by an extra 5º et al – this latter-day Speedster was never intended as a track-day warrior, and more of a low-volume collectors' model.
That view was supported by its price when new: £52,850, when the regular Carrera Cabriolet started at £41,710.
However, its value today suggests that it would not have been a poor investment in 1989.
The Porsche 911's more luxurious interior was a departure from the original Speedster formula – it also marked the introduction of the double-humped hood cover
Unsurprisingly, wide-body cars such as this accounted for 1942 of the 2103 Speedsters sold, though the less dramatic narrow-body cars now command a premium due to their scarcity.
For our final 964 Speedster, you need to flip those numbers. Produced between 1992 and '93, just 15 cars were sold with the 'Turbolook' body and 930 with the narrow or 'lean' shape you see here.
Purchased by current owner Bill Robinson 20 years ago, this ex-Texas car betrays its US roots with deeper bumpers, a high-level brake light, a steering-wheel airbag, and options such as electric windows and air-conditioning.
The Porsche 911's 3.2-litre flat-six is torquey, tuneful and flexible
It's also believed that only one right-hand-drive 964 Speedster was equipped with this car's four-speed Tiptronic gearbox.
Other than that, all the Speedster cues are in place – including a 'screen carried over from the previous generation – with the addition of an easier-to-operate hood mechanism and rather lovely RS-spec bucket seats as standard, complete with body-coloured frames.
Other than that, as with all 964s, this Speedster benefits from the larger, 3600cc flat-six and a small power increase to 247bhp, though an extra 287lb (130kg) of weight would have no doubt negated much of that advantage.
The 911 Carrera 3.2 Speedster's steering is communicative and accurate, but surprisingly heavy, too
Our introduction to Speedster motoring starts with the 911 Carrera 3.2, however, and for once in my life being of below-average height (at 5ft 7in) puts me at an advantage, with my head just shy of the shortened windscreen's top edge.
This being a traditional 911, it's easy to pick fault with the ergonomics: the long-travel, floor-mounted pedals are sharply offset to the left, and the haphazard layout of the dashboard controls will keep a new driver fumbling around for a while on first acquaintance.
You may also have to peer under the upper rim of the chunky but handsome three-spoke wheel to check when you're hitting three-figure speeds. But niggles aside, the 911's vibrant, red-trimmed interior is an attractive and comfortable place to be.
After the 911 Carrera 3.2 (behind), the 964 911 continued Porsche's Speedster lineage
Until you venture off smooth A-roads, that is, when the compromises wrought by the fairly unyielding, turbo-spec torsion-bar suspension become more pronounced, while also causing awkward shimmies through the roofless body.
The unassisted steering, while endlessly communicative and accurate, is heavy, when your expectation of a rear-engined car is that it's going to be lighter.
The familiar overhead-cam, 3.2-litre flat-six engine is a delight, though, its aerated exhaust note bouncing off walls as we pick up speed across the Sussex Weald. And the G50 gearbox is a joy to use: rather long of throw, but with the short lever moving around its gate with a well-oiled precision.
The Porsche 911 (964) Speedster borrows styling cues from the potent 964 RS
You expect the 964 Speedster to be simply a more finely honed version of what you've just experienced in the Carrera 3.2, but it couldn't be more different.
The 964 marked the single biggest departure from classic 911 form to that point, with a move to coil springing all round.
Purists may bemoan it as the beginning of the end, but here and now – setting aside the rather lacklustre nature of this car's Tiptronic 'box – the 964 outperforms the 3.2 in most respects.
Bill Robinson's US-supplied 964 Speedster has RS-spec bucket seats
Its steering through the rather bland-looking wheel is lighter, yet just as rewarding when the pace increases, and the ride, while being generally more pliant, combines with superior high-speed body control and a less fidgety structure.
The car I'd imagined to be a boulevardier is actually far more engaging to drive than expected, and with its chopped 'screen and Batmobile-style rear deck is quite something to behold.
Of course, this is British summertime, so the day wouldn't be complete without precipitation. All three 'rain covers' are hastily erected, and while each has elements of which Heath Robinson would be proud, they're manually in place (no electrics here) with all tonneaus – fabric on the 356, and large plastic covers on the 911 and 964 – secured in less than 2 mins.
Like the earlier cars, Porsche's 964 is a strict two-seater
But honestly, if hood-up practicality concerns you, best opt for the Cabriolet versions.
