text:
Finders Keepers (titulado Buscadores de tesoros en Hispanoamérica y Quién lo encuentre, para él en España) es el primer episodio de la duodécima temporada y el número 211 en general de la serie de televisión animada de comedia Padre de familia. Se estrenó originalmente por FOX el 29 de septiembre de 2013 y el 5 de mayo de 2014 en Latinoamérica por FX cambiando el día de transmisión de la serie a los lunes. En España se estrenó el 18 de julio de 2014 en FOX. En el episodio, cuando Peter descubre el mapa de un tesoro en la servilleta de un restaurante, comienza su búsqueda y los habitantes de Quahog al saber tal hecho comienzan también a buscarlo, ocasionando un caos.

Argumento
Tras una tarde agotadora en su trabajo, Peter llega a su casa donde el resto de la familia Griffin perciben un mal aliento, en los siguientes días, todos los integrantes de la familia se ven obligados a soportar el aliento de Peter, hasta que Lois cansada de tal situación, programa una cita con un dentista. Al ser atendido, Peter se percata que el aliento era producido por un camarón que estaba en su dentadura. Como premio al buen comportamiento de Peter con el dentista, Lois lleva a la familia a un restaurante con temática relacionada con la época de independencia de Estados Unidos. Un camarero bromea con Stewie al decirle que el mapa de una servilleta colocada en su mesa muestra la localización de un tesoro que se presume es verdadero y que fue enterrado durante la guerra de Independencia de los Estados Unidos, Stewie lo ignora pero Peter se sorprende y pronto se propone hallarlo. En la almeja borracha, Peter invita a Quagmire y Joe a buscar el tesoro, sin embargo, ellos no acceden por creer que es otra idea loca de él. Más tarde, Peter cava varios hoyos a un lado de la ruta 2, momentos después, Lois llega para hablar con Peter y que regresen a casa, cuando Peter estaba dispuesto a abandonar la idea del tesoro enterrado, lanza la pala sobre uno de los hoyos que provoca un sonido que indica que la pala golpeó a un objeto metálico. Al excavar más, logra sacar un cofre. Por la mañana la familia Griffin revisa el contenido que resulta ser solo una pista de la verdadera localización, Brian insiste en que nadie le mencione a alguien acerca del tesoro y todos aceptan, pero Chris logra ver un reportaje que Tom Tucker hace sobre Peter y su pista del tesoro, así mismo, Tom menciona que una página de internet da las pistas para localizar el tesoro, Joe y Quagmire acuden a la casa de Peter en busca de más pistas, pero él niega decirle más porque en un principio ellos no creían que el tesoro era real. A partir de ese momento, Lois nota que la búsqueda del tesoro puede ocasionar que unas personas se pongan en contra de otras. Brian trata de descifrar el mensaje y llega a la conclusión de que tiene que ir a la plaza principal, al llegar notan que muchas personas ya se encuentran ahí, enojados y desesperados se detienen a ver la estatua de Timmy Musket, ahí descifran otro mensaje que tiene como destino un cementerio localizado en una isla aledaña a la ciudad, Peter y Lois se separan de la familia para ir a dicha isla. Meg convence a Chris que si Peter llegase a encontrar el tesoro no lo compartiría y lo desperdiciaría, por tanto le propone que ellos dos vallan en búsqueda también. Por su parte Stewie y Brian deciden buscar juntos, en poco tiempo gran mayoría de los habitantes de la ciudad buscan los medios necesario para poder transportarse a esa isla. Al llegar al cementerio, Peter y Lois se dan cuenta de que ya hay muchas personas ahí, Peter llega e impone tener el derecho de desenterrar el cuerpo de Timmy de su tumba. Lois ve que la necesidad por tener el tesoro hace a Peter volverse violento, incluso golpeando a Chris, hecho que hace que Lois y la familia se marchen del lugar totalmente enojados. Al tener el cofre de Timmy, los interesados en el tesoro abren el cofre y descifran el mensaje que indica que el tesoro está en el estadio de Quahog. Peter se retrasa un poco, pues Lois se llevó el único medio de transporte con el que contaba. Al llegar al estadio y ver a todos golpeándose entre sí con tal de obtener el tesoro, hace que Peter se de cuenta de que Lois tenía razón al decir que ese asunto los volvía violentos. Peter regresa a casa decepcionado y se disculpa con Lois, ahí le muestra una foto que tomó a la tumba. Lois al analizar se percata de que la pista no se dirige al estadio, sino a la almeja borracha. Al llegar al bar, buscan tras una foto histórica colgada en la pared, y finalmente logran encontrar un cofre adornado de joyas. Al abrirlo, Peter encuentra una carta que resulta ser un cupón para una comida gratis en el mismo restaurante de donde había obtenido el mapa, el cual expiraba el 16 de mayo de 2006.

Recepción

Audiencia
El episodio obtuvo 5.23 millones de televidentes en su estreno original por FOX, convirtiéndose en el segundo programa de la dominación de la animación de la noche, ganando a American Dad! (Steve & Snot's Test-Tubular Adventure) y Bob's Burgers (A River Runs Through Bob) pero perdiendo frente a Los Simpson (Homerland) que obtuvo 6.37 millones de televidentes.

Recepción crítica
Eric Thurm de The A.V Club calificó el episodio con una C.

Referencias culturales
La familia Griffin mira un programa por T.V llamado "11 hombres enojados y un hombre mentalmente discapacitado" en referencia a la película de 1957 12 Angry Men.
Cuando la familia Griffin huele el mal aliento de Peter, Stewie, quien se encontraba en el segundo piso, baja para averiguar si tal olor proviene de Whoopi Goldberg haciendo ejercicio.
Mientras Meg y Peter van en el automóvil, Peter canta la canción "Minnie The Moocher" de Cab Calloway con las ventanas cerradas, propagando el mal aliento de Peter al grado que obliga a Meg a lanzarse del automóvil.
En un flashback se muestra a George McFly molesto con Lorraine McFly, pues el chico Marty que logró que ambos comenzaran su noviazgo se parece mucho a su hijo Marty.
Mientras los habitantes de Quahog se encuentra en búsqueda del tesoro, se ve a Bruce y un acompañante navegando por las aguas de la isla con la canción 1957 de Milo Greene como fondo.
Al no tener medio de transporte para ir al estadio, Peter no tiene más remedio que promocionar al Suzuki Samurái.

Referencias

Episodios de la duodécima temporada de Padre de familia
Episodios de televisión de 2013

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


I know this, but it is possible for a player to join another player whom they have as a friend in their friends' list. I join my cousins all the time when they are in a pregame lobby, and we play together AND against each other in the same lobby, depends on how the lobby matches us (TDM and KC, their favorite gamemodes). We wont be thrown into the same "party" if we join the lobby.
I could try to do the same thing I explained earlier, but I don't have that many "friends" who play the game at the same times I play.
Exactly... but there have been reports of SSs getting into FFA games. A random glitch that has happened.
I am not a fan of split screen one bit mp or zombies side of the game. If someone wants to splitscreen with a friend sure but do it offline (system link,local). It kinda messes up the lobby on Zombies side seeing as 1xbox controls how 1/2 the zombie game goes. I was unaware that splitscreen players could end up on opposite teams in MP did treyarch do this on purpose or was this something they didnt pay attention to? I usually avoid splitscreen players nothing personal against them but I have had alot of issues with splitscreeners on the zombies side of the game and refuse to give another one a shot.
Theater Mode is OUT for COD Ghosts - Now if they'd just announce Split Screening is OUT - I'd be pretty happy.


Terry is a Fellow of the Royal Television Society and the Royal Society of Arts, a member of the IET, and a Trustee of the Winchester Science Centre and Planetarium.
Terry started her career lecturing in statistics at Surrey University, Terry joined the BBC as a data analyst, moving on to produce award-winning science and technology programmes for the BBC's Computer Literacy Project. She was Head of Schools' Programming for five years before joining the Universal/Paramount owned SciFi Channel as their Vice President of Programming for Europe, where she oversaw original programming, acquisitions, presentation and transmission.
In 1997 Terry set up as a Consultant in Digital Media working on a wide range of projects ranging from business planning to implementing start-ups. With expertise in evaluation, analysis, and creative thinking, she has advised on digital projects with a range of clients including BBC, IBC, Granada, Pearson, Prudential, and News International, and operationally delivered two multi-million pound digital projects for the DfES.
After lecturing in statistics at Surrey University, Terry joined the BBC as a data analyst, moving on to produce award-winning science and technology programmes for the BBC's Computer Literacy Project. She was Head of Schools' Programming for five years before joining the Universal/Paramount owned SciFi Channel as their Vice President of Programming for Europe, where she had management responsibility for original programming, acquisitions, presentation and transmission.


At Texarkana Auto Body Works, we want to provide as much access to your vehicle as possible while it is in the shop. Click on the link below to access your vehicle's repair. Choose your relationship and fill in requested information.
This service allows 24 hour access to your repair. Please contact Texarkana Auto Body Works during business hours should you have difficulties accessing your account.


As I am continuing my journey into leadership, I feel my confidence building. I feel so supported in this endeavour; David, Elly and James (leadership team) are amazing! I learn so much from them and work so well under their guidance. Along with this, Carol Lynch's leadership coaching is "just in time" scaffolding that gives me direction in my work streams. The book Shifting the Monkey by Todd Whitaker is awesome and it helped me to adopt the mindset of leading our team CRT planing days.
After trying my best to articulate why I thought our team planning day was such a success, Carol shared with me the concept of Servant Leadership.
Another story I shared with Carol is how once I had had a bad day. From the moment I stepped foot into school, things went pear shaped. You know those days? Interruptions, nothing goes to plan, chopping and changing... Man, what a day!
I went through some pretty major "self-talk" at that stage. I had to compose myself. I closed my eyes and took a deep breath and just decided to make this meeting about everyone else. I started asking questions and celebrating the successes of the people in the group; their ideas, their initiatives, their efforts.
I walked out of that meeting with a clear head. I had just climbed a mountain. And I survived.
Carol then introduced me to the concept of dialogue vs discussion.
"It was refreshing to talk about the successes in your leadership coaching... sometimes this job is about analysing when things go wrong. I believe, we can learn just as much, if not more, when we analyse the things that go right."
What to do with early finishers?


