text:
Freedom For All Americans Education Fund
Content Filed Under: 2017 Election
All stories concerning federal, state, and local elections in 2017.
Minneapolis Councilmember Reflects on History-Making Election for Transgender People and the Work Ahead
March 1, 2018, 11:54 am	"As a 'First' I want to be able to take space where people have not been before and then create space for folks who are like me. I take that responsibility very seriously."
Virginia Governor Signs Executive Order Protecting LGBTQ State Workers and Contractors
By Shane Stahl • January 17, 2018, 11:24 am	Governor Ralph Northam signed several executive orders after his inauguration, including an update to non-discrimination protections for state employees and contractors.
Reflecting on 2017, and What It Means to Be An Advocate for LGBTQ Equal Treatment
By Adam Polaski • December 31, 2017, 10:58 am	Years from now I don't want to hear stories of gay people forced out of their jobs after they introduce colleagues to their spouse. I don't want to hear stories of transgender kids humiliated and barred from using the restroom at their school, where they should be safest. I don't want to hear stories of parents forced to watch their children suffer because of who they are or who they love.
End-of-Year Spotlight: 10 Heroes Who Advocated for Equal Treatment for LGBTQ Americans in 2017
By Shane Stahl • December 27, 2017, 5:36 pm	From elected officials sticking their necks out on behalf of their constituents to parents who will do anything to protect their children to LGBTQ people themselves, there are so many heroes in the movement for LGBTQ nondiscrimination.
Transgender Americans Win Historic Victories from Coast to Coast on Election Night 2017
November 8, 2017, 12:28 pm	Transgender Americans won historic races in Virginia, Minnesota, Georgia, and California last night -- delivering a rebuke not just to President Donald Trump's anti-LGBTQ agenda, but to state lawmakers who have doggedly pursued anti-transgender legislation in recent years.
© 2022 Freedom for All Americans Education Fund


text:
Frank Rattray Lillie
Lillie in 1893
November 5, 1947 (1947-11-06) (aged 77)
Alexander Agassiz Medal (1939)
United States National Research Council
Marine Biological Laboratory
Warder Clyde Allee
Ernest Everett Just
Frank Rattray Lillie (June 27, 1870 – November 5, 1947) was an American zoologist and an early pioneer of the study of embryology. Born in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Lillie moved to the United States in 1891 to study for a summer at the Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) in Woods Hole, Massachusetts. Lillie formed a lifelong association with the laboratory, eventually rising to become its director in 1908. His efforts developed the MBL into a full-time institution.
Lillie was appointed an Assistant Professor at the University of Chicago in 1900. He was named Chairman of the Department of Zoology in 1910 and Dean of the Division of Biological Sciences in 1931. His research there was instrumental in the development of the field of embryology. He identified the influence of potassium on cell differentiation and elucidated the biological mechanisms behind free-martins. Lillie was instrumental in founding the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and served as its first president. He also served at times as the chairman of the National Academy of Sciences and the United States National Research Council.
Biography[edit]
Frank Rattray Lillie was born on June 27, 1870 in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. His father was a wholesale druggist and accountant. After attending a laboratory school as a youth, Lillie enrolled at the University of Toronto. Originally intending to study theology, Lillie came under the tutelage of Robert Ramsay Wright and Archibald Macallum, who influenced Lillie to study endocrinology and embryology. Lillie graduated in 1891 and moved to the United States. He accepted a summer position at the Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, then became a fellow in zoology at Clark University, where he studied under Charles Otis Whitman.[1][2]
In 1892 he was lured by Whitman to the newly founded University of Chicago. In 1894 (at the age of 24) he received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Zoology summa cum laude. Between 1894-1899 he was instructor of zoology at University of Michigan.[1] He married Frances Williams Crane, whom he met at MBL, June 29, 1895. Crane was the daughter of wealthy Chicago businessman Richard T. Crane.[3] Between 1899-1900 he was Professor of Biology at Vassar College but in 1900 he was called back to Chicago as Assistant Professor of Zoology, where he would spend the next thirty years. In 1906, at the age of 36, he became Professor of Embryology. In 1910 he succeeded Whitman as Chairman of the Department of Zoology and continued in that capacity until 1931. From 1931 to 1935 he was Dean of the Division of the Biological Sciences.[1]
While in Chicago, Lillie lived at this house. It has since been recognized as a National Historic Landmark as a building of national significance.
While researching at the University of Chicago, Lillie also became active in the administration of the MBL. Lillie became assistant director of the laboratory in 1900.[3] In 1902, Lillie was able to convince representatives from the Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, General Education Board, and brother-in-law Charles Richard Crane to provide the institution with financial support. After Whitman retired in 1908 to chair the zoology department, Lillie took his place as the director of the laboratory. He held this position until 1925, when he was appointed the president of the MBL board of trustees.[1] Lillie oversaw the board until his retirement in 1942.[1] Ernest Everett Just studied under Lillie from 1909 to 1930.[4] He is credited with transforming the institution from a summer retreat to a long-term research institution.[3]
At a 1925 meeting of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Lillie suggested that a committee be formed to begin a national oceanography organization. The NAS agreed if Lillie could raise funds for its establishment. With a $3 million grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, Lillie was able to establish the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in 1930.[1] He was named its first president and served in this role until 1939.[3] Lillie was awarded the Alexander Agassiz Medal by the NAS in 1940 for his efforts.[1]
The American Society of Zoologists named Lillie the organization's representative to the United States National Research Council (NRC) Division of Biology and Agriculture in 1919. Three years later, he was named the chair of the division.[2] From 1935 to 1939 he was served as President of the NAS. From 1935 to 1936, he was also Chairman of the NRC. Lillie served on the fellowship board of the latter institution for several years after his term expired.[1]
Lillie had four daughters and adopted three sons.[3] He died in Chicago on November 5, 1947.[1] A building on the MBL campus is named after Lillie.[3] On May 11, 1976, the National Park Service recognized Lillie's house in Chicago as a National Historic Landmark.[1]
Research[edit]
Embryology was still a relatively new field when Lillie began his studies. In 1901, Lillie published his first major work on the subject. After exposing eggs to abnormal concentrations of potassium, Lillie noted that unsegmented eggs underwent cellular differentiation in the absence of mitosis. In 1919, Lillie summarized his findings to that point in Problems of Fertilixation, where he concluded that fertilization was a series of timed and irreversible events.[1]
Lillie was also a pioneer in the study of sex steroids in sexual differentiation. He published "The Theory of the Free-martin" in Science in 1917, which found that sex steroids in the blood controlled differentiation.[1] Free-martins, sterile female cows born without sex organs, were a perplexing issue for cattle ranchers. Lillie found that free-martins formed when twins shared the same placenta. The hormones from the male twin would then be shared with the female, stunting the growth of her reproductive system.[3]
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Sheire, James (January 27, 1976), National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: Frank R. Lillie House (PDF), National Park Service
^ a b Cullen, Vicky (2005). Down to the Sea for Science: 75 Years of Ocean Research Education & Exploration at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Woods Hole, MA: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. p. 7–9. ISBN 978-1880224090.
^ a b c d e f g Peters, Paula (2000). "Frank Lillie: The cultivator of an embryonic Woods Hole scientific community". Cape Cod Times. Archived from the original on November 21, 2008.
^ Cevasco, George A.; Harmond, Richard P., eds. (2009). Modern American Environmentalists: A Biographical Encyclopedia. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 235. ISBN 978-0801891526.
"Addresses at the Lillie Memorial Meeting, Woods Hole, August 11, 1948" Biological Bulletin, Vol 95, No2, 151-162, October 1948;
"Moon Out of the Well; Reminscences," by Mary Prentice Lillie Barrows (daughter of F.R. Lillie), unpublished 1970;
"The Development of the Chick. An Introduction to Embryology. Lillie, Frank R. New York, Henry Holt, 1908.
Gilbert, S. F. 2003. Edmund Beecher Wilson and Frank R. Lillie and the relationship between evolution and development, Developmental Biology, Seventh edition, Sinauer
National Academy of Sciences Biographical Memoir
Works by or about Frank Rattray Lillie at Internet Archive
Presidents of the National Academy of Sciences
Alexander Bache (1863)
Joseph Henry (1868)
William Rogers (1879)
Othniel Marsh (1883)
Wolcott Gibbs (1895)
Alexander Agassiz (1901)
Ira Remsen (1907)
William H. Welch (1913)
Charles Walcott (1917)
Albert A. Michelson (1923)
Thomas Morgan (1927)
William Campbell (1931)
Frank Lillie (1935)
Frank B. Jewett (1939)
Alfred Richards (1947)
Detlev Bronk (1950)
Frederick Seitz (1962)
Philip Handler (1969)
Frank Press (1981)
Bruce Alberts (1993)
Ralph J. Cicerone (2005)
Marcia McNutt (2016)
SNAC: w66d62x1
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Rattray_Lillie

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


We are extremely fortunate to have found a site that will allow us to invest for growth while retaining our highly skilled employees. Customers will be receiving the same high-performance parts as we progress through this expansion and transition.
DuPont Transportation & Advanced Polymers (T&AP), a business unit of DowDuPont Specialty Products Division, today announced the purchase of a new facility in Newark, Delaware, to manufacture DuPont™ Kalrez®, a specialized engineered material used in a variety of sealing applications that require high-temperature performance and excellent chemical resistance.
The facility is twice the size of the current plant in Newark, and will be outfitted with state-of-the-art equipment and advanced manufacturing capabilities. Over the next two years, DuPont T&AP plans to invest approximately $45 million to increase manufacturing capacity and then transition production from the current site to the new facility. The new facility will allow manufacturing of Kalrez® perfluoroelastomer parts to expand in-line with the projected business growth and to better serve customers in the important semiconductor, electronics and industrial markets.
"We are extremely fortunate to have found a site that will allow us to invest for growth while retaining our highly skilled employees. Customers will be receiving the same high-performance parts as we progress through this expansion and transition. We also are pleased that our growth and investment plans are Delaware based as we've enjoyed a strong partnership with the state since we launched the Kalrez® business over 40 years ago," said Randy Stone, president, T&AP.
DuPont Transportation & Advanced Polymers (T&AP), a DowDuPont Specialty Products Division business, delivers a broad range of technology-based products and solutions to the transportation, electronics, industrial and consumer markets. T&AP partners with customers to drive innovation by utilizing its expertise and knowledge in polymer and materials science. T&AP works with customers throughout the value chain to enable material systems solutions for demanding applications and environments. For additional information, visit http://plastics.dupont.com.
The DuPont Oval Logo, DuPont™, and all products denoted with ™ or ® are trademarks or registered trademarks of E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company or its affiliates.