The essence of Speedster motoring was always about driving purity, not ease of use, and nothing comes closer to achieving that than the 356.
Sit behind this car's exquisite, non-standard three-spoke wheel and you're faced with… well, not very much: three chrome-rimmed dials for revs, speed and various systems.
Rubber matting extends across the floor, with a foot-operated dip-switch and a couple of pull-out knobs for lights.
Porsche's 964 Speedster has an enlarged 3600cc engine, mated to a rare four-speed Tiptronic auto
Each door is unfeasibly light and – like those on its modern brethren – the top edges neatly follow the line of the upper dashboard, wrapping around you in a continuous arc. Spartan it might be, but there's an underlying quality about all the controls.
As Sumpter admits, this car drives far better than it would have done nearly 70 years ago, and that's borne out as soon as we take to the road.
It's the loudest of the trio by some margin, and the hard-edged, air-cooled bark from its exhaust is addictive as you change up at 5000rpm – still 1500rpm shy of the redline – through the notchy, rather wooden-feeling gearshift.
The essence of Porsche's original, classic 356A Speedster (front) is present in the 911 Carrera 3.2
Grip from its modern radials is probably a bit too tenacious for the available performance, especially on a car weighing just 1750lb.
But the deliciously light, direct and uncorrupted steering is a thrill, as are the well-judged damping and overall structural tightness.
In short, it gives you more confidence than is probably prudent in a car worth £400k-plus. And that's why the 356 Speedster is the only real keeper of our guiding 'less is more' mantra.
Great cars though the 911 and 964 are, they feel more like tribute acts in comparison.
Images: Luc Lacey
Thanks to: Porsche Club GB and Paragon
All three Speedster models share a thoroughbred DNA and the special driving sensations of a rear-engined Porsche
911 speedster: the modern generation
It was another 17 years before the Speedster name resurfaced after the 964 model, this time based on the 997.2-series 911.
Produced in 2010 by Porsche's Exclusive department, the 997 Speedster had the requisite 77mm chopped from the height of its windscreen, with the rake unchanged.
However, this was by no means a stripped-out racer for the track, and pound-for-pound it was almost the same weight as a Carrera 2S Cabriolet.
Porsche reintroduced the Speedster name for the 997.2-series 911
It did, however, sport the 'Power Kit' 3.8-litre flat-six, producing 408bhp, and the PDK dual-clutch transmission, meaning 0-60mph in 4.4 secs and a 189mph maximum speed.
Just 356 (get it?) were built, with 14 reaching the UK at £144,100 each.
The most recent 991.2-based Speedster, though, made a welcome return to the model's 1950s roots.
Porsche's 991.2-based 911 Speedster marked a return to form
Developed by Porsche's famous GT division, the 2019 special's rear body-in-white was from the Carrera 4S Cabriolet, grafted to the front end of a GT3, complete with the carbonfibre wings and bonnet from the 911R.
Power came from Porsche's epic, atmospheric 4-litre flat-six (redline: 9000rpm), delivering 503bhp to the rear wheels, only through a six-speed manual gearbox.
The price? £211,599.