Swayam are delighted to offer for sale, this four bedroom terraced house located in Manor Park. This is an excellent opportunity that has arisen for any potential buyers & investors to purchase this stunning house. The property itself is situated in an excellent location with access to local schools such as Little Ilford School, Essex Primary School, Kensington Primary, Dersingham Primary School, Avenue Primary School.
The Property is peacefully located in a Residential Area, close to a selection of Local Shops and Amenities on Romford Road. The Closest Transport Links include East Ham Underground Station and Woodgrange Park Station for reliable links.
The property is spacious and well maintained presenting the new owner with the opportunity of enjoying the property immediately.


text:
Q: how can i get testone inside array value repeat list tag how can i get  testone  inside array value repeat  list tag
$scope.abc = [
    {
        testone: "x",
        model: ['a', 'b']
    }
    , {
        testone: "y",
        model: ['c', 'd']
    }
]

template:

    <input class="mdl-textfield__input" type="text" id="sample2" value="Belarus"  tabIndex="-1">

        keyboard_arrow_down

    Country

{{a[0]}}

A: I think this will answer will help you.

    <input class="mdl-textfield__input" type="text" id="sample2" value="Belarus"  tabIndex="-1">

        keyboard_arrow_down

    Country

            {{a.testone}}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Actress Jessica Rey will be introducing her eponymous line of swimwear to the retail market on January 10-12, 2013 at the Surf Expo tradeshow in Orlando, Florida. Rey Swimwear will be showcased with men's line Jonah at booth number 1393 at the Orange County Convention Center.
The collection consists of vintage-inspired pieces that disprove the age-old notion that when it comes to swimwear, smaller is always better. Inspired by Audrey Hepburn, Rey attempts to capture a vintage, glamorous feel that can make any woman feel beautiful, yet comfortable. Consisting of maillots, tankini tops and high-waisted bottoms, Rey Swimwear has been called a breath of fresh air in a world of the often confidence-killing string bikinis.
Established in 2008, Rey Swimwear ships to customers in 19 countries. Surf Expo will be the first time the line is exhibited at a tradeshow. Rey will be exhibited alongside brand-new men's line, Jonah, which boasts a similar line of vintage-inspired swim trunks and beachwear for men.
Jessica Rey has been acting consistently for over ten years, with her most notable role as the White Ranger in Power Rangers: Wild Force. She continues to make appearances all over the world at fan conventions, and is currently in production on No Nerds Here, a documentary web series that chronicles the lives of former Power Rangers at Comic Conventions.
Jessica is also filming a web-based talk show entitled Jes My Life, in which she reviews and discusses various baby, home, and lifestyle products. Both No Nerds Here and Jes My Life are set to debut in 2013.