text:
HS Football preview: SA Wolves in beastmode following back-to-back losses in semis
By Caleb Beames and Jeff Wright | August 5, 2019 at 10:14 AM CDT - Updated August 5 at 10:04 PM
SAN AUGUSTINE, Texas (KTRE) - For many East Texas students, the month of August brings with it the end of summer break and the dread of returning to school. However, for many student-athletes, August also brings with it the beginning of high school football practice.
San Augustine Wolves didn't waste any time, hitting the practice field at 7 a.m. Monday.
"We are excited and ready to go," Head Coach Marty Murr said. "I knew the coaches and kids wouldn't sleep much on Sunday with Monday being the first day. We hit it early. The kids got here at 6:20 this morning."
"It feels good man, I've been waiting on it. I really couldn't sleep last night. I probably got like three hours of sleep," said senior running back TiJay Davis. "It's exciting. I'm back out here with my boys and I know they're pumped up, too."
"These guys stay up all the time, they're always working; working hard, I mean, I love that," said teammate Jayden Hicks, senior quarterback. "I'm excited."
The fight for a playoff berth is especially competitive in Class 2A Region III, which includes the Carlisle Indians, Garrison Bulldogs, and Tenaha Tigers. The Wolves defeated the Tigers in the regional playoff in 2018.
"I think it's more than them, I think Centerville is another team that has a chance to win, I think Alto is going to be better this year; Joaquin made some noise in the district last year," said Murr. "I think there's 6 or 7 teams that legitimately have a shot."
The Wolves enter the 2019-20 season after a disappointing finish to the previous season. The Wolves ended their playoff dreams in the state semi-final round for a second year in a row, most recently to the Mason Punchers.
"You know, the two [losses] we took the last two years in the fifth round, it's on our minds," Davis said. "We got the same team, so I don't think nobody is going to stop us."
The key for an Augustine is all the starters from last year on offense are returning plus they add Hicks at quarterback. A lifelong resident of San Augustine, Hicks had been attending Center High School but made the decision to finish his high school years at home. The team also returns almost every starter on defense.
"We have got 17 or 18 returners," Murr said. "It sets up for a good year. Our line will be the strength again this year. Our skill position kids will be a year older. If we get better each day I think we got a chance to be pretty good."
When asked what the team's goal was this year, Hicks had an answer in two words: state championship.
The first week of high school football season kicks off Aug. 30. San Augustine will host Big Sandy.
Copyright 2019 KTRE. All rights reserved.
Caleb Beames
KTRE Sports Director
Caleb Beames joined KTRE in 2012 after spending several years working freelance in the high school sports scene of Houston.
Jeff Wright
KLTV/KTRE Content Producer
Jeff Wright came to KLTV in Jan. 2013. He is currently a content producer for KLTV/KTRE, writing content for KLTV and KTRE digital platforms, as well as for television.
Mahomes Mania continues in Whitehouse
The crze is growing in East Texas as Patrick Mahomes looks to lead the Kansas City Chiefs to their first championship in 50 years
Dante Nuñez and Caleb Beames
WEBXTRA: 5 East Texans among 900 possible All-American basketball players
Tyler ISD calls special meeting in regards to Tyler Lee head football coach position
Caleb Beames and KLTV Digital Media Staff
Gilmer ISD Athletic Director, Head Football Coach Matt Turner announces retirement
Jowell Hancock stepping down from Rusk HC/AD position


For over sixteen years America's Test Kitchen has approached cooking through a methodic, scientific lens, explaining how to execute a recipe to perfection. In a crowded landscape of culinary television, they stand out for their rigorous testing and accessible recipes.
Julia Collin Davison and Bridget Lancaster have been appearing regularly on the show since its inception, and are taking the reins as hosts this year for the show's 17th season. You can expect more of the same in the best way, with equipment reviews, taste tests, and recipes for home cooks evaluated by professionals in America's Test Kitchen. We caught up with Julia and Bridget to learn a little about how they work when they're not behind the stove.
Current Gig: Food Editors and hosts of America's Test Kitchen and Cook's Country television shows.
Julia: iPhone—No idea which version.
Julia: MacBook Pro—Again, no idea which version.
Apple Music: It's basically the radio for me. While I hate the idea of paying to listen to the 'radio', I love that any music I want is right at my fingertips, especially when I'm working.
Audible: I rarely have time to read anymore. I save the great books for actual paper, but listen to everything else on Audible. It's transformed my commute from being the worst part of my day into one of the best. Sometimes, I sit in the driveway when I get home just to hear the end of a chapter.
Gym Trainer Appointment App: I eat a TON of food at work (it's part of my job) so finding time for an efficient workout is crucial to my health. I love any appointment making apps in general.
Google Calendar: It's not pretty, but it seems to be the only way for everyone to track my schedule. Maintaining my schedule is a real battle and currently, I'm losing. I've looked at other types of apps, calendars, and so on, but so far, none of them have worked for me. Maybe someday someone clever will come up with something that really works.
Bridget: Love Waze for navigation and use WhatsApp to keep in touch with family near and far.
Julia: I care very much about my work space. I have two offices (at home and work); my work turns out better when I'm at one of my desks. I always plug my laptop into a proper keyboard, mouse, and large monitor. I'm short so my desks are humorously low—they almost look like desks meant for children— but my feet have to rest flat on the floor or else I get cranky. Also, I have good lighting (no blue-tinged, buzzy overhead florescent lights for me) and need to have neat things on the walls to look at when I'm thinking.
Bridget: Most of the time I work from my home office. It's a pretty traditional setup (desk, window, phone,) but I also have a FitDesk—which is a stationary bicycle and desk.
Julia: I wear headphones when I'm in my office, even if I'm not listening to anything. It helps me focus, but also prevents folks from interrupting just to say hi when my office door is open. It's like having a bouncer at the door.
Bridget: I have a couple of "cook days" per week, where I cook as much as I can and package up the food for easy leftovers. That way I'm not starting meal from scratch every single day.
Julia: Old-school paper and pencil. I have a favorite, small, spiral-bound notebook and I write my work-to-do list every morning, with a side list of all my meetings for the day. I carry the notebook everywhere. Anything left on the list at the end of the day either gets written down for the following day and/or I find someone to help me get it done. Before I leave work, I rip out the day's page, crush it into a ball, and throw it into the bin—very satisfying. I also have an old electric pencil sharpener at my desk because writing with super sharp pencils feels cool.
Bridget: I'm old school! I have a Moleskine journal and a pen. There's something incredibly satisfying to manually crossing items off a "to-do" list.
Bridget: Coffee maker!!! I'm like The Hulk without my first cup of coffee. Also, I have a homemade "keezer" (chest freezer converted into a keg chiller/dispenser) in my basement that is pretty handy.
What kitchen gadget or tool that people often overlook is a necessity for you?
Julia: An electric tea pot that turns it self off when the water comes to a boil. I've no idea why folks aren't in love with this thing—we use it several times a day at my house.
Bridget: An electric tea kettle. I have to have a cup of tea in the late afternoon.
Julia: Huh—I've never thought about this before. I do 'celebrate' when I'm done with a project by letting my mind wander. It could be as simple as taking a walk through the Test Kitchen to see what everyone else is working on or indulging in some aimless web trolling. I also do this when I'm stuck in a project with no ideas.
Bridget: I'm always working on several projects (home and work) at once. I do a lot of DIY at home so there is always something to do.
Julia: I'm very efficient at getting out of the house in the morning; from waking up to commuting takes me just 15 minutes (including a shower). I don't cook breakfast (I drink kefir), I don't really read my emails (just glance to see if anything is on fire), and I don't drink my coffee/tea until I'm driving. Also, I have simple clothing that's mostly black so everything always matches.
Bridget: Making a bed. I love a well-made bed with hospital corners and tightly tucked sheets.
Do you have any culinary guilty pleasures?
Julia: American cheese—so creamy when melted.
Bridget: You know, indulging your desire for Taco Bell or... I don't have any guilt when it comes to eating.
Julia: I have a specific play list for work that helps me focus. It contains mostly modern music (some chill/ambient stuff and electronic stuff) with a little classical and classic rock thrown in. Also, I love the playlists on Apple Music's 'For You' feature.
Bridget: I definitely prefer silence when I work.
Julia: I've just realized that I like sci-fi, so I'm working my way through the classics: Dune, Ender's Game, Outlander, and so on. Also having fun listening to Ready Player One.
Bridget: I've gone through a reading binge lately. Read Ready Player One, and old Agatha Christie novel—The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, as well as A Hillbilly Elegy. Currently re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird.
Julia: Have a hard work-out at the gym, then take a long shower, followed by a good nap.
Bridget: I've got two wonderful sons and a make sure to spend as much time with them as I can. It puts everything else in perspective for me.
Julia: I'm a night owl. I often have a hard time getting up early in the morning and oversleeping is problem.
Bridget: I'm a terrible sleeper so I'm both a night owl and an early riser. I use my iPhone alarm to make sure that I've gotten out of bed.
Bridget: I'd love to see Nigella Lawson answer these same questions.
Bridget: Always find the things you have in common with another person, rather than dwell on the differences.