Porsche 356A Speedster
Sold/number built 1955-'58/3676
Construction steel platform with unitary steel body
Engine all-alloy, ohv 1582cc flat-four, with twin downdraught Solex/Zenith carburettors
Max power 59bhp @ 4500rpm
Max torque 81lb ft @ 2800rpm
Transmission four-speed manual, RWD
Suspension independent, at front by trailing arms rear swing axles; transverse torsion bars, telescopic dampers f/r
Steering rack and pinion
Brakes drums
Length 12ft 11½in (3950mm)
Width 5ft 5¾in (1669mm)
Height 4ft 3¾in (1320mm)
Wheelbase 6ft 10¾in (2101mm)
Weight 1750lb (794kg)
0-62mph 13.9 secs
Top speed 99mph
Price new $2995 (pre-A 356 Speedster)
Price now £3-400,000*
Porsche 911 Carrera 3.2 Speedster
Construction steel unitary
Engine all-alloy, sohc-per-bank 3164cc flat-six, Bosch L-Jetronic fuel injection
Max power 227bhp @ 5900rpm
Max torque 209lb ft @ 4800rpm
Transmission five-speed manual, RWD
Suspension independent, at front by MacPherson struts rear semi-trailing arms; torsion bars, telecopic dampers, anti-roll bar f/r
Brakes ventilated discs, with servo
Length 14ft 1in (4291mm)
Width 5ft 10in (1775mm)
Height 4ft 2½in (1280mm)
Wheelbase 7ft 5½in (2273mm)
Weight 2667lb (1210kg)
0-62mph 6 secs
Top speed 152mph
Price new £52,850
Price now £150-200,000*
Porsche 911 (964) Speedster
Sold/number built 1992-'93/945
Engine all-alloy, sohc-per-bank 3600cc flat-six, Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection
Transmission five-speed manual or four-speed Tiptronic automatic, RWD
Suspension independent, by MacPherson struts, coil springs, telecopic dampers, anti-roll bar f/r
Brakes ventilated discs, with servo and ABS
0-62mph 5.7 secs
Price new DM131,500 (1992)
*Prices correct at date of original publication
Little gems: Alfa Romeo Giulietta Sprint vs MGA Twin-Cam vs Lotus Elite vs Porsche 356B
Porsche dream machines: 911 RS 3.8 vs 928 GTS
Chasing unicorns: Porsche factory rarities
Simon Hucknall
50 Porsche RS cars to star at London Concours
C&SC presents… Porsche Legends is on sale now
| 8 Dec 2022
Future classic: Porsche Boxster 25
| 18 Aug 2022
Porsche 917: flat-out flat-12
| 1 May 2022
Thousands of classic cars for sale!
Find your next car in our classifieds – the classic of your dreams could be just a click away...
Best alloy wheel cleaners 2023
Pentz AC Ace Bristol: Latin twist
Future classic: Fiat 500
Jaguar Mk2 2.4 vs BMW 1800 vs Alfa Romeo 1300 TI: Continental challenge
All latest stories
Bucket-list classics: what's on your list?
Rolls-Royce Silver Wraith: somebody please talk me out of this
| 1 Jun 2022
Celebrating the landmark Alfasud
| 30 Mar 2021
Falling for a Lotus Elan M100
| 4 Jan 2021
Video: The Classic & Sports Car Show 2018 highlights
| 3 Jul 2018
© 2023 Haymarket Media Group


text:
Q: Contact Picker tutorials Hey does anyone know of any good contact picker tutorials for android? I need to make a contact picker that will allow for multiple selections

A: Does this answer work for you? is it possible to selecte multiple contacts from contact picker?
For tutorials:

*

*http://www.android10.org/index.php/forums/49-other-coding-problemsarticles/1242-tutorial-reading-contacts-in-android-2

*http://www.higherpass.com/Android/Tutorials/Working-With-Android-Contacts/


One of my greatest joys of the fall semester (2012) was having Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim in Princeton, my home town, where they taught a course in Religion and Ecology at the Princeton University. They have been friends for many years, but having them in town enabled us to deepen our friendship considerably. We had dinner together nearly every week, sharing hopes, dreams, and struggles. We watched the election results come in and shouted with ecstasy when the skaters moved toward Ohio to color that state blue. The movie they produced, "Journey of the Universe," which won an Emmy and has been aired on many PBS stations, was shown a number of times at the University, D&R Greenway, Princeton Seminary, and other places, followed by incredible discussions led by Mary Evelyn and John. Through these many showings, we've been able to expand a community of local people who see the universe story as context for the our great adventure. I'm sad to think of them returning to Yale, their home institution, but Mary Evelyn sent a list of all the many times they'll be back in Princeton over the next six month, nearly once a month, so . . . will be good!


text:
QIAGEN collaborates with BioNTech on companion diagnostics development for HPV-associated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck
Industry News: QIAGEN collaborates with BioNTech on companion diagnostics development for HPV-associated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck
QIAGEN has announced a strategic collaboration with BioNTech to develop and commercialize a tissue-based companion diagnostic, to be used with investigational cancer treatment BNT113, which identifies patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) that are caused by specific infections by human papilloma virus (HPV).
The assay will detect the presence of HPV genotypes and will be developed on QIAGEN´s RGQ MDx platform, a member of the QIAsymphony family of products.
QIAGEN plans to expand the panel for use across HPV-driven cancers such as cervical cancer and other cancers, in order to provide a universal HPV companion diagnostic (CDx) for QIAGEN's pharmaceutical partners.
Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma is the sixth most common cancer. Every year, there are more than 650,000 cases leading to 330,000 deaths, according to a 2018 global cancer study. These numbers are expected to double by 2035, according to the World Health Organization. The incidence of HPV-related SCCHN has significantly increased in recent years.
QIAGEN established the global HPV testing market over two decades ago. More than 100 million women have been tested for HPV infections using QIAGEN´s portfolio of HPV products, including hybrid capture, genotyping, and methylation tests.
"This CDx project will help to identify patients who might benefit from BioNTech´s innovative BNT113 treatment option," said Jean-Pascal Viola, Senior Vice President and Head of Molecular Diagnostics Business Area at QIAGEN. "QIAGEN's Sample to Insight workflows and experience in developing diagnostic solutions for Precision Medicine are well-suited to aid in evaluating patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. We will leverage our world-leading position in HPV testing to commercialize the new HPV companion diagnostics in all target markets of BioNTech."
QIAGEN is a pioneer in Precision Medicine and the global leader in collaborations with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to co-develop companion diagnostics, which detect clinically relevant genetic abnormalities to provide insights that guide clinical decision-making in diseases such as cancer.
QIAGEN has an unmatched depth and breadth of technologies from polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to next-generation sequencing (NGS) for companion diagnostic development. These capabilities, such as the flexibility to tailor a CDx to a partner's needs, IVD development expertise, and a proven global commercialization track record, allow QIAGEN to develop novel and innovative diagnostic solutions, including customized NGS products. Through the Day-One Lab Readiness program, a network of laboratories are ready for commercial testing, pending drug regulatory approval, allowing patients to benefit from immediate access to a therapeutic.
Currently, QIAGEN is working under master collaboration agreements with more than 30 companies, including BioNTech, to develop and commercialize companion diagnostic tests for their drug candidates – a deep pipeline of potential future products to advance Precision Medicine for the benefit of patients.
Want the latest science news straight to your inbox? Become a SelectScience member for free today>>
QIAquick PCR Purification Kit (250)
Edward Carter
Product News: Owlstone Medical introduces breath biopsy panel for respiratory diseases
Product News: Mission Bio launches single-cell multi-omics system for faster development of precision cancer therapies
Expert Insight: The mysteries of intensive care medicine unraveled: Watch on demand
Expert Insight: The value of SARS-CoV-2 serology testing and the role of neutralization
Expert Insight: 5 new expert webinars you won't want to miss
Product News: Sensyne Health launches MagnifEye smartphone application to automate the reading and big data analysis of lateral flow tests using deep learning AI


Cover for Spider-Man: House of M #1 (August 2005).
Spider-Man: House of M is a five-issue comic book limited series that ran concurrently with Marvel Comics' House of M crossover event in 2005. In the House of M pocket universe, mutants rule the world and humans are an oppressed minority. Magneto and his family, the House of M, rule the world from the island of Genosha.
Much like the Fantastic Four: House of M miniseries, Spider-Man: House of M is a standalone story that takes place in the House of M universe, but the events do not affect the story of the actual House of M series. However, it is shown in the House of M series that the Peter Parker of the mainstream Marvel Universe remembers the life he had in this pocket universe.
In the House of M universe, Spider-Man is famous for being an actor, super-hero, wrestler, and businessman. His identity as Peter Parker is known to the public, who believes he is a mutant and thus born with his powers. His uncle Ben Parker, first love Gwen Stacy and Gwen's father George Stacy are all alive; Peter and Gwen are married and have a son together. Rhino is Peter's bodyguard, even though he is not needed. J. Jonah Jameson, after years of publishing anti-Spider-Man articles, takes a high-paying job as Peter's publicist, where Peter constantly humiliates him in public.
At Peter's surprise birthday party, Jameson is attacked by the Green Goblin, who states his intention to use Jameson to destroy Spider-Man. Jameson awakens the next morning holding Peter's journal, part of which explains how he got his powers and that he is not a mutant. Spider-Man searches all over the city to find Jameson, but it's too late. J. Jonah Jameson, with a camera crew, reveals the truth in Spider-Man's journal.
After the news breaks, a mutant boy is beaten half to death for wearing a Spider-Man shirt. Peter visits the boy at the hospital, where he meets a mutant security guard who expresses respect for Spider-Man. An announcement comes in that Rhino is causing havoc downtown. The guard turns to face Peter, but sees only an open window.