text:
July 30, 2014; The New Cold War Russia & Gold
Home » July 30, 2014; The New Cold War Russia & Gold
July 30, 2014; The New Cold War Russia & Gold2014-07-312017-10-04https://mcalvanyweeklycommentary.com/wp-content/uploads/mwc-logo.svgMcAlvany Weekly Commentaryhttps://mcalvanyweeklycommentary.com/wp-content/uploads/mwc-logo.svg200px200px
Kevin: It's been a year of anniversaries. Last week we talked about the 70th anniversary of the Bretton Woods agreement, but this week we mark the 100th year anniversary of the beginning of the war to end all wars.
David: With 100 years in the rear-view mirror, we can say that with World War II, with Korea, with Vietnam, with various Middle Eastern incursions, Iraq I, and Iraq II, it was really the war to redefine all wars, not the war to end all wars.
Kevin: Yeah, it did not end it, did it?
David: No, in fact, what we've seen is the mass killing with weapons that have, over the course of time, created a distance from the consequences of policy choices, and even the choices that a soldier makes, played out on a battlefield. We are evolving, but the progress that we are making is really tied to technology, an advantage warfare which has led to dehumanized choice. We have battlefield statistics; they give us the improved score. And yes, this is sort of a mechanized warfare which has morphed into almost war games. The real thing is played, but it's played almost X-Box style, or like you're playing a Wii-2 game, a tussle amongst friends on the same block, not realizing that there are other people at the end of these joysticks.
Kevin: You know, Dave, it makes me wonder, too, just how vulnerable we are. Just before I came into work this morning I was looking at my new Air and Space magazine. It was talking about the New Orion space capsule. They showed the difference between the cockpit of the old Apollo capsule and the new Orion capsule, and it was amazing. You look at these chairs as they are sitting back, and instead of having the normal gauges, dials and buttons that they pushed during the Apollo era that were very mechanical, by the way, instead they had just three computer screens for everything. I was thinking, "Gosh, what would Apollo 13 look like – when they were having to put things together with duct tape and everything else – what would Apollo 13 look like with this new technology? That's how war is fought right now, too. It's all just screens. As you said, these are guys sometimes that are sitting somewhere in California playing a video game, flying a drone over Yemen, or Ukraine, or you name it.
David: I think the interesting thing is that that technological advantage can go away under the right circumstances, or I should say, under the wrong circumstances. So, what makes us the leader of the military world could be compromised very quickly in terms of that dependence on technology. Think about what happens when you take your car to the shop. It used to be that you could tinker, and maybe it was flush out the carburetor or change the spark plugs, maybe it was this or that to sort of fine tune your vehicle. Now, fine-tuning your vehicle is taking it to a specialist who hooks it up to a diagnostic computer. They run a fair number of algorithms through the machine to figure out what's wrong or what's right, what needs to be fine-tuned. And then, and only then, can they get to work, because nothing is that obvious any more, everything is very technology dependent.
Kevin: I think we should talk later in the program just about what our vulnerability is, because we do feel the drums of war starting up, in Ukraine, we see it in the Middle East. But let's cover the financial right now while we're talking, because false senses of security are being threatened right now in something that has always just been a bedrock, you never break the buck, we're talking about money market funds.
David: Sure. Last week we talked about money market funds facing the music. We talked about 35% of all money market funds being treated differently. After what occurred, scheduled for last Wednesday, the SEC hearings were heard, and they did come up with two things. I would love to sit down with bank regulators and know their view. Does this benefit them in any way? Does this shift assets out of money market funds into bank deposits, or instead, is this really the SEC battening down the hatches in order to preserve the industry organizers, frankly, at the expense of the public – John Q Public who is putting money into a mutual fund, and now at the end of last Wednesday, these are the conclusions they came to: Number one, under stress and strain in the marketplace, you will be faced with an exit fee from your money market mutual funds.
Kevin: So, you'll be charged to take your own money out of a money market fund.
David: And number two, an alternative would be that there is as much as a ten-day delay on any redemption from a money market mutual fund.
Kevin: And think about a time of stress, Dave. How much can happen in ten days? Look at the Weimar Republic? How much did the mark devalue in a ten-day period? It could go from 100% down to about 2% in that time period.
David: You remember the safety checks that were being done at Chernobyl. Literally, in order to improve the system, they were coming in and tinkering with things at Chernobyl, and it was the safety checks, which in a complex system ended up triggering a major catastrophe of a meltdown of a nuclear reactor. I think they are well intentioned, and the SEC is trying to coordinate things, but in a very complex financial system, it doesn't take that much tinkering, in fact, to create major issues down the line.
Kevin: So, the person who would use a money market instead of a bank, which many of our clients do, we have recommended that in the past, they may now turn more toward the banking system.
David: Well, and frankly, I think it may be a push on the part of the Treasury to re-enfranchise treasury ownership. Money market mutual funds that have treasuries only won't have those same restrictions, limitations, or penalties, and so there may be growing popularity for treasuries in the money market space, with some allowance for extra leverage and extra risk-taking just so that those mutual fund companies can make a buck at the same time.
Kevin: Dave, do you think they are preparing for something? The IMF has come back out and said, "Look, we were going to have slow growth as it was; we said it was going to be 2%. Now we're revising our estimate and saying it's only going to be 1.7%. Now, that can't be weather, can it?
David: No. Well, exactly. We only wish it was snow flurries as a possible explanation for why growth is slowing for the full year outlook. No, the IMF downgraded us to 1.7% in July, they had already downgraded us in June to 2%, and I guess the one thing you could say is, if you are lowering expectations it may set us up for a whopper of a surprise. You see that oftentimes with Wall Street. They will lower forward guidance, and then beat that forward guidance by a penny, and everybody says, "Look at how well they've done." Lower forward guidance by a dime, then beat by a penny, and you're the winner. To some degree, if you lower it to 1.7 and come in at 1.8, you're the hero.
Kevin: It reminds me of the kid who says, "I think I'm going to fail this class, Mom and Dad," and then he comes back and he says, "Hey, I got a C!"
David: "Oh, you didn't fail? Fantastic!" Well, at the same time you have junk bond outflows, which, in the last few weeks have been taking prices down and yields are starting to move up, and this is really a reversal of investment flows which was fairly predictable. We're still surprised to see, in the general marketplace, a lack of risk aversion, and we saw this acutely this last week. This is just shocking to me. Yields on junk-rated corporate debt, in Mexico – it's junk, first category of concern. Second category of concern – now you have, not only your regular credit risk, but also your interest rate risk, and now layered on top of that you have currency risk.
Kevin: Well, let me guess. That's got to be paying 15% or 20%.
David: Junk paper should pay 15% in Mexico, and U.S. junk paper should pay 10-12%. The fact that Mexican junk bonds are paying less than 5.5%, right around 5.23%, tells you just how skewed these markets are. And then you have Spanish ten-year treasuries. They dipped below 2.5% for the first time in two centuries – in two centuries. As we sort of grow numb to what is happening in the marketplace around us, as we get used to a new normal, keep in mind that these are things that haven't happened, either in decades, or in this case, in the Spanish treasury market, in two centuries. I think to myself, "This is absolute insanity." In the first half of the year, you have emerging markets and frontier markets – these are your sort of micro caps, if you will – very small countries. They've issued a record amount of debt. It is up 54% from 2013, according to the Financial Times. And that does not include China, by the way. All of this is on the belief that central bankers are the new gods amongst men.
Kevin: Even Bloomberg is talking about it. Bloomberg is not necessarily the thing you think of when you are thinking about crying wolf. Bloomberg is coming out and saying, "You know, people may be looking a little too much toward these central banks to bail everything out." It's the certainty that we talked about over the last several weeks.
David: And then you know what's funny is you'll have some other news pundit come on and say, "Yes, but the fact that we're asking the question about a potential problem here really underscores the fact that we have no problem at all, because the problems that are the real problems are the problems that we don't see coming, and the fact that you saw it means that this isn't a problem – at all." It's this back and forth of justification for high valuations. In my life, and in my world of investing, I've found the greatest satisfaction, really in life, coming from lowering expectations. The marketplace, on the other hand, doesn't seem to mind the gyrations of setting expectations extraordinarily high, and then seeing, frankly, market prices collapse when disappointment occurs, and what you would hope doesn't come to fruition.
Kevin: Well, we can still measure real business, though, Dave, when you're making something, going out and actually tilling a field, or dragging something into a construction zone. Caterpillar just keeps losing money.
David: I prefer to count value in terms of Facebook likes, because frankly, I feel more valuable at the end of my 500th Facebook like than I do looking at Caterpillar's numbers. Seriously, Caterpillar reports 19 consecutive months of declining year-on-year sales. This is ridiculous.
Kevin: What do you think is causing that, though? One of their main customers, I think, has been an Asian customer, as China has been rebuilding their infrastructure, or building, for the first time, their infrastructure. They've been buying a lot of equipment.
David: They've been buying equipment, but it is also the countries that are in the process of getting materials to China that need heavy earth moving equipment and what-not. So, yes, there is a shift in the model of growth from investment there in China, and infrastructure growth, to the new model of consumption growth, and that metric has begun to grow – not significantly, but it went from 35-36% of the economy. And again, that's consumption. But it's not moving, to a huge degree. You have to roll the clock back to, say, 10-15 years ago, and they actually were at 45% of the economy was consumption, and then it slips to the low 30s.
Kevin: Can I ask you a question, though? Because, isn't this something from a Chinese perspective? We've talked to Pettis, we've talked to some of these guys who are ex-pats, and these guys said for China to actually grow they're going to have to move away from that investment side of things and grow toward more of a consumption type of economy like America did.
David: Sure. And you'll see that impact, certain natural resources negatively, and certain natural resources very positively. When you look at Brazil, when you look at Chile, when you look at Australia, you have products that are used for building materials, commodities needed for the development of infrastructure, and those products aren't going to be in demand as much. Meanwhile, you have consumables, which will continue to increase. Folks in New Zealand are saying, "This is like white gold." They've got herds on every field, and the fact that milk is flowing and being exported to China, there is where agricultural commodities are diverging from industrial commodities. At the same time there is this minor shift from the investment and infrastructure development toward consumption in China.
Kevin: As we look here in America, we were talking about Caterpillar, but one of the great ways of seeing whether we are actually recovering is new home sales, and something is fishy right now in the numbers on new home sales.
David: Sure. Well, we've looked at existing home sales before. Last week we had June's new home sales, which tumbled 8.1%, and the really interesting details in the report were that they revised the May numbers down. They also revised April down. They also revised March down. And I struggle with that because it turns out that new home sales statistics don't actually count new homes sold. When you are revising back on a new home sales figure to May, April, March, and 86,000 home that were sold are now unsold? What does that mean, exactly? Are these transactions that weren't completed? They were pending, and counted, and never went through? Or in fact, are we talking about sort of a statistical model, an aberration where, yeah, well, we thought we were going to sell 86,000 on the basis of a particular run rate, or this particular methodology, but I think to myself, "Pravda would choke on our current methodologies." You know, the old Russian news agency known so well for propaganda. How do you erase 86,000 homes sold?
Kevin: You're talking about propaganda. I had brought up Bloomberg before, and we don't have anything, necessarily, against Bloomberg, but there is a propagandized message in Bloomberg. Let's look at the Marc Faber interview.
David: CNBC, Steve Liesman. I was on with him on the Early Morning Show, and we actually nearly got into fisticuffs. Do you remember that interview?
Kevin: I do. I do.
David: "Oh, you think people should own gold?" It was like, "I've never met a moron quite as idiotic as you!" It's that same sentiment. It doesn't matter if it's Bloomberg or CNBC. Marc was adamant, looking back and talking to the viewer this last week, and talking to the interviewer, that in December and January in his published newsletter he had talked about gold being undervalued, and gold shares being undervalued, and they should be acquired, much more attractive than U.S. equities. And lo and behold, year-to-date, U.S. equities are up 6-7%, but gold shares are up 20-30-50%, depending on the quality of the issue, and gold is up 10%. So, he was right, he was right. But that's from the beginning of the year. And I think what was curious was the host's antagonism and sort of repeated circling back around to gold's underperformance over the last two-and-a-half years, regardless of the year-to-date Dow performance. Her point was that on a longer timeframe, it was a terrible investment. And I listened to this interview, and I'm sitting there, almost jumping out of my skin. I wanted to jump onto the screen and ask, "Why the last three years were the only years that mattered." And just bear with me, set aside that this has been an inconvenient time for anyone who purchased gold in that timeframe, the last 2-1/2 to 3 years have been ugly. But the bull market began in 2000 and has, in spite of a nasty correction, remained multiples ahead of equities.
Kevin: I think we should do that. Let's look back to the start of the bull market, March of 2000. Let's just compare stocks to gold.
David: You have equities, which take the S&P 500, a broad measure, it has actually outperformed the Dow, so we'll be generous and use the S&P; you have returned roughly 70%. So, if you were taking $1000, it's now $1700, that's a 70% return.
Kevin: That's going back to 2000.
David: 14½ years, puts you at about 4.8% per year, in nominal terms. Now you have to factor in inflation. Just using the CPI, inflation-adjusted terms, you're up about 1.48, but let's just call it 1.5% and be generous.
Kevin: And that's annual, 1.5% a year, going back to the year 2000, if you were in the S&P 500.
David: That's correct, 1.5%, or nominal returns, 4.8%, to get you to that 70%, over the course of 14-1/2 years. Gold, over the same timeframe, you took your $1000 investment, it bought you roughly 3-1/2 ounces of gold at the time, and today, your 3-1/2 ounces of gold are worth right around $4600; silver, roughly the same, from $1000 to $4600 versus $1000 to $1700, and there is this sort of constant drone of, it's a ridiculous investment, nobody wants it, roughly 32% per year in nominal terms is not interesting, according to CNBC and Bloomberg. And by the way, that's off of a peak, because if you wanted to factor in $1900, I'd have to do the math. $1900 and 3-1/2 ounces would be closer to $6700. So, it just confounds me.
Kevin: Well, even if you take the inflation out, like you did with the stocks. Let's take 3% or 3-1/2% CPI out, you're still at almost 28-29% return per year since 2000.
David: No, let's do this. Let's say we take real world inflation and not the CPI inflation rate. So, let's give them CPI, and we'll take full-bore 8-10% annual rates of inflation. Let's just say that it only returned 15% a year, as opposed to the 1.5% inflation-adjusted. CPI inflation for them, real world for us: 1-1/2% for them, 15% plus for us. Again, it confounds me the way Bloomberg or others can want to overlook the tremendous move in price already witnessed.
Kevin: And this confirms why they are always late to the party. They are going to miss the last portion of this precious metals bull market, aren't they?
David: I think they will. We've been in a transition. Equities, in our view, in a long-term structural bear market, with a short-term cyclical bull market still in play, as we speak, precious metals on the other hand, they are in a long-term structural bull market, a growing market, and they are completing, or have completed, the cyclical bear phase, about 2-1/2 years of declining and sideways moving prices.
Kevin: Let's go back and define that. There are secular and cyclical; sometimes it goes past us quicker than we can actually define, but give an analogy as to what a cyclical or a secular market would do.
David: Charles Dow said of secular versus cyclical trends, that secular trends are like the tide; it goes in and it comes out. And the cyclical trends are more like a set of waves hitting the beach. So these are obviously relevant, but in terms of the power and force in the market, the natural force of the tides is more significant than the activity of the waves, even the waves taken in aggregate. So, his advice complements ours. This is Charles Dow, who started the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Dow Jones Transportation Average. He was the original editor of the Wall Street Journal. Capture as much of any long-term secular trend as you can, which frankly, is better achieved, it is more easily achieved, when you take on the mindset of an endowment.
Kevin: An endowment – you're thinking long term, even intergenerational.
David: Exactly, where you're looking at time as a friend, instead of an enemy; you're not marching up against it. But if you have an investment deadline, where you are managing results for a calendar event, what you may miss is the full expression of a secular trend as you attempt to conform the markets to your expectations instead of the other way around.
Kevin: David, I think of so many people who have watched their friends over the last year, two, or three, start to make money in the stock market, and down deep inside they know it's dangerous, they know that secularly, we may still be in a bear market, but they just can't help themselves. They will sell gold, or take some of the cash and go into the stock market. Usually that is right before the market comes right back down, because it is one of those short-term waves.