On December 7, 1941 the Japanese landed on the North Eastern coast of Kota Bahru, Malaysia. Within two months, Peninsular Malaysia fell. On February 8, 1942, they crossed the causeway and seven days later, Singapore surrendered.
Bicycles played a critical role in the Japanese advance down the Malayan Peninsula. Japanese Army planners adopted the bicycle as their main mode of transport. Most Japanese soldiers were issued bicycles. Strapped to the bicycle would be the soldier's personal equipment and food rations.
Mr Rajoo recalls bicycles being widely used as mode of transport during the Japanese reign. So much so that even after the Japanese surrender, Rajoo and the other villagers working in the Sembawang Shipyard used bicycles as means of transport to travel to work. (Title of essay : Reminiscences of the Japanese Occupation ). Today, the humble bicycle is still the preferred mode of transport for shipyard workers at Sembawang.


text:
FeatureGames
Geek Culture's Best Games of 2019
2019 was a great year for games, from memorable and awesome AAA games, to some endearing independent ones. Geek Culture has managed to play a lot of games in the past year, big and small, West and East. As such, we've rounded up some of our favourite titles of 2019!
Now, our criterion is slightly different, in that some games might have scored a high rating, but upon a greater reflection, the team here has opted for some truly great titles to be awarded as truly memorable and impactful games.
Game of the Year – Devil May Cry 5
The best AAA (more like SSS in this case) game in our books goes to none other than Devil May Cry 5. The long-awaited fifth entry in the iconic action games series by Capcom marks the franchise's return to form in SSStyle, and deservedly so. Flashy (in a good way) visuals, head-banging music, and blood-pumping balls-to-the-walls action, there isn't anything that screams GAME on this list more than DMC 5.
Best Indie Game – Planet Zoo
The simulation genre hasn't had some proper love in the last few years. Not if the folks over at Frontier Developments could help it. Planet Zoo had always looked special when we saw its trailers, with its stunning visuals and dynamic gameplay elements. It felt even more special when we managed to get our hands on it, and then some. If there's any indie in 2019 that can really make the AAA devs sweat, it's this one.
Best of the West – Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order
You wouldn't think a Star Wars game, let alone a game published by EA, would make it on this list, but as it turns out, it did.. Somehow, EA ran out of ideas to churn out another mediocre Star Wars: Battlefront game and instead devoted their resources to make a proper single-player experience with the Titanfall developers Respawn Entertainment taking charge.
And guess what– their "risk" paid off, with arguably the best Star Wars game to have come out in a long, long time. While being a mish-mash of a ton of other games, Fallen Order took those elements and combined them well, adding a dash of really cool Star Wars narrative and lore on top. The result: a satisfying single-player experience. So when it came to picking a game developed in the West, Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order was a no-brainer for us.
Best of the East – Devil May Cry 5
Since DMC5 was the best AAA game, it wouldn't make sense for it not to be the best game from its area of origin? It took about 11 years for series director Hideaki Itsuno to bring the franchise to the forefront once more after DMC4, and the wait was certainly worth it. Even as Capcom has since grown into quite the huge corporation, to still be able to put out quality single-player experiences such as Devil May Cry 5 is testament to legendary company's strength as a developer-publisher.
Best Action/Adventure – Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice
This was another tough pick, given just how many incredible action/adventure games there were this year. But while the likes of Devil May Cry 5 had a ton of over-the-top action and Monster Hunter World: Iceborne's realism, FromSoftware's Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice straddled the balance really well. Hidetaka Miyazaki and his team have refined their self-made Soulsborne genre to a T over the years, and Sekiro was the result. Despite the controversy about lacking accessibility options surrounding it when it was first release, From parried away any more flak by bullishly sticking to its formula with a purely skill-based game in Sekiro. And that was most certainly a good thing in our books.
Best RPG – Monster Hunter World: Iceborne
Okay, while this entry isn't exactly a new game since it's an expansion, it boasted such a bevvy of new content enough to make it feel like a brand new game. Monster Hunter World: Iceborne is by far one of Capcom's best-handled expansions to an already great game in Monster Hunter World. In Iceborne, the action-RPG elements were really fleshed out with more crafting options, and more ways to kit out your Hunter with a wider variety of builds thanks to the revamped Augment system.
READ ALSO: Everything Star Wars Coming In 2020
Best Strategy – Total War: Three Kingdoms
The real-time strategy genre, like its simulation counterpart, has seen somewhat of a resurgence in recent years. Despite a ton of indie titles with fresh takes on the genre emerging like mole rats, the Total War franchise is still going strong with its yearly releases. The Three Kingdoms spinoff title is arguably one of the better recent Total War games out there. While the iconic Romance of the Three Kingdoms have typically been adapted into musou-style video games, Creative Assembly knew just how to upscale the conflict to suit an RTS playstyle, addled with a dash juicy political intrigue the books were also famous for.
Civilization VI: Gathering Storm
Jon Shafer's At The Gates
Best Sports/Racing – eFootball PES 2020
Remember the days when FIFA used to dominate the sports game scene? Well, it seems the likes of EA and 2K have dropped the ball (heh) in recent years, leaving the competition for top spot wide open for other sports titles to take the crown. And in 2019, Konami has snatched it quite firmly with the release of eFootball PES 2020. From silky-smooth controls, stellar visuals, and genuinely intelligent AI, it's got the most balanced sports game of the year, at least until this year's titles come out.
Team Racing Sonic
Best Story – Death Stranding
Hideo Kojima's very first game in his now-independent dev studio Kojima Productions, was yet another heavy-hitter in 2019, having been one of the most-hyped games ever since its reveal in 2016. Death Stranding, while being both a technical and visual masterpiece, is also one of the best stories of the year. Despite how dauntingly confusing its initial stages may be, stick with Death Stranding long enough and you'll soon discover what a rich narrative Kojima-san and his team have written with such careful, passionate precision, and is definitely reflective in the heart-wrenching journey of Sam Porter Bridges.
Man of Medan
Best Music – Death Stranding
A great game is nothing without its soundtrack, and it is certainly exemplified best in Hideo Kojima's Death Stranding. What better to match Sam's journey across the sprawling wildlands of the United Cities of America than with a series of hauntingly beautiful tracks that slowly fade in and out as you transit between landmarks, or speed up your pulse as you dart through waves of BTs in the stormy outdoors.
Best Art – Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice
When you look at a game like Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, usually it's the gameplay that strikes you. But what draws you to play it in the first place? Surely not just said gameplay or the FromSoftware namesake, right? In most cases, it would have to be the visual style the reels you in to play a game, and in Sekiro, you have one heck of a beautiful game. From the picturesque landscapes of Sengoku Japan, to the garish, grotesque monsters and bosses, to the visceral attacks and weapons used by the titular Sekiro himself, this game is more than meets the eye, no matter how many times you die.
And those are our favourite games of 2019. With the new decade just freshly begun, we're already looking forward to what heavy-hitters there will be in the gaming landscape this 2020. For now, we still have time to complete the games above that we haven't finished yet.
Marion has a serious RPG addiction. Sometimes it bleeds into real life; he forgets to sleep because he thinks he has a Witcher's body clock. Forgive him in advance if he suddenly blurts out terms such as "Mind Flayer" and "Magic Missile", because never once does he stop thinking about his next Dungeons & Dragons game.
2019 Best of 2019 death stranding devil may cry 5 Monster Hunter World: Iceborne Review sekiro: shadows die twice Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order
Geek Culture's Best Movies of 2019
PlayStation 5 vs Xbox Series X: What We Know So Far
Geek Review: Richard Jewell
Clint Eastwood may be 89 years old, but he can still deliver a moving film about the injustices of the world.
John Li
The quintissential jack of all trades, master of none.
GamesGeek Bits
Orange Lightsabers & Other Pre-Order Bonuses Are Now Free On Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order
Deluxe Edition content is still locked away to those who bought that version, though.
Daniel Radcliffe Ditches Wands For Pistols Bolted To His Hands In Guns Akimbo Trailer
Tamoya Singapore Celebrates New Outlet With Exclusive Truffle Tonkotsu Udon
New Sailor Moon Limited-Edition Skechers Sneakers Landing On 20 January In Singapore


text:
TOPDIR = ../..

include $(TOPDIR)/Makefile.common

THIS = consolez80
OBJ = crt0.o putchar.o
AS = $(AS_Z80)

include ../Makefile.platform

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Roberto L. Ramirez has multiple years of experience in helping clients with their general litigation needs in Weslaco, TX.
Roerig Oliveira & Fisher L.L.P.
Are you searching for a top general litigation lawyer in Weslaco, Texas?
Are you ready to take action? Our profile's contact form is simple to use and makes it easy to connect with a Weslaco, Texas lawyer and seek legal advice.