Spider-Man tries to stop Rhino from destroying downtown, but gets attacked by angry mutant pedestrians. Rhino escapes and meets the Green Goblin, who he tells to meet him behind Parker's house tonight. As soon as Green Goblin arrives, he sees that Ox, Vulture, and Electro are there as well, and they all attack the Green Goblin. During the fight, Gwen Stacy runs to see what's going on. Rhino grabs the Green Goblin and lets Gwen take his mask off, revealing Peter Parker.
It is revealed that Peter has been having recurring nightmares of horrifying events that Spider-Man faced in the true Marvel Universe, including the deaths of Ben, George, and Gwen. Thinking him insane, his family believes that Peter may have subconsciously created his Green Goblin persona to force the truth of his non-mutant origins to come out.
In the end, Spider-Man fakes his own death, leaving a note for the House of M, threatening to come back if Magneto does not "lay off the humans." The Parker family is last seen somewhere in the countryside, contentedly building their new home away from mutant civilization. For this story to fit in with the larger story told in the House of M miniseries, the Parker family would have had to return to New York at some point, as it was there that Wolverine and the rest of the memory-restored heroes introduced him to Layla Miller.
An issue of What If...? had two alternative stories that could have happened from the Spider-Man: House of M story, including Gwen Stacy accompanying the heroes in the final assault and Gwen and Richard Parker being restored to the real world after Wanda cast her final spell.
When the 'Superior Spider-Man'- Doctor Octopus in Spider-Man's body- found himself temporarily trapped in the year 2099, his attempts to return home via a dimensional portal resulted in him witnessing various alternate worlds where other Spider-Men had been killed by a dimension-hopping adversary, including a dead Spider-Man in what appeared to be the world of the House of M.
The "House of M" Goblin appears as a boss in the phone app "Spider-Man Unlimited". The "House of M" Spider-Man also appears as a playable character.
This page was last edited on 4 June 2018, at 22:50 (UTC).


text:
Smackdown – December 10, 2015
December 10, 2015 by Thomas Hall
Location: Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Coliseum, Jacksonville, Florida
Commentators: Rich Brennan, Jerry Lawler, Booker T.
It's the go home show for Tables Ladders and Chairs and the show isn't looking like the most interesting in the world. Most of the card is set though and that means tonight is all about the build. I have a feeling we'll be seeing more about the main event, which is a bit of a shame as Smackdown was getting good about building up the midcard. Let's get to it.
Opening sequence.
Roman Reigns vs. Alberto Del Rio
Non-title because I don't think Del Rio has defended the thing since he won it. Swagger vs. Del Rio on Sunday is officially a chairs match. The rest of the League, Ambrose and the Usos are at ringside. Del Rio takes him into the corner for a kick to the back to start but Reigns pounds him in the head. Alberto comes back with some kicks and a way too early chinlock (Sheamus: "SQUEEZE THE LIFE OUT OF HIM!"). That doesn't exactly work as Reigns fights up, only to be greeted by what sounded like a Y2J chant.
Reigns takes it to the floor but gets in a staredown with Sheamus, allowing Del Rio to kick him in the ribs as we take a break. Back with Del Rio coming off the top with a right hand to the head for two. With the everything else not working, Del Rio puts on the armbreaker over the top rope for all of four seconds until Reigns powers him off the ropes and out to the floor. As usual, I don't know why I'm supposed to cheer for Reigns when he can do anything. Well aside from get the ratings up that is.
Reigns wins a slugout (duh) and fires off the clotheslines in the corner. The Superman Punch is countered into the Backstabber for two but Reigns does his rollup into a powerbomb for two. A Sheamus distraction lets Del Rio get in the enziguri for two of his own but there's the Superman Punch for two with the League pulling Del Rio away. The big brawl is on and it's a double DQ at 14:38.
Rating: C+. They work well together but as usual this was an obvious ending and not for the title because Reigns is programmed for the World Title and therefore doesn't care about the US Title. It's the same, standard operating procedure stuff and I'm getting really tired of it, as are most of the fans it seems.
There's going to be an eight man tag main event. That's not all though as we also get a CONTRACT SIGNING between Ambrose and Kevin Owens. Good grief this is like a Greatest Hits Smackdown.
Tyler Breeze vs. Dolph Ziggler
Speaking of the exact same things we've seen time after time, here's Dolph Ziggler in the second segment of the show for I think the third show in a row. Oh and it's in a rematch too because this was screaming for a trilogy. They fight over arm control to start until Tyler grabs a headlock. A nice running dropkick gets two for Breeze and he starts in on the leg.