David: Yes, and I think of the number of investors I've spoken to that have retirement assets that target a specific date for retirement, a mutual fund that targets 2035, and the allocation of stocks and bonds is going to get you ready for your retirement date, launching into the golden years at 2035 or 2025, or 2020, or whatever the date is, and that allocation, those funds, essentially, shift from stocks to bonds to meet the generic criteria of lowering your risk as you approach the time frame where income will arguably be more important than growth. Listen, there is a part of me that says, "Okay, I understand the practical side of that, I understand from a planning point of view that that works." But that's the practical side. The practicable side – does it actually work? It doesn't. Markets will rarely, if ever, do what you want them to do when you want them to do it.
Kevin: I think this is a critical point, because I have seen this so often, where a person is told they can be in stocks until they reach their 50s, 60s, 70s, and then they start moving to bonds. The problem is, the interest rate cycle, the secular cycle, may be wrong. That reminds me of when the tide goes out. When you are near an ocean and the tide goes out and you go in and say, "You know, let's camp at the beach. Let's go ahead and set the tent up. If it's low tide, you set that tent up, and you've got a surprise when high tide comes back in. And it's the same type of thing if the secular market does not match your retirement market, you are going to get wet.
David: That happened to me when I was 14 years old. We were down at Galveston. We had gotten there late at night, set up the tents, and the next morning we had six inches of water coming in. That's so funny that you should say that – 14 years old, Galveston, the tide coming in, because we set up the tents in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Kevin: Let's look at the two ways of looking at the market, because you've talked about endowment, but not all of us can look three, four, or five generations down the road. When we talked to Smithers he told you, "I'm probably old enough that I'm not going to make many more of these cycles, so he is having to alter his investment plans. But he said, if you were running an endowment for, let's say, a college or an organization, you're not going to make decisions based on today's market moves.
David: No, and that doesn't mean that you sort of philosophically say, "Well, I'll just take the volatility as it comes." That is the view held by many stockbrokers, which is that you buy stocks for the long run, downside volatility you ignore completely, and just know that stocks will always take care of you. Jeremy Siegel told you that it will give you 7% rates of return per year, and that's what the statistics show. Granted, the last 14-1/2 years have upset that idea.
Kevin: So Dave, is there are a balance between the two, actually trading some of these waves, and also looking at the secular trend.
David: I think, before getting into those details, you come up with two dispositions that I think are very fruitful for long-term success. One is of market agnosticism, that is to say, it doesn't matter what you own, whether it is stocks, or bonds, or gold, or commodities, or currencies; rather, you want to own the assets that you have purchased at discounts. I think anyone with some experience, with some gray hairs, in the market will tell you that you make money on the basis of buying low.
And secondly, there is the idea that we mentioned earlier. The endowment takes the longer view, that's the longer timeframe. So, when they're looking at asset management, they will accept a variety of risks, which, to them, are not particularly dangerous or detrimental when timeframes are pushed out. I'll give you a for instance: Real estate, and other, call them illiquid, assets. They have an inherent risk of nonmarketability. Yet, when time is factored out so that short-term nonmarketability becomes irrelevant, they can say we want to own them, and we don't have to weigh in that risk into our risk-adjusted returns.
Kevin: You have a friend who has many, many rental units, and he made sure that he was out of debt so that when the market turned down he didn't have to sell. He was able to maintain his real estate properties through the ups and the downs.
David: That's right. That is clearly another strategy, if you will, of keeping leverage to a minimum, or eliminating it altogether, if you are sensitive to the cycles within interest rates. But as you mention, Kevin, I'm not suggesting that we are all endowments, or that any of us have the resources of an endowment. What I'm suggesting is that compelling compound rates are achieved when value is a priority, and when time is not. For the family that thinks intergenerationally, with a timeframe of decades or generations, there is a radically altered and advantaged outcome, compared to the person in need, or the priority of a short-term return.
Let me give you an example. I know a number of families that have owned ranchland, have owned real estate properties, whether it is commercial properties, or what have you, and they've owned them for a long, long time. And these are, let's say, acreage that you bought for $100, $200, $300 an acre, that today sells at $5000, $6000, $7000, or even $10,000 an acre. That's what I'm talking about. The compound rate of return is compelling, because of the cost basis, and that was only achievable by being a multigenerational project. That did not happen overnight, and someone looking to flip a property and make 20% on their money is never going to see the thousands of percent return which come from taking an intergenerational, or again, more of an endowment approach.
Kevin: But there is money to be made as a speculator. You can't deny, for the person who is sitting down and day-trading, what have you.
David: Let's say you've got a Jessie Livermore. You've got the stock operator who, today, would be in the hedge fund industry, and yes, there are short-term successes that, unfortunately, are not really translatable into a model that you can duplicate. You can't duplicate it and say, "Kids, here is what I want you to do." Because honestly, you're not going to find that many Stanley Druckenmillers, for instance. He ran Duquesne Capital in concert with the Quantum Fund. George Soros was one of the chief traders for the Quantum Fund through Duquesne Capital. You don't find many Stanleys in a generation. So I doubt very seriously those kids who will replace him will take on the mantle of being a stock operator, a stock trader, the way he did so successfully.
Kevin: Dave, one thing I've observed, I've had several friends retire so that they could day trade, and I've also had several friends unretire when day trading didn't work in the long run. It's like what you are saying. You may have a model that works for a short period of time, and then you have what they call a flash crash, or you have a black swan event, or you have something like that. And so, really, when you are talking more of the take-time-out-of-the-equation-and-buy-value mentality, those types of things don't affect you as much, do they?
David: Think of the Kennedy family. Their M.O. today is maintaining wealth, and they've tried to do that through multiple generations. Maintain as it gets dispersed throughout the next generation. The Kennedy family is something of a dynasty. But you know what? It's very different than the generation that worked on Wall Street during the depression and made the fortune. Now they're keeping it, and they're doing their best to keep it, and it has its challenges. But they're not making a fortune. They're simply maintaining. There is no duplication possible when the success is based on an individual and a nonduplicatable strategy. The process of wealth building, intergenerationally, is, in fact, very possible when a value orientation and patience is applied. This relates well to the idea of transmitting the skills that you need from one generation to the next, in order to succeed in life. Of course, success is not just a moment in time, it's all the moments strung together in a compelling narrative, and we're not saying that success is merely an accumulation or a multiplication of financial resources. Success includes many more intangible values. But the long process is similar, whether you are talking about the multiplication of financial resources, or the development of character. Nothing is achieved in a day that can't be undone in a day, and I think if you are looking at a greater achievement, or a greater establishment of resources, whether that is interpersonal, intellectual, or what have you, or physical wealth resources, you take a longer time frame and set a clear vision to achieve it.
Kevin: I really liked that analogy, Charles Dow's, of the tide versus the actual short-term waves. Let's take this to gold. We try to always talk about gold a few times a month. Gold is still in a secular growth bull market, even though we've had a correction over the last couple of years, is it not?
David: Yes. The growth trend, we should review the dominos that tend to fall in line that are commensurate with the secular growth trend for gold, because there are a number of complementing elements. Gold is an asset that is no other person's liability. It is money, good anywhere in the world, which is to say it is a mere cash equivalent on any continent, and in any country. It is an asset that under normal times – under normal times – that is, a healthy market environment, gets marginalized and forgotten about. Look at the period from 1982 to 2000. That accurately demonstrates gold being marginalized.
When there are diminishing concerns and growth in the economy, the control that is provided to the owner of gold is less important. So, the reason for being marginalized – yes, you've got positive rates of return that can allay many of the fears, which in turn, diminish any real benefit from owning gold. A growth in demand for gold, as we've witnessed since the year 2000, is driven by individuals, it is driven by institutions, it is driven by banks, including central banks, which are concerned, for one reason or another, with either market instability, asset price volatility, or an increase in inflation. It can be some social or political dislocation, including international conflict, that would decrease the value of other assets, and therein, increase the merits of a liquid asset, like gold.
Kevin: So, when we are considering the broader context of gold and silver, we have to look at a lot of different reasons why people would own gold. I think of the triangle, though, Dave. When we talk about the triangular investment strategy, there is one-third that is always a foundation in gold and silver, because you can't necessarily time the tides perfectly. You don't know when things are going to happen. But what you are talking about now is the growth in gold and the future reallocation, or exit strategy, out of excess gold, correct?
David: To some degree, but I think also, when you look at the context which has been supportive to the rise in gold and silver, over the last 10-15 years we see multiple stock market bubbles, we see the bursting of those bubbles, we see the inflation and deflation of a housing bubble, along with a return of international conflict, with the regional flashpoints being the Middle East, and those between West and East being highlighted by growing competition between the U.S. and China. Now we have growing conflict between Russia and the West for dominance in the sphere of energy. Is what is really happening in Ukraine with Russia an expression of Western interests in energy and Russia's interest in controlling that energy market, and those interests being in conflict? These are circumstances which have been, to a degree, predictable. If you could roll the clock back to seven years ago when we started doing our weekly commentary, we suggested that financial crises – and this was before the financial crisis, by the way – lead to economic crises, which in turn create political crises, and these political crises tend to trigger geopolitical crises. This same process of devolution can work in reverse. And in reverse, what is it? It is the positive evolution in those same social spheres where geopolitical conflicts are resolved, international cooperation improves, domestic and political concerns come off the boil, so to say, and economic growth, ultimately, complements the expansion of finance and investment.
Kevin: I think a perfect example of that, Dave, is what we talked about with World War II, when we went from a geopolitical, huge conflict, and then we started to see it work backward. From the late 1940s until, really, the Johnson administration, we saw some of the best economic growth of the century, so what we had, actually, Dave, was a healthy evolution, where we went from geopolitical crisis and backed up through the political, and then to the economic, and then the financial.
David: As the problems were solved.
Kevin: As the problems were solved.
David: That's correct. That was the great bull market of 1949 to 1967-1968, what we typically think of as a business growth cycle. So, in the current context, gold has responded to the last 14 years of devolution in the marketplace of ideas, and in the literal marketplace. That trend will continue for months or years to come until resolution to those concerns has adequately muted the desire on the part of institutions and individuals to own an asset that they can control, versus other asset choices which are owned through multiple intermediaries, where they don't have as much control.
Kevin: In speaking about war and geopolitical crisis, Russia is really highlighting just how fragile the system is. TIME magazine, on the cover, is now saying that we're in a new Cold War.
David: It does highlight the fragility of the post-Cold War piece. The U.S. is, at the same time, not helping anything. We're demonstrating a brazen foreign policy. Listen, we ousted the Ukrainian president – our state department and CIA – and we placed a man who was less supportive of Russia and more supportive of the U.S. in his place. And not 90 days from those changes, we have Joe Biden's son, who was brought on as a board member to the largest Ukrainian gas company?
Kevin: That sort of smells, doesn't it?
David: You don't think this looks like an amateurish adventurism from the Russian side? Could we state our energy interests in a less obvious way? This is where when I think of our foreign policy, it is brazen. Either that, or our diplomats are not aware of just how dirty politics is today, and how much politicians today are pimping their rolodexes and gaining a family and wealth advantage through the connections that they have politically.
Kevin: A regular guest that we have on our commentary here, Dr. George Friedman, from STRATFOR, told us five years ago that Russia would have to retake that barrier, because Russia's only defense, going back to Napoleon, going back to Hitler – the only defense that they have had from invasion has been the Ukraine. It is about a 1000-mile or 1100-mile stretch of nothingness that stretches the army out so that they can't really get into Russia with strength.
David: Right, so we isolate Russia. We squeeze its national boundaries. We take away that 1100-mile flat, and very defensible space, the space that gave them great comfort when they fought the French, that space that gave them great comfort when they fought the Germans, and we have just taken that space away, by taking out a man who was sympathetic to their interests and putting in a man who is sympathetic to ours.
It was interesting, I sat with a friend recently who was somewhat critical of Friedman's conclusions on the Soviet Union. His view was, that is just so old cold war; it sounds like the calculus of a cold war conversation. I sat there and I scratched my head, listening to his criticism of Friedman. I tend to agree with Friedman, by the way. But Putin is a cold warrior.
Kevin: That's all he knows.
David: You can't take the cold war out of a man that was educated and trained in the context of the Cold War as a KGB officer. We are neglecting any subtlety of action in our posturing with Russia, and if we're not careful, we may very well goad the bear out of its den. There may be no Archduke Ferdinand, hearkening back to 100 years ago and what started World War I. It could be a different kind of noun that triggers a war. Maybe it's a place or a thing this time instead of a person.
Kevin: It seems like we're poking the bear, literally, right now, we're poking the bear, because we had this very complicated situation with the shoot-down of the Malaysian aircraft, and unfortunately, the Netherlands were affected dramatically. I think more than half of those on the plane were from the Netherlands, were they not?
David: That's right, over 200 out of the close to 300 on the plane.
Kevin: Yet, we have this decision that is coming out of the Hague, the Netherlands, this week, that is representing the Western world, and it's really more than a slap on the hand to Russia.
David: Right, so the Hague hands down a 50 billion dollar settlement for Russia, pays to shareholders of Yukos, the dissolved Russian energy giant taken over by the state, following the Yukos CEO mobilizing energy resources and finances against Putin and his political ambitions, and of course, the challenger was silenced and accused of tax fraud, thrown in jail, and now is, I think, sitting in Switzerland. But all that to say, the Hague settles the claims in arbitration, with a fine that is 20 times – 20 times – greater than any handed out by that body ever before.
Kevin: Let me ask you – does the Netherlands connection have anything to do with this kind of judgment? Because it is just an amazing shot at Russia.
David: I don't think there is a connection. But do you know what? If I were in the Russian shoes, I couldn't help but feel as if it was awfully convenient. The Hague is in the Netherlands, 200 lives lost on the Malaysian flight were from the Netherlands, because as you may recall, Malaysia is a former Dutch colony. So just let this all settle in. The timing may be coincidental, but we have what appears to the Russians to be a united Western assault, with the European powers pushing for tougher sanctions, the Hague sending a bill for 50 billion dollars and the U.S. accusing Russia of direct military involvement in Ukraine. Concerning the Yukos settlement, this week one of Putin's advisors, one of the people who is very close to him, said this: "We're not concerned about the 50 billion dollars. Why? It's insignificant compared to Ukraine and that geopolitical standoff." This is a quote: "There is war coming to Europe," he said. "Do you really think this matters?"
Kevin: I think we should stop and pause on that. You have one of Putin's top advisors who is saying that there is war coming to Europe and do you really think the 50 billion dollars matters? Unbelievable.
David: Well, what are the opportunities? (laughs) This is, perhaps, where I get a little cynical, but are you an arms contractor selling hardware to Poland? Are you building an LNG terminal in the gulf coast so that you can export product to Europe? Are you Joe Biden's spawn picking up where the Russians left off supplying gas to Germany and Western Europe? Do you want to know the height of irony? Young Biden is there to consult on corporate governance, ethics, and transparency.
Kevin: (laughs) Better in Ukraine, I guess, than here, huh?
David: That's one for the history books, and I tell you, it's audacity of this caliber which tends to start wars. It completely ignores the consequences of choices. It ignores what is being, not just communicated from you to them, but what is received on the other side. How is the message received and interpreted?
To be quite honest, I see gold as an asset to own – not because of these tensions, but because these tensions, and others like them still to come, are symptomatic of that crisis domino effect that we've been talking about for seven years, from financial to geopolitical. You want gold until values of other assets are more compelling elsewhere, and that elsewhere, today, is not anywhere to be found.
July 23, 2014; King Dollar is 70! Is it Now Out With the Old?Transcripts
August 6, 2014; Fingers of InstabilityTranscripts