text:
The Doggerelizer
where a writer manqué splurges words all over your screen
GIVE ME A JOB!!! (a.k.a. Welcome!)
About: Me, This Blog, and My Other Projects
SOME OF MY OTHER ARTICLES HELPFULLY GROUPED INTO TOPICS
PETITIONS!!! (please click here!)
Project Polyglot Parry
Tag Archives: #EUReferendum
Brexit Voters Are ****ing Stupid! #Brexit
Posted by bryanajparry in EU Referendum, politics and tagged with #EUReferendum, #LEHEU, #LoveEuropeHateEU, @LeaveEUOfficial, Boris Johnson, Brexit, Brexit Means Brexit, Brexit voters are stupid, Canada model, Canada plus, Canada plus plus plus, CANZUK, dumb, EEA, EFTA, EU, EU Referendum, Europe, FBPE, FOEU, Gisela Stuart, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Juncker, Kate Hooey, Leave Means Leave, Love Europe Hate EU, Michel Barnier, NAFTA, Norway model, politics, racist, Releaver, Remain, Remainer, Remainiac, Remoaner, Rule taker, social media, stupid, Switzerland model, Theresa May, thick, Twitter, UK, Vassal state, Vote Leave June 12, 2018
This post is inspired by a Tweet I saw and the countless times I've been slagged off by people who voted Remain in the EU Membership Referendum.
I have a Bachelor of Arts with Honours with an award of First Class, two Master of Arts, not to mention my professional qualifications, all from world leading institutions. IQ tests rank me as 98-99 percentile — that qualifies me for Mensa. Oh yeah, and my wife is foreign.
Yep, no doubt about it; I'm a typical stupid, ignorant, racist, thicky dum-dum Brexit voter. Cos only imbecilic racist scumbags voted Brexit, amirite?
© 2018 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://i.pinimg.com/736x/eb/8c/37/eb8c37e0ae5b5627d8ca68fda0bb92df.jpg
Brexit, A Second Referendum, and Double Jeopardy @juliahb1 #Brexit
Posted by bryanajparry in EU Referendum, politics, Uncategorized and tagged with #EUReferendum, @juliahb1, @LeaveEUOfficial, Brexit, Clean Brexit, Council of Europe, EU, EU Customs Union, EU Referendum, EU trade laws, Euro, Hard Brexit, Julia Hartley-Brewer, Soft Brexit, Twitter March 21, 2018
Many opponents of Brexit (which I am sure you know refers to Britain exiting the European Union) say that we the British people should get a second vote, just to make sure that we still want to leave. Such people include former British Prime Ministers Tony Blair and John Major. After all, we voted almost two years ago, and so much has changed since then. This proposed second vote would specifically be based on the yet-to-be-agreed final deal that the Government is currently trying to negotiate with the EU. If we the people don't like the final deal, then we the people should have the right to change our minds. After all, they say, isn't that the essence of democratic choice? If we don't like a particular politician we've voted in, we can always vote them out again come the next election. So why shouldn't we be able to change our mind about this too? It is the supporters of Brexit who, despite their cries about "democracy", are the true anti-democrats.
Well, that's how heavyweight remain supporters such as Alistair Campbell, John Major, Tony Blair, Kenneth Clarke, and, err, Femi Oluwole have it.
But this view, despite being superficially highly convincing, is nonsense.
Firstly, their analogy is flawed; when we elect a politician, we don't then have a second vote to see if we really do want them to be elected. Rather, the politician is in fact elected. Likewise, Brexit should in fact happen. Sure, if we change our minds at a future date, we should be free to try to reapply to the EU. And in fact, we would be free to reapply. Just as we would be free to not re-elect that politician.
Secondly, as I pointed out in my 26th June 2016 blog post, where I predict a second referendum and that the UK would never leave the EU, the people are almost never asked if they want to go along with the ever-closer union and integration. Former Prime Minister John Major, who is so shrill in claiming democracy requires a second EU referendum, never gave his own parliamentary party, let alone the people, a free vote on the Maastricht Treaty, the treaty which created so much of what is now the EU. Indeed, he insisted on brutal discipline to get the vote through parliament, including secretly flying in hospitalised MPs and making them vote his way(!), famously calling his few uncowed parliamentary opponents "bastards". (As a point of interest, the Maastricht Treaty and the atrocious way Major handled the whole thing, directly resulted in the formation of UKIP.) Second votes are apparently only required when things don't goes John Major's way.
Indeed, when the people are from time to time asked, they almost invariably vote against the European Project. Yet they are always asked to vote a second time, just to make sure. And of course, with the right pressure and scare-mongering, they unfailingly return a vote in favour of the EU.
I've gotten into arguments with people who don't understand why the people changing their minds in a second vote or a second vote at all would for me constitute an egregious violation of democracy. The best analogy I can give is to the famous legal rule of "double jeopardy".
Double jeopardy states that an individual cannot be tried again for the same or similar offence on the same or similar evidence once acquitted. The logic is that, if they could be tried again, they would never truly be free or be able to live freely or in peace. Why not? Because the powers that be could simply try the individual again and again and again and again, grinding the defendant's willpower, money, and life into the dust, until he is no longer able to fight back, and/or until a judge or jury can be found who would find in favour of the prosecution.
Yes, whilst it might sense to try the defendant again if new evidence comes to light, the rule of double jeopardy is clearly in fact one of the greatest tools defending individual liberty. Or at least, it was, until 2003 when the Labour government of Tony Blair and his henchman Alistair Campbell went a long way to "abrogating", that is, removing, this ancient liberty.
And perhaps that is why Blair, Campbell, and all their ilk don't understand why a second vote would be undemocratic. They simply don't buy into the notion of democracy, even though they probably think that they do; rather, they buy into the Aristotelian and continental European view, that the plebs are too stupid to know what's good for themselves, and only an elite Philosopher-King, or a committee version thereof, is able to rule the people and thereby allow the people to be free by preventing them from allowing their own plebbish baseness to cause harm to themselves. Like children, we should be free, but like children, if allowed total freedom, we would soon end ourselves. Yet this is the very opposite of democracy.
But to the rest of us, trying an acquitted person again and again and again, is a flagrant abuse of freedom. And to get the people to vote again, but this time the "right way", is an equal abuse. We voted to leave knowing that, whilst there were countless ramifications to that decision — just as there are when we vote in any referendum or election –, we would in fact leave.
featured image from http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2016-10-05-1475670108-7560650-brexit1.jpg
Brexit, The Deal, and the EU's Long Game #Brexit
Posted by bryanajparry in EU Referendum, politics and tagged with #EUReferendum, @LeaveEUOfficial, Brexit, Clean Brexit, Council of Europe, EU, EU Customs Union, EU Referendum, EU trade laws, Euro, Hard Brexit, Soft Brexit, Twitter February 28, 2018
I'll keep this to the point.
If the UK does not fully leave the Customs Union (CU), the Single Market (SM), and the European Court of Justice (ECJ), then the UK will not be able to take back control of our borders, our laws, and our trade deals. We'll be a vassal of the EU. And in ten years' time when Brexit has not worked out well due to our being hamstrung from the get-go, I fear that enough of the people will buy the hype that we will be sold: that we never should have left the EU.
I saw one person on Twitter deride Brexiteers saying that, 'when Brexit fails, you guys will say what all the old communists said after the USSR failed: "but they didn't do it right!"'. There is a grain of truth in this, except this 140 character journalist got one thing wrong. Even though I oppose communism, the USSR didn't actually do it right: Marx and Engels were clear that Communism would only work if the society evolved through and past capitalism, but would fail if a society "jumped" a social stage. Well, the USSR did indeed jump from agricultural straight into communism, by-passing capitalism. Likewise, if we are not free to pursue our own path 100% freely, whether that path be Corbynistic Commie Heaven, or a Singapore-on-the-Thames style tax haven, or anything in between, then Brexit will fail.
I think the EU supporters, within and without our nation, are playing the long game here. They know that the semblance of a true Brexit, coupled with things not working out as well as we would like, plus another 8 years or so of EU influence and propaganda, will soften up the pro-Brexit side to the point where, they reckon, we will be begging to rejoin the EU — on any terms. And that means joining the Euro. We'll be nothing but a non-sovereign state, a Mississippi or an Idaho.
We cannot take our eye off the ball. And if our generally useless leaders succeed in giving us a true Brexit, then I foresee most hardcore remainers ten years from now, claiming, 'Well, I was never really anti-Brexit; I always knew it was going to work out'. But we must make sure that we leave the CU, the SM, and the ECJ.
© 2017-2018 Bryan A. J. Parry
Brexit Momentum Dwindling? #FlorenceSpeech #Brexit #VoteLeave #TakeBackControl #ChangeBritain
Posted by bryanajparry in politics and tagged with #EUReferendum, #TakeControl, 1Oct, @LeaveEUOfficial, @voteleave, @vote_leave, Brexit, catalan, Catalonia, Catalonia Independence, Cataluña, ChangeBritain, Clean Brexit, Conservative, Conservative majority, EU, EU Referendum, EU speech, European Economic Area, European Free Trade Association, European Super State, European Union, Florence, Hard Brexit, indyref, Jeremy Corbyn, Labour, Labour Party, Soft Brexit, take back control, Theresa May, transition deal, two year transition period, UK Independence Party, UKIP, Vote Leave September 23, 2017
"Brexit" means Britain's Exit from the European Union, which is not due to happen until March 2019. Sorry to explain that, but my recent conversations with people show that many think "Brexit has already happened" and can't understand why more money isn't being spent on the NHS yet. So, just to be clear: Brexit is in process, but has not yet happened.
Exiting the EU is supposed to be a two-year process. But now Prime Minister Theresa May has set out her plans for a two-year transition deal which is, by any other name, extended temporary membership of the EU. Certainly, it would extend the lifeline for us to backpeddle into the EU. Indeed, the day after the referendum I was already saying that I doubt Brexit will ever even happen. History shows that the EU Fanatics just will not accept "non" for an answer. And that incorrigible EU-phile Lord Heseltine has today, I think rather accurately, said that he not only foresees us not leaving the EU, but actually joining the Euro, too. Indeed, now that we've decided to leave, should we change our minds we will have lost all of our opt-outs, including on not joining the Euro; oh yes, the French and Germans will exact a pound of flesh and be out to humble us and lock us in forevermore.
So has the Brexit momentum critically dwindled?
Corbyn has forsaken his principles and Labour have reneged on their Referendum pledge to back Brexit. The Tories are weakened since losing their majority in the General Election. The party which single-handedly got us the referendum (whether you love them or loathe them), UKIP, seems to have had its moment and looks a spent force. The momentum for Brexit, which was the culmination of years of hard, focused pressure, is rapidly fizzling out. Just look at the polling data: the margin of support for Brexit is shrinking.
So, as someone who has spent half my life fighting for Brexit, I am extremely worried by the warning signs of interim deals and such. And with oppression of the Catalans by the Spanish state, and the election of anti-democratic EU fanatic Macron, I fear the future is bleak for European liberal democracy.
Hard, Soft, and CLEAN Brexit #Brexit
Posted by bryanajparry in politics and tagged with #EUReferendum, #TakeControl, @LeaveEUOfficial, @voteleave, @vote_leave, BoJo, Boris Johnson, Brexit, Clean Brexit, EU, EU Referendum, European Economic Area, European Free Trade Association, European Super State, European Union, Florence, Hard Brexit, Laura Kuenssberg, Leave.EU, Liam Halligan, Soft Brexit, The Telegraph, Theresa May, transitional period, Vote Leave, Yahoo September 21, 2017
A brilliant article here which completely sums up my view on the Brexit process. There is no such thing as "hard" and "soft" Brexit in reality. The Leave campaign was based on "taking back control", and making our own trade deals with the rest of the world, and making the British parliament the ultimate source of power in this land again, and making British law and British judges in British courts being the supreme arbiter of British matters. People complain that nobody knew what they were voting for, but on these points alone it was abundantly clear what people were voting for. And they voted. Yet if we do not leave the single market, the customs union, and the EU's main legal constructs, then we will not achieve these ends that we voted for. And so, this "soft" Brexit would be no Brexit at all. We need to sink or swim on our own merits as a fully freed nation. And so the only true Brexit is, as the article points out, a "clean" Brexit. That is, a clean break from the EU instruments. Anything else would not achieve the openly stated goals of the leave campaign and would not fulfil the referendum result. Indeed, I could even see us officially rejoining the EU from such a Norway-like model several years down the line — but without our current opt-outs, such as from the Euro. The lie we'd be sold is, 'Oh, well, the leaving experiment didn't work out for us, did it?' when in reality we would only have left in name, not substance, and thus would have been set-up to fail. Leave Euratom or not, perhaps there is a debate to be had there. But there is no debate that Brexit needs to be clean and requires us to leave the single marker, the customs union, and the EU's main legal constructs.
For what it is worth, in the short run, there may be some instability, and I am sure that in the future there will be times when the UK is relatively stronger and other times when the EU is doing relatively better. But I have no doubt that over the long run, Brexit will be a resounding success which will not only arouse the jealousy and anger of high European Unionistas, but will also be to their eventual benefit — should they let it, and should we give Brexit that fair chance by opting for a "clean" Brexit.
Here's the article in full in case the website takes it down at some point.
text above this point only © 2017 Bryan A. J. Parry
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/biggest-problem-soft-brexit-apos-164052679.html
The biggest problem with Soft Brexit is that it's not attainable
Liam Halligan
The Telegraph16 September 2017