Ziggler tries to roll out of a knee bar but gets caught in a half crab instead. With that broken up, Breeze tries to wrap the leg around the post but gets pulled face first into the steel instead (with no mention of this from the commentators because Lawler is reading a line about selfies). Back in and the superkick ends Breeze at 4:44. That was Ziggler's only major offensive move of the match.
Rating: D+. So let's see. Breeze arrived about a month and a half ago and already has a losing record in general and to Dolph Ziggler. I'm so glad we saw him go through all that work down in NXT, only to have him come up here and lose a feud to the perennial jobber to the stars, who TOTALLY needed to win this feud. As usual, it's the same old things that we've seen for years that don't work but they keep doing because they're sure it's a brilliant idea.
We recap Ryback vs. Rusev. I'm assuming they'll fight on Sunday.
Here's New Day and since it's Smackdown, this is probably their only appearance for the night. Before their match, Kofi talks about LeBron James just signed a lifetime deal with Nike. Big E.: "Lifetime? As in like it and put a ring on it?" Kofi shows off his shoes as E. gives us a quick commercial. As for Sunday, they're defending their titles in a triple threat ladder match, but getting the belts off of them is harder than getting Adele to answer a phone call. Why you ask? It's because NEW DAY ROCKS of course.
New Day vs. Lucha Dragons
Again non-title and a rematch from Raw, though this time it's Big E. on the floor. Kalisto flips Kofi down to start but both guys try a dropkick to give us a stalemate. The Dragons take over again with Cara monkey flipping Kalisto onto Kofi for two. New Day finally gets it together with Kofi sending Cara to the floor as we take a break. Back with Woods stomping in the corner and Big E. not being able to master the trombone.
We get an awkward sequence where Woods misses a clothesline and then hits it a second later with Cara standing there so he can hit it. Cara lifts Kofi up into a powerbomb (ala Reigns), finally allowing the hot tag to Kalisto as things speed way up. The hurricanrana driver gets two with Kofi making the save. When that doesn't work, Kalisto kicks Xavier in the head and hits the Salida Del Sol for the pin at 8:14.
Rating: C-. This didn't have much time due to the break and was another rematch from Raw. Just like with Owens in the Intercontinental Title feud, the Usos have been completely forgotten in this whole thing and should have been in this match instead of the rematch with the Dragons where New Day loses AGAIN. In other words, they're using the same idea in the Tag Team Title feud that they're doing in the World Title feud. And people wonder why this isn't the most well received time in creative's history.
It's time for the contract signing for Owens vs. Ambrose. Dean comes out first and has to yell at Owens' attorney. Owens has an attorney? That doesn't fit for some reason. Owens has been instructed to not show up tonight because it's not a safe working environment. Oh sweet goodness with the legal storylines. That's another trope you can check off the list for this show.
Dean says he was hoping for a quick beatdown tonight instead of having to actually do something. He goes to sign but here's Owens, blowing off the ploy a good three minutes after it started. Dean is sent into the barricade but whips Owens into the steps and takes out the attorney as a bonus. Owens bails and the attorney gets Dirty Deeds before Dean signs.
Ryback vs. Ascension
Lana and Rusev are on commentary. Ryback throws Viktor around to start and plants Konnor with a spinebuster. The Meat Hook and Shell Shock put Viktor away at 1:29.
If you're going to do that, BRING BACK JOBBERS! Good grief man. Someone explain to me the reason why we need to beat down a team that could be used somewhere else for the sake of pushing this midcard feud. If you're going to have someone lose in 90 seconds, bring in jobbers who have nothing to lose. I know Ascension doesn't have much to lose, but they COULD mean something if they're built up. Add this to the list of annoying things WWE doesn't understand that gets on my nerves because they're so obsessed with this way of thinking and no one comes in and says "hey, that's stupid."
Ryback stares at the Russians or whatever country they're from this week.
Recap of Rhyno returning Monday.
Becky Lynch vs. Paige
Paige's early headlock doesn't get her anywhere so she punches Becky in the ribs instead. Some knees to the head set up a chinlock on Becky but she comes back with some hard uppercuts. A double clothesline puts both of them down but here's Charlotte coming to the ring, complete with full music. The distraction only works on Paige (because they're feuding you see) and the Disarm-Her makes her tap at 3:23.