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
In the belly of the beast
Alex Rowell
Alex is a Beirut-based writer, translator, and managing editor of Al-Jumhuriya English. His first book, 'Vintage Humour: The Islamic Wine Poetry of Abu Nuwas', is due to be published by C. Hurst & Co. in November 2017. He tweets @alexjrowell.
Syria - Damascus - Aleppo - homs - Gareth Browne - Britain - Baroness Cox - Andrew Ashdown - Giles Fraser - Robert Fisk - journalism - Ethics - Bashar al-Assad - Vanessa Beeley - Robin Yassin-Kassab - Christians - Church - Reconstruction - Demography - Propaganda
Al Jumhuriya Fellowship for Young Writers
Culture & Politics
Da'esh
Gareth Browne
AlJumhuriya.net
Al-Jumhuriya talks to journalist Gareth Browne about his week in Syria last month observing a "crazy club" of pro-Assad British parliamentarians and priests.
Gareth Browne is a British journalist with The National, recently based in London, but previously stationed in Beirut and Iraq. Aside from The National, he has also reported for The Daily Beast, the London Times, the Telegraph, and Lebanon's Daily Star, among others. In December 2017, he was crowned New Journalist of the Year at the British Journalism Awards for his reporting from Iraq's Mosul.
Last month, Browne spent a week in Syria as part of a British parliamentary, religious, and media delegation invited by the Bashar al-Assad regime; described by one of its own organizers as "the crazy club." This was not an invitation he had ever expected to receive; Browne is not a reporter known for writing in favor of the regime, and indeed fellow members of the delegation later spoke of tensions created by his repeated questions to regime officials about the chemical weapons attack that took place in Douma shortly before their arrival. A few days after his return to London, Al-Jumhuriya English spoke to Browne via Skype about what he saw on the ground in Damascus, Homs, and Aleppo; what he learned about the regime's savvy courting of Western influencers; and his take on the ethics of journalists visiting the country as guests of the Assad regime. Below is an abridged transcript of the conversation, which is also available in full as an audio podcast:
Al-Jumhuriya interviews Gareth Browne by Al-Jumhuriya الجمهورية
Audio titled Al-Jumhuriya interviews Gareth Browne by Al-Jumhuriya الجمهورية
Al-Jumhuriya English: First of all, if you could just briefly introduce and explain the delegation; who it was organized by; who it was led by; who paid for it; who else, if you're able to say, was in attendance.
Gareth Browne: As you've indicated, it was quite an interesting delegation. It was led by Baroness Caroline Cox, who is a member of the British House of Lords. There was another member of the British House of Lords, Lord Hugh Dykes. So that was the parliamentary aspect of the delegation. And then Rev. Andrew Ashdown, who is a British Anglican priest, was also a key organizer of the trip. So those three individuals, I would say, were kind of the leaders of the delegation. In total I think we had a few last-minute dropouts, but there was about nineteen, including myself, that went in total. We had the parliamentarians, we had the clergy, there were some academics, there was a handful of journalists; two journalists; and a few others who were, I guess, concerned citizens, you could almost say. So it was quite a diverse group, it wasn't all clergy, it wasn't all parliamentarians, and with that there was also quite a strong diversity of opinion. This certainly, although we went in at the invitation of the regime, there were some people on the trip who were certainly not pro-regime. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Just to put listeners and readers in the picture who may not be familiar with Baroness Cox, she's been several times, I believe, to Syria in the past. She's met President Assad. She's repeatedly come under fire for this, understandably, and has always very adamantly defended the idea. I think it's fair to say at this point she is a relatively open sympathizer of the regime, for political and perhaps religious reasons as well. I believe you mentioned an Ashdown, he's also been in the past, is that correct?
Browne: Yeah, they have. Andrew Ashdown, I think he's been about ten times to Syria since 2014.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Wow.
Browne: I'm not exactly sure, but he goes there regularly. He was there, he told us, during the final stages of the Battle for Aleppo.
Al-Jumhuriya English: That's right, yeah.
Browne: As an observer with the Syrian army. So, you know, he's a regular visitor to Syria, within regime-held Syria, at least.
Al-Jumhuriya English: OK. So it began in Damascus. You were there just hours after Saturday's strikes occurred, is that correct?
Browne: Yeah, we crossed from Beirut to Damascus, literally, I think it must have been about five hours after those strikes […] So it was obviously a really topical time. So we started off, we had a couple of days in Damascus, various meetings, then we headed north, we went to Homs, then up to Aleppo, and then we returned to Damascus on the final day.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And so on that morning, did you detect any anxiety in the mood and behavior of the people showing you around? Given that the strikes had just gone off?
Browne: Yeah, I mean, it was interesting. There was a lot of anxiety my end. I was kind of expecting the trip to be cancelled at any moment. And even now, I'm still surprised it went ahead, given the timing; such a sensitive issue and a sensitive time. But you know the organizers were adamant, they kind of said it's far more important that the trip goes ahead now.
Once we got into Damascus, obviously I got the chance to speak to some Syrians. Now, I must caveat almost everything I say in this interview with: we had mukhabarat [regime intelligence/informants] minders with us at almost all times throughout the trip. So that's a very heavy, very significant caveat there. That said, I still was able to have conversations with people. And there was, I detected […] a strange sense of optimism or confidence. There was this feeling that, Oh, you know, these strikes could have been a lot worse, the Americans really haven't done much damage to us. That was from both citizens; speaking to people in the Old City of Damascus, but also on the Monday, so barely forty-eight hours after the strike, chatting to Syrian parliamentarians. We met with about twenty MPs, and the speaker of the Syrian parliament. One of them said, "We had two victories – first, we captured Douma, and then we survived the US airstrikes." So that kind of, I think, encapsulates it quite nicely. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: More generally, this was obviously your first experience in regime-controlled Syria. How did you find the atmosphere in general? How would you describe it for a listener or reader who's never had the experience […]?
Browne: Well I'd never visited Syria at all before this week. So it was kind of a very peculiar time to make my first visit. It's really hard to talk about this without drifting into very dogged clichés, but in Damascus, for example, life was very normal. In the Old City in Damascus, you really wouldn't have known anything was going on there, at least the first couple of days.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Normal from a war perspective, you mean, but it doesn't have the same feel as [for example] Paris, surely? You are aware you're in a police state, are you not?
Browne: Yeah, you are in a police state. There's posters of Bashar al-Assad everywhere, or Hafez al-Assad. You are reminded of the regime on every street corner. There's no denying that. But at the same time there is this weird kind of air of normality. And, you know, the regime play on that, so in the Old City, there are lots of bars which are open. Even now, they're open till 2am. And there's young Syrians going there, and the women are wearing short skirts, and they're getting very drunk, and it's this kind of cosmopolitan atmosphere. That does exist, and the regime plays that up massively, to say, This is going on, so there are no problems in Syria […] Now, you know from an outsider's perspective that simply isn't the case. That masks a very, very grim reality for a huge number of Syrians. And you've got to remember that almost everything I saw on this trip was what the regime wanted me to see. But that existed, and I couldn't deny it existed.
But I think outside of Damascus, it became a very different story. So, Homs, I found Homs very, almost depressing, I want to say. Because you and I, we know Homs as the kind of cradle of the revolution, that's where it all began, and it's now, what, nearly four years? Since Homs has been fully recaptured by government forces. And whole swathes of that city are empty, particularly the kind of opposition neighborhoods, which tend to be Sunni neighborhoods. They're just completely flattened. Kind of similar to what I saw in Mosul; they're just piles of rubble. And even when you go to the Christian areas, you know, we're constantly fed this narrative that Bashar is the defender of Christians, and any opposition will just chop the heads off Christians and destroy all the churches. Even in the Christian neighborhoods in Homs, there's a real emptiness. I remember we were walking through and it was the middle of a week day, and all the shops were shuttered. Even the Christians who are allegedly safe under the regime, all of them have fled and they haven't come back.
And it was really sad to see that. In Homs, you can see where opposition slogans had been painted on the walls. And they've literally been whitewashed off. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: You went thereafter to Aleppo, and if I understood your article from there correctly, you spent your time exclusively in the western sector of the city, as opposed to the eastern half that was the target of the regime's barrel bombs and air bombardment and so on. Was that because the regime simply prevented you from going to the east?
Browne: Yeah, I mean we had quite a strict itinerary. Any deviations from that itinerary had to be requested, and go through the church; ultimately the church was the organization that was hosting us.
Al-Jumhuriya English: So they were determining where you'd go on any particular day?
Browne: Yeah, pretty much. There were the odd moments when some people in the group were able to go off for a couple of hours and wander round the park or meet with someone that they knew inside Syria, like Syrian friends. That did happen on a couple of occasions, but overwhelmingly, our itinerary, where we could go, what we could see, was controlled.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And so how did the encounter at the parliament, the one described by [Giles] Fraser in his article, how did that unfold?
Browne: That was on the Monday, if I'm not mistaken. We took the bus, we arrived at the People's Assembly in Damascus, and we were kind of welcomed in. There were uniformed guards who saluted us as we walked in through the main doors, where there was a press podium with Syrian flags, and it was flawlessly kept, marble floors. Very well presented. Then we went up the stairs, and as we went up the stairs, there was a lot of Syrian state media. There must have been at least a dozen photographers, cameramen, journalists. And at the door of the meeting room stood the speaker of the parliament. And there was about maybe three or four MPs. The deputy speaker of the parliament stood next to him. So the delegation was kind of expected to shake hands with these people, one by one, and this was all going to be caught on camera, and it was almost like a state visit or something. So I kind of hung back, I felt quite uncomfortable, I really didn't want to be used as a propaganda tool by the regime, so I was really keen to stay out of videos and pictures. You know, it was almost impossible to do absolutely, but I think I did quite a good job of staying out of most of the state media. As we walked in I shook hands very begrudgingly with the speaker of the parliament and kind of avoided the other MPs.
We went into the meeting room, we sat down in this large room with the speaker in one corner and just the MPs kind of all around the edge. I think we were in the parliament for two hours, maybe three hours. And everyone in that room got to speak at some point. All of the MPs spoke. We were kind of free to ask questions as and when [we wanted], so I kind of plucked up the courage and that's when I asked about chemical weapons, and a couple of follow-up questions. I was trying to establish, you know in the wake of Douma, there were kind of two narratives coming out of the regime. One was there was a chemical weapons attack in Douma that was carried out by rebels. And the other was that it was completely staged, and those gut-wrenching videos we saw were fake. So I kind of tried to pin them down, and say, which of these is it? It can't be both. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Was this also the same room where you met [Grand] Mufti [Ahmad Badr al-Din] Hassoun, or was that a different occasion?
Browne: No, that was actually at the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus. Where he's based. And it was a very similar sort of meeting.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Because this guy, I mean this really fascinates me. You must have known this was a guy who had personally signed off the execution warrants for thousands of political prisoners, had threatened to send suicide bombers to Europe, and was, or is still, just a thoroughly abominable character. What is it like to see such a person face to face? Do you get that kind of Hannah Arendt 'banality of evil' [impression]? What is it like breathing the same air as such a man?
Browne: Yeah, I think the banality of evil point probably comes quite close to describing how it felt. It's nerve-wracking. I'm not going to lie, I was really nervous in some of those meetings. You never quite know how a kind of hostile or assertive questioning is going to go down, particularly in a place like that. His history of authorizing executions didn't come up in the meeting at all. And that's partly my fault, I didn't ask that question. I didn't feel comfortable asking the question at the time. Which, in hindsight, I wish I had done. […]
It's really interesting, because someone like the Grand Mufti is portrayed as a faith leader. Faith leaders in the UK and even in the US are kind of seen as independent actors. They represent their church, or their constituency, or their mosque, whoever. And I think what you have to remind yourself is actually, no, this Grand Mufti is an integral part of the regime. He is absolutely complicit in everything going on here. And I think that was forgotten at times. That meeting was justified as, oh, we're meeting with religious figures, because it's a religious delegation. He might be a religious figure, but he's also an integral part of the regime, and I do think that was forgotten.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Yeah, I think it's very clear when you read some of the articles coming out, not by yourself, but by other members of the delegation, that your point is exactly right. There was a good piece in the New Statesman the other day that said, someone had said, Yeah, the guy may have signed off on these tens of thousands of [execution orders], but at the same time, he's a "theological moderate." As though, Column A, Column B, type of thing. I take it there was quite a lot of that? You haven't spoken about the conduct of the other members of the delegation. Did you detect any sympathy from various circles?
Browne: Yeah, I did […] What you have to remember is, these trips, they make you feel important. And I think that's why some people go on them. They make you feel like you're a minister, or a prime minister, or something like that. They lay out the red carpet for you, and the hospitality, they really don't hold back. And you can get lost in that easily. You can be sitting there, being praised, and being thanked, and people are listening to you make speeches. And you feel so important, you feel actually kind of valuable, that you forget about the context of the situation.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And, like you said, there's the state media paparazzi following you around.
Browne: Yeah, exactly. It's like you're a celebrity. It seemed like everyone had heard of the British delegation that was in town. I think that's part of why these trips can sometimes be effective for the regime, because they lure in; even people who might not have been explicitly pro-Assad can be lured in by this kind of hospitality and this sense of importance. It's a really, really powerful aspect of the foreign trips that the regime organizes.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And I'm sure it applies to journalists as well.
Browne: Yeah, absolutely. You just have to be aware of it, and I tried to be conscious. There were times when I felt uncomfortable, you know, I'm being plied with hospitality here, and, I think as long as you're aware of it, you can manage it, and you can keep at a respectable distance; hang back, not be in the photos. You don't have to go and shake these guys' hands. You don't have to pose for photos with them. That's perfectly possible. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Do you think any information was conveyed by the delegates to [regime] officials of a political or diplomatic nature? Was this in any sense a kind of informal or Track II diplomacy [delegation] sent to communicate any kind of message from Downing Street or the Foreign Office, or was it entirely independent and just a private initiative?
Browne: It sometimes had that appearance. From a London or Westminster [perspective], I don't think there was any kind of Track II diplomacy intended there. But I do think some of the organizers bestowed upon themselves the role of diplomat. Caroline Cox continually made reference to some speeches she'd made in the House of Lords about the UK government funding the White Helmets, who she considers terrorists. Throughout the trip, they were repeatedly referred to as terrorists. And she kept saying, you know, I intend to keep asking these difficult questions of the government. And I think some of the clergy also felt that maybe the church; some of them even said this to me; that the church can have a role as a back channel. The kind of standard diplomacy has failed, now the church can stand in and in some form be the line between the UK and the Assad regime.
Al-Jumhuriya English: I'm no longer worried about Syria, in that case. If the church is handling it, we can all go home then.
Browne: Absolutely. And you know sometimes even if that isn't the case, I think perception is really important. And there was definitely, at times, it was portrayed, the meetings were almost portrayed like they were a state meeting or something.
Al-Jumhuriya English: You mentioned Cox presenting a set of Buckingham Palace crockery to the mukhabarat at one point. That was a highlight.
Browne: Yeah, well, it just stuck in my mind. It just seemed like such a ridiculous thing to be happening. And it kind of showed the naivety of the whole situation, I think, from her end. Because if you de-contextualize that, she's just giving a thank-you gift to the people who have been our security for the trip. If you completely de-contextualize it. But then, as soon as you add in the context, it's obviously a completely ridiculous situation. It really shouldn't have happened.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And, just to be clear, would this have been provided by Buckingham Palace for the purpose, or has she just gone by herself…
Browne: No, I'm almost certain, yeah, she bought them out of her own pocket.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And on that note, do we know if any British taxpayer money was spent on the trip, or was it purely a private—
Browne: No, it was purely a private thing.
Al-Jumhuriya English: OK. I can't not mention the fact that on your final evening, you told me at the time that you discovered [veteran British journalist] Robert Fisk sitting opposite you.
Browne: Yeah. We were in our Damascus hotel, and this gentleman had been sitting opposite me for about twenty minutes, and I whispered to [someone], and then it kind of hit me, I think that's Robert Fisk, actually. So I kind of spoke to one of the other people on our delegation to check I wasn't going mad, and he was like No, no, you're right. The other person struck up a conversation. We had a chat with him. It wasn't particularly extensive, maybe twenty minutes.
Al-Jumhuriya English: It was just funny timing, because that very day, I believe, he had been getting a lot of flak online for his reporting from Douma, where he had failed to find any witnesses of the attack, whereas I think AP had been there the same day and they had. But I'm guessing none of that was brought up.
Browne: No, it wasn't. So yeah, this was a few days after that Douma article came out, which obviously the pro-Assadists on the trip absolutely hailed as the gospel account of the Douma attack. He'd based it all on speaking to one doctor who wasn't even there at the time. Hadn't spoken to any survivors. And obviously whilst I was chatting to him that was constantly in my mind, but, you know I have to say he was quite cordial, and polite, and humble, and he took an interest in me, and it was a kind of, it was a two-way chat. I would have liked to have pressed him, [but] it was a very short exchange. But it would have been interesting to press him on that Douma article, definitely.
It's interesting [also] because he said he was leaving Beirut and then coming back to Damascus in a few days, so you kind of learn a lot from that, if someone can come and go from Damascus as they please—particularly a journalist—there's a reason for that. And it's because they're trusted by the regime. And I think that says a lot.
Al-Jumhuriya English: And at the extreme end of that, you mentioned to me earlier that Vanessa Beeley had been brought out at some point to speak to you, is that correct?
Browne: Yeah, that was earlier on in the trip, the organizers invited her to our hotel. They seemed to think she was a fantastic journalist. A lot of the people on the trip didn't know who she was, and I did, so I actually didn't go to that, because I didn't want to engage with her. I just felt it was a waste of time, to be honest. And I spent the evening wandering around Damascus Old City, which was far more interesting. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Again, just to put listeners in the picture who may not be familiar with her, she is a formerly obscure blogger, essentially, who has now become a favorite on Russian state media, Syrian state media, and this kind of alt-left/alt-right blogosphere of conspiracy theories about, as Gareth mentioned, the White Helmets, and every chemical attack is a false flag, and—
Browne: It's gone even further, if you look on her Twitter, she's suggested that al-Qaeda wasn't behind the 9/11 attacks, and the Charlie Hebdo massacre was staged.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Interesting, so they weren't behind 9/11, but they were behind the attack in Douma the other day.
Browne: Yep, exactly. And, you know, there's an interesting point here, which I touched upon in my final article. This was speaking to Robin Yassin-Kassab, who's a fantastic writer—
Al-Jumhuriya English: And a Jumhuriya contributor, I should say.
Browne: There you go, absolutely. And he kind of said as much as he loathes someone like Vanessa Beeley; I'm paraphrasing here; as much as he loathes someone like Vanessa Beeley, she's not irrelevant. She plays an important role. She is a bridge; she gets conspiracy theories into the mainstream media. She is how something goes from being rumor or complete conspiracy to ending up in the Independent or the Guardian. And that's not something that can be ignored, that is really, really significant in the last few years, I think […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Definitely, and what's fascinating to me is that she seems to have been just hanging around in Damascus while you happened to be in town. And I know you're not the first, because I've seen other European parliamentary delegations, usually far-right or far-left, from places like Poland, or Spain, or wherever, she always crops up in their Twitter pictures and so on. You almost wonder, how much of her time is she spending in Damascus, and is she just, sort of, I really don't know how it works, it's such a mysterious, murky world, but fascinating how she always manages to be there at the right time, as it were.
Browne: Yeah, absolutely […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Now, in closing, at least from my end, and you have touched on this a lot already, but there's obviously always heated debate and controversy; political as well as moral, I would say; about the mere decision by journalists to go to Syria on these delegations and junkets, where they are, in effect, guests of a regime that has committed unspeakable atrocities; guests of a dictator who is the leading mass-murderer of the twenty-first century. You obviously grappled with this dilemma before going. Do you feel now, looking back, that it was worth it? And would you go again?
Browne: Yeah, I do think it was worth it. And I would go again. I don't think I'm likely to be invited on any of these trips [again] any time soon, but if the opportunity were there, I would go again. I think it's different going as a journalist, to some of the other people on the group […] Syria is one of, if not the, defining news story of our time. The level of human suffering there just makes it a kind of unavoidable issue that, as a journalist, you're going to have to grapple with, even if you don't really write about the Middle East or Syria. And, you know, there is no replacement for time on the ground. For actually speaking to Syrians, spending time in the country, there is no better insight, even in terms of insights into how the regime works. How its propaganda manifests itself on the streets of Damascus. And I think this trip allowed me to learn and write about those quite significantly. Maybe shed some light, I don't know, I guess that's for other people to judge from my work. Going as a journalist, I don't think you're endorsing; I mean, obviously, it depends on what you write. But as a journalist per se, traveling to somewhere like Assad-held Syria, it's not an endorsement of the regime. And so I think it's a perfectly acceptable thing to do. If you're going to be true to your own journalistic integrity, there's no reason why you shouldn't go on a trip like this. I've had opportunities to question some of the highest levels of the Syrian government: government ministers, the Grand Mufti. And those opportunities are very rare, and I think they still have some value […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: Yeah, I mean obviously different journalists have different opinions on this. I definitely would commend you for stating in your articles that the mukhabarat were within earshot essentially the whole time you were there, and I think it's outrageous that a lot of journalists don't put that detail in, and give you the impression that this guy on the street singing Assad's praises is just doing it spontaneously. I think that's such an elementary and crucial detail that, to me, colors the whole value of what he's saying.
Browne: Yeah, definitely. I'm in no doubt that there are Syrians, for whatever reason, who do support Assad. Some people find that incomprehensible, but there are some people who I spoke to on the streets who I'm sure sincerely believed the praise they were kind of heaping on Assad. But I think it's my responsibility as a journalist to actually, I should let the reader make that decision. Are we going to take this on face value? Is it genuine, or is it just being said because the mukhabarat are there? By putting that line in […] and saying, Look, the secret police were listening in, the reader knows that. And the reader can make the decision. They don't have to take my word for it. It's such a small thing to do, and I think it makes a big difference. It's just part of being honest and open with the reader, which I think is the most important thing when you're operating in these sorts of environments.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Oh, absolutely, to me it's essentially a gun pointed to the man's head when he's being interviewed. That's really not much of an exaggeration. But I'm just curious to press you a bit further on that, because I can see the argument for going once, because, as you say, you get a feel for the mood, you get to experience and breathe the air, and smell the smells, and everything. But given how much it's controlled, as you said; smothered night and day more or less, by the mukhabarat, by the regime, you're being herded around; what's the added value really in going twice? Fine, in five years' time, things will be very different, but to go again next weekend, for example?
Browne: Well, I mean the answer to that is Syria is a massive country. There are millions of people there and there are millions of different stories, millions of different themes. And there are so many different challenges, so the more time you have to work, the more of those you can explore. When I was covering Mosul in Iraq, I was there for ten months, in one city. And here I was in the country for less than a week. I do think more time would have allowed me to kind of shed more light on the regime, and, who knows, I'm sure there are people inside regime-held Syria who would be critical of the regime, and whose stories it is worth listening to. Even though the mukhabarat are there, I've no doubt there are brave people [who would speak] freely, and you have to find these people first. It takes time to find these people.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Yeah, I'd wanted to ask earlier in fact, were there ever any moments, whether it was at the bar at two in the morning, or just at noon getting a man'oushe on the street or something; were there ever moments when someone broke character, as it were, and told you something, whispered in your ear, something that didn't toe the line? Or was it just that well-controlled?
Browne: There's two points on that. There were times when people, if you want, broke the line, but they did it by accident. And it was never a direct criticism of the government. So, for example, I quoted a young woman in the article I wrote in Homs. I'd heard a lot about the demographic engineering in Homs. Essentially these empty neighborhoods, the city was kind of being repopulated with regime loyalists, and a lot of Alawites were kind of being moved to the outer peripheries of the city. And just speaking to this girl, who was certainly pro-regime, she said, Yeah, I've got Alawite friends who have moved here, and they're living on the outskirts of the city, and they commute into the city center for work, because they don't want to live in the city. And so you get something like that, and that confirms, or helps to confirm, things you heard from other sources outside the country who can speak freely. So there she wasn't making a direct criticism of the government, but she was confirming something just through telling an anecdote.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Being more revealing than she realized, perhaps.
Browne: Exactly. So you can get value through things like that […] There was [also], this is a second-hand anecdote, but someone else on the trip at a public event had someone kind of almost whisper in their ear, saying, "No one knows what happened in Douma. We don't have journalists in this country." So you get glimmers of the reality like that. And obviously the more time you spend, the more of those glimmers you get. And they are, I think, as a journalist, some of the most valuable things you can take out of a trip like that. When someone is brave enough to speak out of turn, intentionally, there's no substitute for that. And one line whispered like that at a public event in Aleppo, or in Homs, or wherever, can be worth a thousand-word interview with someone speaking freely overseas. Just because of the context of it. So I think there's a lot of value in those two things.
Al-Jumhuriya English: Well, that's it in terms of my questions. Was there anything else you wanted to add?
Browne: Yeah, absolutely. I think one of the most pertinent questions I've come back from the trip with is regarding the church, and the role of the church, in Syria. And maybe this is something that perhaps your readers or your listeners will know more about. From the visit it became apparent to me that the church had become an extremely powerful institution. I don't know how powerful it was before the war, but now it seems to have become extremely powerful. That was how we got in; we were essentially vouched for by the church. So our visas were essentially done through the church. That's why myself and some of the other people who would never have got visas under any other circumstances managed to get in. So that shows you the church can get the people into Syria that they want to get in. Which I think is fascinating when you think how much control the regime have over so many aspects, actually this is somewhere where the church has a bit of leverage. And I'm sure it extends, the church has so much money, it's rebuilt so many churches in Homs. The Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate has rebuilt seven churches in Homs, and these churches are beautiful buildings, expensively refurbished. Rebuilt while in whole swathes of the city there just isn't money to rebuild, to even turn the sewers on, to build toilets, rebuild apartment blocks. But the church has the money. And I wonder how that's going to impact on Syria in the future. You have an institution that's become very powerful, become a lot closer to the regime, and it's spending money building churches when whole Muslim neighborhoods are completely leveled. What does that do for future community or inter-community relations? I think the regime has absolutely annihilated these kind of inter-minority and inter-community relations within Syria. […]
Al-Jumhuriya English: That's interesting. Not a subject you often read articles about. Well, thanks so much Gareth, it's always a pleasure speaking to you.
Browne: Thanks for having me on.
Alex Rowell is the managing editor of Al-Jumhuriya English, and the author of Vintage Humour: The Islamic Wine Poetry of Abu Nuwas (Hurst, 2017). He tweets @alexjrowell.
Read more about In the belly of the beast
Share the Article
Fields of destruction: Assad's cluster munitions crimes
Soleimani in Syria: A legacy of death and devastation
Syrians under airstrikes: You've got email
Syria's forbidden cities
Saving the Syrian pound: Mission Impossible
https://www.aljumhuriya.net/en/about