The Union flag and the EU flag flying from the same mast above the Summerhall building in Edinburgh – PA
In the first of two extracts from their new book, Liam Halligan and Gerard Lyons say the commonly held belief that Britain would be better off inside the single market and customs union is misconceived
There has been much talk of "Hard Brexit" versus "Soft Brexit". Such labels are ubiquitous during these Article 50 negotiations – used freely by the broadcast media – yet they are partisan and deeply misleading. Hard Brexit makes leaving the European Union sound extreme and damaging, suggesting isolation and a bleak economic future. Soft Brexit, conversely, conveys a comfortable, ongoing relationship with the EU, with Britain still "part of the club".
Leaving the single market and the customs union isn't Hard Brexit – even if the name is deliberately coined to sound painful. It is simply Brexit. Staying inside the EU's two main legal constructs, meanwhile, isn't a harmonious Soft Brexit. It amounts, instead, to a deliberate and cynical failure to implement the 2016 referendum result.
A political narrative has developed that Britain would clearly be far better off staying inside the single market and customs union. As such, anyone wanting to actually implement Brexit, by leaving both, is seen to be obsessed only with sovereignty and immigration – and prepared for the economy to suffer, as long as they get their way.
Remaining a member of the single market and/or the customs union, in contrast, is presented as an enlightened "Soft Brexit" compromise, a balance between the Leave side's "hard" ideology and Remain campaigners' common sense. These are the terms of the UK's Brexit debate, as viewed by much of our political and media class as we enter the autumn of 2017 and these EU negotiations heat up. Yet they are wrong on every level.
Soft-headed
Many Parliamentarians say they "respect the referendum result" but want "Soft Brexit". Attempting to negotiate such an outcome, though, would seriously damage the UK, the EU and the vital ongoing relationship between them.
Soft Brexit would leave Britain in a dangerous halfway house. Inside the single market, the UK would become a "rule-taker" – still subject to rulings of the highly politicised European Court of Justice. We would be bound by huge restrictions on our economic and political freedom, but no longer able to vote on or influence those rules, even if they were changed to Britain's disadvantage.
And, of course, single market membership would mean continued multi-billion pound annual payments to Brussels and "freedom of movement". This isn't Brexit – and would be viewed by millions of voters as an affront to the referendum result.
The economic benefits of single market "membership" are, anyway, wildly overstated and may even be negative. Membership means all UK firms – including the 95pc that don't export to the EU – must comply with often unnecessary and expensive EU rules. Also, the single market in services barely exists, despite much rhetoric to the contrary. Many EU nations refuse to drop barriers to imports of certain services – which severely penalises the UK, the world's second-largest services exporter.

Prime Minister Theresa May Credit: AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth
We don't need to be "in" the single market to trade with the EU. The US conducted almost a quarter of a trillion dollars of EU trade in 2016 from outside – without accepting ECJ jurisdiction, freedom of movement or making large annual payments. The UK can do the same. If Britain cuts an EU free-trade agreement, tariff-free trade can continue.
If not, we can trade with the EU under World Trade Organisation rules, paying relatively low tariffs – as does the US, China, Japan and every other major non-EU economy.
Since 1999, the share of UK trade with the EU has fallen from 61pc to just over 40pc. If the single market is so good for the UK, why do we trade less with the EU than with the rest of the world? Why is our EU trade shrinking and our non-EU trade expanding? Why do we have a large deficit on our EU trade, but a sizeable surplus on our trade outside the EU?
Being inside the EU's customs union is also wrongly presented as economic nirvana. Membership means the UK must charge tariffs on non-EU goods. So British shoppers are paying more for a range of imports, including food, often to shield uncompetitive producers in other EU states from cheaper global prices.
And because 80pc of these tariffs are sent to Brussels, and the UK does more non-EU trade than any other EU member, Britain accounts for an unfairly high share of the EU's combined tariff revenues. Again, this burden is shouldered by consumers.

The UK does more non-EU trade than any other EU member Credit: OLI SCARFF/AFP/Getty Images
Customs union membership also prevents Britain from striking trade deals with nations outside the EU – countries accounting for four-fifths of the global economy. This is a serious disadvantage for the UK, given our deep cultural and historic links with a wide variety of nations. As the global centre of economy gravity shifts decisively east, it is vital for the our future prosperity that Britain engages more with the world's fastest-growing and most populous markets.
Outside the customs union, the UK is no longer part of the EU's trade deals with various nations – often presented as a huge sacrifice. Over the 60 years since the EU was founded, though, Brussels has failed to cut a deal with any of the world's top economies. The EU has no trade agreement with the US, China, India or Japan. (The recent, very preliminary agreement with Tokyo was little more than a press release). The EU's 50 or so trade deals cover less than 10pc of the global economy, being mostly with tiny countries.
The EU is not well placed to negotiate trade agreements, comprising of numerous member states, often with conflicting objectives. The deals it has struck have also generally favoured French agricultural and German manufacturing exports, rather than UK services. Nations acting alone – such as Switzerland, Singapore and South Korea – have secured far more important trade deals, covering a much bigger share of the global economy, than has the EU.
In 2013, Switzerland struck a trade deal with China after three years of talks – the UK can do the same. Far from being "at the back of the queue", Britain is well-placed to reach an agreement with the US. And India has shown great interest in a UK trade deal. The sizeable nations that do have EU trade agreements – including Mexico, South Africa and South Korea – have also indicated they want UK-equivalent agreements, providing an opportunity for Britain to modify existing agreements to our advantage.
While Soft Brexit is often presented as liberal and progressive, the single market promotes the interests of producers over consumers while entrenching the advantages of large corporations – which are far better able than smaller rivals to handle the complex regulation. Freedom of movement rules provide big firms with a ready stream of cheap, easily exploitable labour, while suppressing the wages of the UK's most financially insecure workers. The single market also facilitates large-scale corporate tax avoidance.
The customs union, meanwhile, is a bad deal for UK consumers. On top of that, the EU's tariff wall, particularly on agricultural goods, combined with the ghastly Common Agricultural Policy, severely hinders the development of many of the world's poorest countries.
Perhaps the biggest problem with Soft Brexit is that it is unobtainable. Back in December 2016, the EU's chief negotiator Michel Barnier said: "The single market and its four freedoms are indivisible – cherry-picking is not an option." Yet this is precisely what the Soft Brexiteers are attempting, breaching EU rules by seeking single market membership along with a special dispensation from freedom of movement that no other country has.
That's why "Soft Brexit" will actually end up being "Messy Brexit". Pushing for this outcome puts the UK in direct and absolute conflict with the EU's core principles – which, if seriously breached, could tear the bloc apart, as others demand the same deal. The most likely Soft Brexit outcome would be a diplomatic stand-off, along with chronic uncertainty for citizens, investors and businesses, risking serious economic and political damage.

A pro-Brexit demonstration outside parliament Credit: Charlotte Ball/PA Wire
In late July 2017, this point was made with devastating clarity by Fabian Zuleeg, a policy analyst closely linked to the European Commission.
"What is missing in these discussions is a real appreciation of the view from the other side of the Channel," said Zuleeg. "Allowing cherry-picking of benefits would act as a signal to others that a Europe à la carte is obtainable, opening the Pandora's box of disintegration."
That's why Theresa May did the right thing in her Lancaster House speech in January 2017 – confirming from the outset that Britain wants to leave both the single market and customs union. We call this approach "Clean Brexit".
This allows the UK quickly to take control of sensitive issues relating to our borders, laws and trade – because we are not negotiating over such issues in a bid to stay inside any EU legal construct. Knowing we will be outside both the single market and customs union from the outset also gives Britain time to prepare ahead of March 2019 when we leave the EU – creating new facilities for cross-Channel customs clearance, for instance.
By avoiding cherry-picking, Clean Brexit is better for Britain, the EU and their broader relationship – with the UK not trying to upend EU rules, increasing the chances of ongoing UK-EU co-operation across a range of headings. Soft Brexit, in contrast, attempting to trade off single market membership against freedom of movement rules, would maximise "cliff-edge" dangers and business uncertainty – and could result in a disastrous diplomatic stalemate, while risking a systemic crisis.
A strong hand
Despite widespread negativity, the UK has a strong hand to play in these Article 50 negotiations. Our £69bn EU trade deficit represents profits and jobs across tens of thousands of EU firms. Germany ran a UK goods surplus of £32bn in 2016. Powerful business interests have much to lose if Britain imposes tariffs on such exports. The BDI German employers' union says it would be "very, very foolish" for the EU to impose high trade barriers against the UK. BDI represents around 100,000 companies, employing one fifth of the workforce.
France is sometimes portrayed as wanting to "punish" the UK for leaving the EU. President Macron has described Brexit as a "crime", vowing to take an uncompromising approach to deter other member states from "killing the European idea". Yet, for French farmers and winemakers, the UK is a huge market. Numerous French firms, and the French government itself, have strong commercial interests in Britain, with investments across sectors including transport, automotive manufacturing and nuclear power. The Netherlands will also want a zero-tariff deal with Britain so Rotterdam, Europe's largest port, remains a UK trade hub.
While European president Jean-Claude Juncker beats his chest and issues fiery rhetoric, influential business groups are determined to limit trade restrictions between the UK and the Continent. By declaring Clean Brexit, maintaining we'll be outside the single market and the customs union, Britain benefits from powerful EU business lobbies urging their governments to strike a favourable UK trade deal, knowing they'll otherwise face reciprocated WTO tariffs.