Rating: D+. So instead of having the champion get beat, let's have the challenger get beat so we have even less of a reason to like her. I think they're trying to make Paige the face here but much like everything else, they have no idea how to make the women likeable either. I'm sure the solution is to have her take credit for the Divas Revolution though and then have her be catty with everyone else.
Long video on Reigns vs. Sheamus. As I've said ever since it started: it's a great Intercontinental Title feud but a lame main event.
League of Nations vs. Roman Reigns/Dean Ambrose/Usos
Alberto shoulders Jimmy down to start but Jimmy (who Booker identifies as having the facepaint on the right hand side, even though they're exactly the same in the ring) comes back with a loud uppercut. Off to Jey vs. Rusev with the Bulgarian taking over as you would expect. Sheamus comes in with a kick to the head and we take a break. Back with Jey having his shirt ripped open for some forearms to the chest.
Reigns has to be held back from interfering but the distraction allows the tag to Ambrose but the fans aren't ready to react. The middle rope dropkick puts Sheamus down and the bulldog sets up the strikes against the ropes. Barrett finally does something by tripping Ambrose from the floor, allowing Rusev to come in and choke away. Del Rio comes in for another chinlock (he's a big fan of those tonight) and a Backstabber for two.
Sheamus' suplex slam gets two and it's off to another chinlock. Back to Rusev for a bearhug but Dean counters into a neckbreaker. A tornado DDT to Del Rio is enough for the hot tag to Reigns, though the crowd doesn't seem that thrilled to see him again. Everything breaks down and the Usos take out Sheamus and Del Rio with stereo dives. The spear finishes Rusev at 13:47.
Rating: D+. Totally uninteresting main event here with nothing standing out. Reigns wins again before he gets screwed over on Sunday like we're all expecting because that's what the fans want to see: more of the same thing we've seen for a year now while we keep pedaling towards the carrot on a string that we can never reach.
Overall Rating: D-. I don't say this often but this show was a huge waste of my time. I understand that this was the same taping as Tribute to the Troops but this felt more like that "special" ("Yeah it's for the troops and totally not just us taping a house show so we can feel good about ourselves. USA!") than a regular show.
Almost every single thing that happened on this show felt like it came from the book of WWE Easy Ideas and that's not how you ever want a show to go. Between the champions losing, the contract signing and the tag team main event, I saw nothing on this show that makes me care about TLC. Nothing. Not a single thing. I'm sure the show will be fine, but this was a waste of my time.
It's very clear right now that WWE isn't trying. I know it happens every year at this time when the creative team basically puts it on autopilot and throws their feet up for the holidays, but this is the kind of show that makes me wonder why I should bother at this time of year. I never had that feeling before but it's happening almost every November and December in recent years because WWE is stuck with five hours of TV a week and nowhere near enough ideas.
They need to give me a reason to care in a hurry (hint: you can have a face hold the title for more than five minutes in fifteen months) because this is getting old. Stop having champions lose, stop treating these shows like they don't matter, stop repeating the same matches with guys trading meaningless five minute wins and stop using the same ideas every few weeks and expecting us to care. I usually give WWE the benefit of the doubt (more often than I should) but this is the kind of show that makes me feel like I've wasted my time and that's the last thing I should feel when I'm watching something that should be entertaining.
Roman Reigns vs. Alberto Del Rio went to a double DQ when the League of Nations, the Usos and Dean Ambrose interfered
Dolph Ziggler b. Tyler Breeze – Superkick
Lucha Dragons b. New Day – Salida Del Sol to Woods
Ryback b. Ascension – Shell Shock to Viktor
Becky Lynch b. Paige – Disarm-Her
Roman Reigns/Dean Ambrose/Usos b. League of Nations – Spear to Rusev
Remember to check out my website at kbwrestlingreviews.com and pick up my new book of the History of Wrestlemania at Amazon for just $3.99 at:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0188BJRGU
And check out my Amazon author page with cheap wrestling books at:
http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Hall/e/B00E6282W6
Categories Wrestling Tags 2015, ascension, Becky Lynch, Charlotte, Dean Ambrose, Dolph Ziggler, League of Nations, Paige, Roman Reigns, Rusev, Ryback, Smackdown, Tyler Breeze, Usos, WWE Post navigation
HHH's Takeover conference call
Ring of Honor – December 9th, 2015