October 2, 2018 11:32 a.m.
A.W.A.K.E., a health awareness support group for people affected with sleep apnea, will meet at 6 pm on Thursday, October 11, in the Sarah Bush Lincoln Lumpkin Family Center for Health Education.
Area residents with sleeping disorders are encouraged to join A.W.A.K.E., which stands for Alert, Well, And Keeping Energetic of Central Illinois. People who suffer from sleep apnea, and family members and friends of those who suffer from sleep apnea, are encouraged to attend the meeting. It is free and open to the public. The support group is sponsored and coordinated by SBL Sleep Disorders Center and Lincolnland Home Medical Equipment.
Certified Diabetes Educator Paula Enstrom, RN, will present "Diabetes." The meeting will also include free mask fitting, pressure checks and refreshments.
For more information, please contact Rodney Wildman, at (217) 238-4908. Sleep studies are offered in both Mattoon and Effingham locations. The Sleep Disorders Center in Mattoon is located at Prairie Pavilion 1, Suite 106, on Sarah Bush Lincoln's campus. Sleep studies are also conducted at the SBL Effingham Clinic, located at 905 N. Maple.


Monty: Gadget luv? Could you possabley bring that bicycle pump over here?
Monty: I learned this move when i traveled with a group of rowby biker Galapagos turtles.......... Its called me shrink n sneak......they'll never see me come'in!
Monty: This reminds me of the time I participated in the Philadelphia Experiment!
Monty: Who wrote this episode, Tex Avery?
Loneheart - Ding, dong, the mouse is flat. Which old mouse? The Aussie mouse!..
Monty: I'm melting! I'M MELTING! Oh curse you and your little dog too!
Monty: See? SEE?! *This* is why I don't like goin' t'see a bloomin' shrink!
Monty: I really, really, really hate birthday sweaters.
MONTY:. . .and this is how I fooled the Two-Tooth Tortoises of Turtle Island into making me their leader!
Monty: Word of advice, mates... if Gadget offers to show you her new homemade liposuction machine, you should politely decline.
Monty: So this is what happens when your unscrew your belly button.
Monty: I don't recommend the new "Anvil Chorus: 3D" at the IMAX!
Monty: Your skeletal destabilizer works like a charm, Luv. Now change me back.
Gadget, offscreen: Oops, we have a problem!