European president Jean-Claude Juncker Credit: EPA/OLIVIER HOSLET
Ideally, the UK will agree what Theresa May has described as a "deep and comprehensive" EU free trade deal during the Article 50 period. Yet, settling a complex, multi-sector agreement with 27 governments, which must then be ratified by national parliaments and the European parliament, is probably impossible ahead of March 2019. That's why the UK must prepare to trade under WTO rules, reoccupying our seat at the Geneva-based trade court and adopting our own tariff schedules.
Trading under WTO rules is often portrayed as a disaster. Yet most trade across the globe is conducted largely under WTO rules. The US and other leading economies trade with the EU on this basis, with each side paying tariffs that are generally very low. As such, it is by no means essential for the UK to strike a free-trade agreement with the EU ahead of March 2019. Failing to grasp this amounts to a major strategic error.
"No deal really is better than a bad deal." The UK should state this clearly and often. "No deal" simply means we don't strike an EU free trade agreement before March 2019 – which actually brings benefits. Under "no deal", Britain's EU trade deficit would generate substantial net tariff revenues, which could be used to compensate UK exporters.
More fundamentally, negotiating up against a hard deadline means the terms of any resulting agreement, which we must live with for years, would be far worse than a deal settled under less time pressure – once the Article 50 deadline has passed. Unless "no deal" is seen as a viable option, though, the UK's negotiating hand will be seriously undermined – so all preparations must be made now to trade under WTO rules.
WTO rules are portrayed as "crashing out of the EU" to pressure the UK to accept an unfavourable trade deal before Article 50 expires. Yet "no deal" is an entirely coherent position and satisfactory outcome for Britain. Trading under WTO rules will provide a platform to strike a better long-term EU trade agreement, on our terms and in our own time, after Brexit has happened. The EU has even more incentive to do that than Britain, given its large UK trade surplus.
Accepting "no deal" on trade is not the same as "just walking away" – which means failing to settle administrative issues such as the mutual recognition agreements on goods that facilitate trade. No one is advocating this. It is unthinkable that existing and uncontroversial EU protocols granted to countless other non-EU members would not apply to the UK, not least as we leave the EU fully compliant. For Brussels to deny Britain such rights would breach both WTO and EU law, while incensing EU businesses and voters by threatening billions of euros of profit and countless EU jobs.
The UK will, of course, continue to trade and collaborate with the EU extensively after Brexit. Complaints that we are "cutting ourselves off" or "pulling up the drawbridge" are infantile and absurd. With a hung parliament, though, and the Conservatives vulnerable in the Commons and the Lords, the Soft Brexiteers sense this is their moment.
Far from "respecting the referendum result", they are promoting an unobtainable outcome and sowing parliamentary chaos. Their aim is nothing less than to reverse the June 2016 referendum and, in doing so, topple the Government.
'Clean Brexit – How to make a success of leaving the EU' by Liam Halligan and Gerard Lyons is published by Biteback Publishing at £20.00. To order your copy visit books.telegraph.co.uk
Random Images 27: Sweet Anger #Random #RandomImages @9Gag #9Gag
Posted by bryanajparry in humour, random images and tagged with #EUReferendum, #randomimages, @LeaveEUOfficial, EU, EU Referendum, Europe, European Super State, European Union, humor, humour, random, random images November 8, 2016
Ah, precious anger, feed my pen!
Text © 2016 Bryan A. J. Parry
featured image from https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Me27a5a2dc8c2bdd0599f2dc4614e802eo0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300
EU Referendum: You Can NEVER Leave Us! (Summary) @THATGINAMILLER #RESPECTTHERESULT #BREXIT
Posted by bryanajparry in politics and tagged with #EUReferendum, @LeaveEUOfficial, @voteleave, @vote_leave, Bremain, Brexit, EU, EU Referendum, European Super State, European Union, Gina Miller, High Court, Vote Leave November 6, 2016
Just in case my article-cum-essay was too much to read, here is the long and short of it.
The High Court says we cannot leave the EU without a vote in Parliament.
The overwhelming majority of MPs are against us leaving the EU.
Therefore, they will block, delay, or water down the terms of our leaving, e.g., we will have to keep open borders "freedom of movement" and paying our dues.
The result: either we won't leave at all, or will leave in name only but not in effect.
And so, like I said in my article just days after the EU referendum, we will never meaningfully leave the EU!
So yes, we've been had again folks. The EU and its supporters simply will not let you quit. And just as voodoo pharmacology has it, once you've taken a hit of that sweet, sweet EU pipe, it's hard to want to quit it anyway; that's why the people will find it hard to summon the will to vote for freedom in the case of a second referendum
Let me sign off with this quote from Jean-Claude Juncker, EC President, on the 2005 French vote on the EU Constitution:
If it's a Yes, we will say 'On we go', and if it's a No, we will say, 'We Continue'
featured image from https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/article_large/public/thumbnails
EU Referendum: You Can NEVER Leave Us! @thatginamiller #RespectTheResult #Brexit
Just like a victim of vampirism, once bitten by the seductive bloodsucker that is the European Union, it seems you are left forever changed, unable to leave the sanguivorous circle and enter daylight again. I am of course referring to the ruling by the British High Court that the British Government cannot just go ahead, trigger Article 50, and make the UK leave the EU. Rather, the justices have decided that Parliament must vote. This is despite the fact that the British people have already voted to leave the EU! This decision therefore leaves Brexit very much hanging in the balance.
The motley crew who brought this case before the High Court have said that the referendum was only "advisory", whereas others in the past have been binding. Therefore, their argument was that it is unconstitutional for the Government to simply have us leave the EU without a vote in Parliament. However, this view is complete tosh. Due to the famed Parliamentary Sovereignty that self-professedly underpins the campaigners' case, erm, Parliament is sovereign. Therefore, all popular votes are advisory, not just this one. That includes General Elections: the parliamentarian who thinks they have the best ability to form a government, which is generally the leader of the party winning the most seats in the Commons, seeks an audience with the Monarch and asks to form a government. The Queen is merely advised; she doesn't have to accept any of it.
Now you might scoff and say I'm being a bit far-fetched. But I'm not at all. The principle is exactly the same. Any and all votes are "advisory". Trying to paint only this referendum as merely advisory is dishonest and misses the point. But the real point is that the people made their decision with the understanding that it would be "respected", that is implemented, and therefore it's not fair to try and slip out of it with this legal trickery. Thus, to make the will of the people come into effect, the Government desires to use the Royal Prerogative to force it through (as MPs are overwhelmingly against Brexit and so may block it and because the people have authorised the Government to do this); much like an "executive order" in the United States. Thereby giving effect to the will of the people by using executive powers ultimately derived from the crown (aka Her Maj)– the theoretical source of all sovereignty in our system. Y'see, "Parliament" isn't the same as "The House of Commons". The Commons voted for the referendum, presumably to delegate its responsibilities in this regard directly to the people; after all, the MPs in the Commons are only there because we delegated day-to-day running of the nation to them. The power of MPs derives from our consent.
But you know what, that is only my interpretation. I'm not a lawyer. The High Court judges are more expert than me. And perhaps they'll be proven right. The Government is appealing to the Supreme Court, which may of course back the High Court. It may equally overturn the High Court's decision. So we shall we see whether lay political activists like me are right, or whether it is the top legal minds of the High Court. But bear in mind that the High Court in Northern Ireland only last week backed the Government's position!
Yet all this bleating about the "unconstitutionality" of the Government taking us out of the EU, in accordance with the wishes of the British people as expressed in the 23rd of June referendum, really makes me laugh. After all, when since was any of the EU project constitutional? For example, how was the Maastricht Treaty (1993) constitutional when it made me the citizen of a foreign state, the EU!? Imagine if it had made us citizens of Russia, China, or even a sensible country like Canada; everyone would see how unconstitutional that is. I mean, it violates one of the most fundamental parts of our constitution, which MPs and the Monarch are sworn to uphold, The Bill of Rights (1688), by giving us, yes, all the privileges and rights of EU citizenship, but all the responsibilities, current and future, as well. Indeed, one could argue that the whole edifice of the EU violates the constitution, particularly given that we never consented to any of it. Oh wait, "I" consented in 1975… when my Mum was 17 years old and I was minus nine. Yeah… But more on this in an upcoming post.
And I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God.
The Bill of Rights (1688)
But anyway, NONE OF THIS SORRY SITUATION IS A SURPRISE TO ME. Just after the referendum, I said that the MO of the European Union is to ignore the wishes of the people. I said that I think Brexit will never happen. By hook or crook, the political elites try and make nations go along with it. They've done it again and again and again and again.
Either Parliament will water down Brexit so as to be fairly meaningless, e.g., still signed up to the freedom of movement, paying into the EU, and so on. This of course leaves the door open to easily becoming "full" members again in a decade or so.
Or Parliament will delay and delay until the momentum and political will fizzles out. And so neither "soft" nor "hard" Brexit occur.
And/or there will be a second vote, if need be. And second votes are always won by the EU (and there have been quite a few; check it out!). Why?
The people who never usually vote, the silent majority who come out and say "NO MORE!" to the EU, tend to go back to being even more disillusioned than ever and not voting second time round.
Those who do normally vote are so demoralised that many don't vote in the second vote, and most of the others who do vote have no campaigning zeal left, so disheartened are they.
The momentum is with the EU, and the anti-EU side is on the ropes.
Increased time, money, and propaganda helps sway a few more people.
Indeed, polls are already beginning to suggest that "Brexit" might narrowly lose a second referendum.
We don't know how this will pan out. But I'll just leave you with this quote from Jean-Claude Juncker, EC President, on the 2005 French vote on the EU Constitution:
Text of the 1688 Bill of Rights: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2/introduction
The EU's Democratic Deficit #brexit #changebritain @LeaveEUOfficial
Posted by bryanajparry in EU Referendum, politics and tagged with #EUReferendum, @LeaveEUOfficial, Council of Europe, democracy, EU, EU Customs Union, EU Referendum, EU trade laws, Euroland, European Economic Area, European Free Trade Association, European Super State, European Union, Europhile, Eurozone, LibDem, LibDems, Liberal Democrats, Member of European Parliament, MEP, repreentative democracy, Tim Farron, United States of Europe October 10, 2016
Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats, has said that the oft-repeated claim that the EU is undemocratic is actually a lie. His view: we elect members to a European Parliament on a proportional basis, something we don't even do in the UK, so how can the EU have any democratic deficit?
But in fact, his reasonable-sounding claim is not true. Being a smart man, Tim Farron must know this. Therefore, it looks like he must be lying.
But why is his view not true?
The EU's democratic deficit has two majors points.
1. The numbers don't add up. The UK gets 79 MEPS to represent the 65 or so million people of the UK. That's one MEP per population the size of Birmingham, more-or-less. Whereas in the UK House of Commons, we have 600 or so MPs (the number has changed over the years) to represent the same number of people. Clearly, one elected representative per hundred thousand is more repesentative than one per million. Therefore, the EU parliament is less representative.
1b. The numbers really don't add up. Remember that those 79 MEPs make up around 9% of the seats in the EU parliament. Therefore, even if all UK MEPs agreed that something was in the best interests of the UK, which is nigh-on impossible, they would still be in a 91-9 minority. Clearly, therefore, the people of the UK do not have control over their own affairs within the EU. The lack of a cogent European demos makes this point relevant not just now, but for the foreseeable future.
2. How are decisions made? Look at the chart at the top of this article. The European Parliament isn't the prime mover within the EU, anyway. The Parliament oversees the Commission, but it is the unelected cabal-like European Commission which puts forward legislation, initiates policy packages, and imposes fines on national governments (p.45, The European Union: a very short introduction, 3rd edition, John Pinder and Simon Usherwood, 2013, OUP). The Commission is known as the "watchdog of the Treaty (p.44) and the "motor" of the community (p.45) for a reason.
Therefore, whilst there is an argument to be had that the House of Commons should move to a proportional basis (and, indeed, there a good arguments against this, too), this is not key to the issue at hand. The EU is, and by its very nature will remain, incapable of the representative democracy which it aspires to. It has a serious, inbuilt democratic deficit it cannot make up for.
Direct Democracy Petition: Update #DirectDemocracy #TakeControl #Switzerland #BindingReferendums #Referendum
Posted by bryanajparry in EU Referendum, politics and tagged with #BeLEAVEinBritain, #DirectDemocracy, #EUReferendum, #TakeControl, #TakeControl #switzerland, @BetterOffOut, @LeaveEUOfficial, @voteleave, @vote_leave, BeLEAVE in Britain, Believe in Britain, Better Off Out, Better Together, Bremain, Brexit, direct democracy, e-petition, EU Referendum, petition, referenda, referendum, Swiss, Swiss style referenda, Switzerland, Vote Leave July 22, 2016
My direct democracy petition has finally gone live (a few weeks after setting it up). So please share the below link and sign the petition (if you agree with me, of course!) I probably should have set this up a few weeks ago, though, before the bruising EU referendum campaign turned people off referendums.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/157241
If a petition gets 250,000 signatures, it should trigger a national referendum
Engagement with politics is continuing to decline. Direct democracy is part of the solution.
When an official petition receives around 250,000 signatures, it should result in an official, binding referendum.
In Switzerland, when around 0.6% of the population signs a petition, it triggers a referendum (https://www.ch.ch/en/referendum/). This system works well in a country of more than eight million people, and there is no reason why it wouldn't work well in the UK.
A committee or group should be set up to administer these petitions so they do not needlessly consume government time. Note that only a small number of petitions a year would receive the needed signatures.
featured image from https://petition.parliament.uk
View @BAJParry's profile on Twitter
View @bajparry's profile on Instagram
View BryanAJParry's profile on YouTube
Follow The Doggerelizer on WordPress.com
© Bryan Ashley James Parry a.k.a. The Doggerelizer, 2013-2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog's author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Bryan Ashley James Parry a.k.a. The Doggerelizer with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
The Blogs What I Follow
davidmasciotra.wordpress.com/
A Libertarian Rebel
Stephen Daisley
Fitness Journey towards the Wedding
Phentermine37.5 - No. 1 Diet pill is Phen375
Primal Fitness Lifestyle
CookingDeLight
Discovering Sooz
LazySundayMovies
Wildfire Movies
Bryan's Magic Lantern Filmhouse
Fatty Bryan and the Procrastinauts
Association of British Counties
Xper Dunn Is Here
autumnacorn
doggerelizer
explicit language
Fatty Parry
Flag debate
Fun Trivia
International LADS' Day
Rarely Sentient Beings [Comic]
Scottish referendum
UK General Election 2015
UK vs USA
"Author David Masciotra is insightful, brilliant at times..." - In These Times
Minimal-state, low-tax, free-markets minarchist-libertarianism. Opposing all manifestations of Leftism
By Dan Sims
Body Weight Exercies + Paleo Diet = The Primal Lifestyle!
We Review The Top Weightloss & Diet Products
Sooz, just Sooz
Review-commendations
An award-winning filmmaker and screenwriter talks movies.
Mostly pithy film reviews and Netflix
healthy living, dieting, life goals, SMART planning, fulfilling your potential
A society dedicated to promoting awareness of the continuing importance of the 92 historic (or traditional) Counties of the United Kingdom.
Aspera Ad Astra
hand knits + patterns inspired by nature


Drew Brees is an American football quarterback best known for his athletic mobility. Although he is not a sprinter, his speed and solid arm strength could not be overlooked by any football team scouting quarterbacks. His football techniques as well as his physical traits, including his big hands, have played a good role in establishing the Texas-born professional player as one of the best-sought football quarterbacks of his time.
Joining the New Orleans Saints since 2006, Brees' role in the franchise victory in the 2009 Super Bowl XLIV, cannot be overlooked. Hence, he was awarded the game's MVP honours. You could confidently count on Drew Brees at all times when it comes to being quick to get the ball out and delivering. Brees does a perfect job not forcing his receivers to constantly adjust to the football in flight. Among the awards he has won for his beautiful performances include Super Bowl champion (XLIV), Associated Press Male Athlete of the Year, Bert Bell Award, and Super Bowl MVP (XLIV).
Drew Christopher Brees is a native of Austin, Texas. He was born on January 15, 1979, to his father Eugene Wilson "Chip" Brees II, and his mother Mina Ruth (née Akins). Brees' athletic skills could be linked to his father who played basketball for the Texas A&M Aggies men's basketball team, and his mother who was famously known during her high school years as an all-state in three sports.
In High school at Andrew's Episcopal School, Brees was active in his school's baseball, basketball and football teams and while he did well in the first two, he was best on the football field. He became famous after he led his high school team in a 16-0 victory and a state championship. He finished his high school career with a stellar record of 314 of 490 passes for 5,461 yards with 50 touchdowns.
Drew Brees became a collegiate at Purdue University where he pursued a degree in Industrial Management and graduated in 2001. While studying, he distinguished himself as a quarterback and as a two-time Heisman finalist. Thanks to his effort, the Boilermakers were able to make the Big Ten Championship and a trip to the Rose Bowl. In addition to his huge success in college, he bagged two NCAA records, 19 Purdue University records and 13 Big Ten Conference records. He left the Boilermakers being named Big Ten's best quarterback of the 1990s.
In 2001, Drew Brees joined the NFL draft and was selected by the San Diego Chargers in the second round (32nd overall) of the 2001 NFL Draft. He made his professional debut on 4th November 2001, in a game against Kansas City Chiefs. Continuing his productive plays, the Chargers appointed Brees a franchise player, giving him a one-year contract that quadrupled his pay to $8 million for 2005. This happened after he was named the NFL Comeback Player of the Year 2004. Unfortunately, he tore his labrum and had to go through arthroscopic surgery.
On March 14, 2006, Drew Brees signed a six-year contract with the New Orleans Saints, after the Chargers denied him a pay increase. He led his team to a 31–14 victory over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and earned for himself several titles including the starting quarterback for the NFC in the 2007 Pro Bowl, a First Team All-Pro and first runner-up for league MVP.
As of 2018, Brees has played for the New Orleans Saints for twelve years winning numerous other award and titles. His first contract was renewed in 2012 after a 6 season-long brilliant performance. The contract was renewed yet again in 2018. He finished his 2018 season with 489 attempts, 3,992 passing yards, 5 interceptions over 15 games and 32 passing touchdowns with 364 completions.
As one of the best-performing quarterbacks in the history of the National Football League, Drew Brees falls among those earning the highest pays. Following his 2-year renewed contract worth $50 million and with $27 million guaranteed with the Saints, Bress earns a base salary of $10,200,000 with a roster bonus of $3,300,000 and a signing bonus of $13,500,000. His Net worth is, therefore, estimated at $130 million.
Drew Christopher Brees is a married man. He tied the knot with his wife Brittany Dudchenko, on February 8, 2003, and together they have four children namely Baylen Robert, Bowen Christopher, Callen Christian, and Rylen Judith. His wife is a native of Syracuse, Indiana and she is famously known as the owner of The Brees Dream Foundation, a charity organisation that supports people with cancer. Dudchenko also attended Purdue University where she met her now husband. The couple currently resides in New Orleans, Lousiana.
Drew Bress has a younger brother Reid who played baseball for the Baylor Bears baseball team. When his parents separated, they suffered the troubles of splitting his time between both parents' homes.
Prior to his selection by the Chargers, Brees was projected to be a mid-late first-round draft pick but he fell back because of his height of 6′ 0 (1.83m)) which is below NFL's 6'4″ prototype size for quarterbacks. Bress body weight is 95 kg (209 lbs) with his chest measuring chest 46 inches and his arm's length 16 inches.