On Wednesday 6th July at 6:45 in the morning, 90 Year 8 and Year 9 students set off to Shakespeare's Globe theatre in London. After a 3 hour long journey we finally arrived. We started out by having a picnic in the summer sun outside the Tate Modern Museum. Then, after a quick walk down Southbank, we arrived at Shakespeare's famous theatre – The Globe.
We were then split into three groups, each with an experienced guide. We got a chance to sit up in the gallery (some could argue the best seats in the house) and watch some professional actors rehearse for the Midsummer Night's Dream. Some of us even got the opportunity to go all the way down to the yard where the less wealthy 'groundlings' or 'stinkards' enjoyed the show, many years ago for only a penny!
Next, we were taken down to an interesting workshop in three rehearsal rooms, where we played a selection of different games to develop our drama skills and understanding of Shakespeare. The three groups focused on different aspects of the play 'The Tempest'. One group focused on movement, another focused on speech and the last on hierarchy and social structure.
Finally, we looked around a museum dedicated to the globe and Shakespeare's work. We were then given the chance to go to the gift shop where we could buy a number of Shakespeare memorabilia and souvenirs.
The highlight of the trip was being able to look around the theatre and experience what it was actually like to be there watching a play back in the Elizabethan age.
Everybody was well behaved and a credit to the school (and some even got to listen to Mr Murphy singing Frozen on the way home!). Overall, a fantastic day was had by all and will be remembered for years to come.