Sorry, there is currently no additional product information available about the EpiPen trainer pen part reference 82000067.
This epipen trainer pen is supplied as un-certified representative training equipment.
Looking for a EpiPen trainer pen for flight operations end use?
We're here to help with all of your equipment needs. Not only with this EpiPen trainer pen but any other parts, equipment and reference training devices that you may require.


Our breeding centre is located in the Central Wheatbelt of Western Australia where Mother Nature still owns the land and demands respect. Work with her and she will let you flourish, against her and the wrath holds plenty.
I give mention to Mother Nature because the breeding and husbandry methods we use are typically natures way rather than a poultry farm type stud. We breed quality pigeons from excellent stock birds and maintain a healthy and active environment. Quality from the ground up.
Medications are not used as a rule of thumb but are used when a specific bird requires a particular medication. We believe this is where the source of a good immune system comes into play, setting the young pigeon off on his new career path with all the makings of a champion racing pigeon.


text:
Friendly fire incident in Libya - American Thinker
« Obama and Immelt Playing US Like Fools | Open government sites set to go dark »
Friendly fire incident in Libya
<?xml encoding="UTF-8">It appears that rebels, in a convoy on the way to Brega, fired off an anti-aircraft gun in celebration and ended up getting attacked by NATO aircraft.
The attack is thought to have happened between 2300 and midnight local time. There is very little clarity surrounding the incident, but an anti-aircraft gun may have been fired in celebration, our correspondent says.
A coalition plane then opened fire on the convoy, destroying the five vehicles, the rebels said.
Nato said it regretted any loss of civilian life.
"Nato jets are in the sky over Libya because they are enforcing the no fly zone, the UN mandate to protect civilians," Oana Lungescu told the BBC.
Nato spokeswoman Oana Lungescu: 'We are taking every care to ensure no human life is lost through Nato strikes'
But she added: "If someone fires against our aircraft they have the right to respond, they are enforcing a no fly zone. Any anti-aircraft guns would be acting against that."
At least 13 people were killed.
Meanwhile, John Rosenthal has dug up a document that should be getting more play on the internet. It was in Arabic, translated by Foundation for Defense of Democracy's Tony Badran, and is the original call for a "Day of Rage" in Libya.
No surprises - the motive of the demonstrators was not secular in the slightest but rather a call for jihad against Gaddafi.
Still wondering who we're fighting for in Libya?


My hopes were dashed when I found out that you didn't actually get to throw babies in this game. Instead you knock the backpacks off of green people trying to hit other green people on the head.
I LOVE this game! I even told my parents about it and they like it, too.


text:
Open full menu
Fact Check Analysis Corrections Blue Feed Red Feed Corona Virus
Fact Check: Big Pharma Is NOT Behind Massive Infection and Death Rates In COVID-19 Conspiracy
by: Gita Smith
Is Big Pharma behind the COVID-19 pandemic and inflating its massive death toll to create a hoax that enriches itself? No, that's not true: The central data-gathering body, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, does not get its cause-of-death data from pharmaceutical manufacturers. And there is no evidence the pharmaceutical company is behind a coronavirus conspriacy.
The supposed Big Pharma conspiracy surfaced in Facebook posts like this (archived here), which read in part:
Flu deaths work the same, even if you die after the flu shot...but let's not talk about those facts and skewed statistics. Anyone new to Big Pharma propaganda and their dirty numbers games starting to connect the Covid-19 dots yet? #crimesagainsthumanity #LetThePeopleGetBackToWork #EconomicFail"
The posting then showed users a tweet copied and pasted from Candace Owens, which looked like this:
There is no evidence to support this, as medical examiners and coroners are not changing death certificates to please pharmaceutical manufacturers.
"Deaths are reported to us only by state health officials," said Benjamin N. Haynes, deputy branch chief and a spokesman at the CDC. While Big Pharma does stand to gain from potential vaccines and other products to diagnose and treat the novel coronavirus, there is no evidence that the industry is behind manufacturing the substantial infection and death rates.
Currently, the United States has the highest incidence rate of COVID-19 in the world. Also, deaths in the U.S. have surpassed 4,000 as of April 1, 2020.
Also, statistical gathering and analysis by Johns Hopkins University and the New York Times, which document every death reported in a COVID-19 database shows that the theory that other causes are just getting lumped into the coronavirus pile are incorrect. Lead Stories has written about this claim.
We published a story on April 1, 2020, that included an interview with Dr. Sally Aiken, M.D., the president of the National Association of Medical Examiners - or NAME - and a practicing medical examiner in Washington state. She said:
For decedents (dead persons) who are known to be positive for COVID-19, and who have symptoms, the vast majority have died during a hospitalization. If they were otherwise healthy, the deaths are being attributed to COVID-19 on the death certificate. The exact certification may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
Aiken said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had issued guidance for death certification on its website. According to its guidance, dated March 4, 2020:
It is important to emphasize that Coronavirus Disease 2019 or COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.
Aiken also noted that individuals with underlying medical conditions are in the higher-risk groups for the coronavirus:
As most people are aware, people pre-existing disease like heart failure, and COPD, seem to be at higher risk for death due to COVID-19. If those individuals are positive for COVID-19 and have symptoms, COVID-19 is typically being listed on the death certificate as the cause of death, with their other diseases listed as contributory. This helps all of us, as we learn what the natural disease risk factors for COVID-19 death are. It is not a conspiracy, or any different than what occurs during non-COVID-19 times. (If someone dies of Influenza A or B, contributory causes are often listed on the death certificate as well.)
The post also refers to "asymptomatic carriers" of COVID-19 being identified on death certificates as having died of the coronavirus. But Aiken pointed out that this suggestion is flawed due to the lack of widespread testing:
As most people are aware, very few asymptomatic people in the U.S. have been tested for COVID-19. In the vast number of cases, living individuals are being tested because they have symptoms. Medical examiners and coroners are doing the same thing. We are performing autopsies on homicides, suicides, traffic accidents, etc. These decedents are not being tested for COVID-19 as a matter of course. Medical Examiners and Coroners are testing decedents who had symptoms, but were undiagnosed during life. MEs and Coroners are not identifying any 'asymptomatic carriers,' because we aren't testing for them, as it is not pertinent for death certification.
The New York Times publishes a county-by-county report. And this is the national report page, scrutinized by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and state medical examiners.
Still, there is no argument that many major companies stand to profit from the pandemic in the long run. For example, executives from the drugstore chain CVS and My Pillow CEO Michael Lindell joined President Trump at the White House Rose Garden to talk about plans for the upcoming weeks, according to The Washington Post on March 31, 2020. The story opened:
President Trump has lately used Rose Garden appearances to showcase a cast of corporate executives who have joined government efforts to fight the coronavirus pandemic, while sometimes slipping in a few plugs for the home office and, often, praising Trump.
Lead Stories is working with the CoronaVirusFacts/DatosCoronaVirus Alliance, a coalition of more than 100 fact-checkers who are fighting misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Learn more about the alliance here.
Gita Smith covered news for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and the Montgomery Advertiser, and she wrote/edited medical newsletters for American Health Consultants at the dawn of the AIDS epidemic when clear, factual information was as needed.
For a time, she taught in Auburn University's journalism department and ran the History-Geography lab at Alabama State University, where she taught students to write research papers . She believes the following to be true: The power of the free press may appear to be a weak reed to lean on, but it separates democracies from juntas.
Read more about or contact Gita Smith
Previous Article Locked Out: Losing Your Facebook And Instagram Accounts In Times Of Coronavirus Next Article Fact Check: CBS DID Air Video From Italian Hospital During Coronavirus Outbreak, Claiming It Was Of Overwhelmed NYC Hospital
Lead Stories is a fact checking website that is always looking for the latest false, deceptive or inaccurate stories (or media) making the rounds on the internet.
Spotted something? Let us know!.
Lead Stories is a:
Verified signatory of the IFCN Code of Principles
Facebook Third-Party Fact-Checking Partner
Member of the #CoronavirusFacts Alliance
Fact Check: The Simpsons Did NOT Predict The Horned Protester Who Stormed The Capitol
by: Alexis Tereszcuk
Not Antifa
Fact Check: Tattooed Man Wearing Horns Storming The Capitol Is NOT Antifa/Pedophile -- He Is A QAnon/Trump Supporter
Web ≠ Big Tech
Fact Check: 'Big Tech' CANNOT Prevent Child Porn From Circulating On The Internet
by: Dean Miller
Apples/Oranges
Fact Check: Searches For Vaccines For HIV, Cancer, The Cold And COVID-19 Each Present Distinct Challenges
by: Dana Ford
Fact Check: Context of Bill Gates TED Talk Quote About Lowering Population Growth By 10 or 15 Percent With Vaccines
by: Maarten Schenk
Fake Quote
Fact Check: Jeff Foxworthy Is NOT Behind Viral 'You Might Live In A Nation That Was Founded By Geniuses But Is Run By Idiots' Essay
Fake Tweet
Fact Check: CBS News Did NOT Report A Florida Man Kidnapped 27 People To Force Them To Play Yahtzee
Audio Changed
Fact Check: Military Band Was NOT Playing 'Hit The Road Jack' Outside White House Gates
Fact Check: Gen. John E. Hyten, Vice Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff, Does NOT Have A Telegram Account -- Did NOT Say 'Hold The Line'
Input Error
Fact Check: Georgia County Meant To Order 250,000 Individual Voter Applications, NOT 25 Million
Tonic Not Cure
Fact Check: NO Evidence This Tonic Recipe Will Change Outcomes For People Infected With COVID-19
by: Sarah Thompson
Loaded Guns
Fact Check: National Guard Commanders Have NOT Confiscated All Ammo And Magazines From Troops Guarding The Capitol
Not Arrested
Fact Check: This Is NOT A Photo Of Nancy Pelosi Being Arrested By 'U.S. Marshalls' -- She's Walking To Her Office
by: Victoria Eavis
Home About IFCN Code of Principles How we work Satire Policy Corrections Policy Contact
© 2015-2020 Lead Stories LLC - All rights reserved.
Blue Feed
Red Feed