book carrier on wheels the best rolling backpacks according to chiropractors.
book carrier on wheels best teacher bags.
book carrier on wheels junior bag cobalt indigo.
book carrier on wheels teacher bags we love.
book carrier on wheels off exploring find yourself a convertible companion which scores highly for storage and durability.
book carrier on wheels steel cart.


text:
Airbus Secured $1.8 Billion Contract From Philippine Airlines
6:47 AM 2016
by Staff Writer 
Philippine Airlines and Airbus Group signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOU) where the latter won the right to deliver six new aircraft worth $1.8 billion that will replace Philippine Airlines' A340 old models. The agreement comes with an option for six more additional orders that will enable non-stop travel from Manila to the U.S., Canada and Europe.
The agreement and announcement was held at the Singapore Airshow Wednesday where Philippine Airlines get the delivery of new A350-900 aircraft within two years. President and CEO of the Philippine carrier Jaime Bautista, said that the delivery will replace old models of A340 aircraft. The deal includes the option of purchasing additional six Airbus' latest jet built with wide body. The order value before discount is $308 million which is the list price of the said aircraft.
Based on a Bloomberg report, aircraft giants Mitsubishi Aircraft Corp., Boeing Co., ATR and Airbus made an announcement at the Singapore Airshow about the total order of $4.2 billion this week. On the same day, Chicago-based Boeing reveals an order with China's Okay Air valued at $1.3 billion.
Philippine Airlines' contract with the European aircraft maker worth $1.85 billion for the order of six A350-900s includes the option of ordering six additional more. According to Jaime Bautista, Philippine Airlines president, the new planes will be utilized for PAL's non-stop, long distance flights from Manila to the Europe, US and Canada, according to Inquirer.
During the past six years under the regime of President Benigno Aquino whose term ends in June, the country's economic growth averaged at 6.2%. This makes one of Asia's strongest performances reinforcing the travel demand. The airlines would become the key transportation connection of millions of Filipinos working abroad with a channel network tracking the key destinations of the labor paladin. The aircraft delivery will begin in 2018, as reported by asiaone.
"We are happy to announce that today we will commit to acquire six A350-900 series which will allow us... to fly non-stop from Manila to New York, allow us to increase our presence in the US, in San Francisco and Los Angeles, and also to Vancouver and Toronto," Bautista told a news conference.
Fabrice Brégier Airbus President & CEO, said: "We are pleased to welcome Philippine Airlines as the latest airline to select the all-new A350 XWB.
The new aircraft order will allow Philippine Airlines to operate the non-stop service of carrying passengers on the 8,000 nautical mile New York - Manila channel 365 days a year, fully loaded with passengers. The A350 wings are made at Broughton and Rolls-Royce provides the Trent XWB engines worth $600 million to power the new aircraft.
© 2023 VCPOST, All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
Overview Of Cryptocurrency in Latin America
Looking To Sell Your Home During COVID-19? Follow These 6 Tips For Success
Prepare Your Online Business for Scaling
12 Keys to SEC Defense with Securities Litigation Attorney Nick Oberheiden
4 Financial Implications of Interest Rate Cuts to American Consumers
Philippine Airlines, Jaime Bautista, Airbus Group, A350-900, Singapore Airshow, Boeing Co, Mitsubishi Aircraft Corp, President Benigno Aquino, travel, aircraft, Fabrice Brégier
Share Share Tweet +1 0 Share Share


text:
'use strict';
var mongoose= require('./../../db');
var Schema = mongoose.Schema, ObjectId = Schema.ObjectId;

//program schema
var ProgramSchema = new Schema({
			url: {type: String, unique: false, required:true},
			_id: {type: ObjectId, unique:true},
			description: {type: String, unique: true, required:true},
			name: {type: String, unique: true, required:true}
		},

         { collection : 'programs' });
module.exports = mongoose.model('Program', ProgramSchema);

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub