text:
Master's programmes
Faculty of Forest and Environment
Forest Information Technology M.Sc.
Global Change Management M.Sc.
Forestry System Transformation M.Sc.
Faculty of Landscape Management and Nature Conservation
Regional Development and Nature Conservation M.Sc.
Management in Organic Agriculture M.Sc.
Strategic Sustainability Management
Faculty of Wood Engineering
Wood Science and Technology M.Sc.
Faculty of Sustainable Business
Sustainable Tourism Management M.A.
Sustainable Business Management M.A.
Sustainable Entrepreneurship & Social Innovation M.A.
Common Programmes
Biosphere Reserves Management M.Sc.
Master's degree
The Master's Degree is a further professional qualification.
Programmes with a Master's Degree at the University of Applied Sciences in Eberswalde usually take 4 semesters.
The Master's degree offers the opportunity to deepen one's scientific knowledge and to specialize.


text:
Flushing and Swartz Creek Show Us What Sportsmanship Is All About
High school sports are about so much more than just sports. Flushing and Swartz Creek proved that again during a Freshman basketball game this week.
The Flushing Freshman team is very good. They were well on the way to their 20th straight win and an undefeated season Thursday night against Swartz Creek. The game was all but over, and Swartz Creek started to put in their bench players.
Ben Sefernick was one of the players checking in at the end of the game for Creek. Ben has Cerebral Palsy which forces him to wear braces on his legs. This obviously limits how much he is able to play the game he loves.
I was on Facebook this morning and stopped to read what happened during the game as described by the Swartz Creek Varsity coach, Scott Wright.
The fact that the kids on the court were only freshmen makes this story even more special.
They weren't told to help Ben at all, they recognized what was most important at the time and acted.
This speaks volumes as to the character that these kids have. The most amazing moment for me though is not when Ben sinks his three pointer at the buzzer. Ben has made a ton of threes in his lifetime, and will make many more! The most amazing part is that instead of celebrating a 20-0 season, the entire Flushing team joined the Creek team to celebrate Ben.
Check out the video below courtesy of Raechel Schilke.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
SHM Converge offers a comprehensive array of educational and networking opportunities designed specifically for the hospital medicine professional. Attendees can re-energize and focus their practice with the latest research, best practices and newest innovations in the field that can immediately be applied to improving patient care.
Target Audience
Hospitalists, physician leaders and practice administrators; hospital, health plan and medical group executives.
Learning Objectives
- Describe current state-of-the-art evidence-based clinical practice for key topics in adult and pediatric hospital medicine.
- Implement system changes to promote quality and improve patient safety
- Address current challenges in academic and educational systems for improving hospital medicine
- Discuss new policy, financial, ethical, legal and management trends impacting inpatient care


text:
Works on Paper
In January 1978, when I was 28 years old, I arrived in New York City from San Diego for a five-month stay. Without a studio in which to make art, I decided to write about it. Though I had no training as a critic, I had made and thought about sculpture for a decade. Robert Smithson wrote to make way for his sculpture in the late '60s, I knew, as had Donald Judd before him.
While doing my MFA at the University of California, San Diego, between 1972 and 1974, I'd been one of Manny Farber's many teaching assistants. Farber painted, but was better known for film criticism. He understood movies visually rather than narratively, and recognized the radical force of R. W. Fassbinder's and Werner Herzog's filmmaking on first sight. The poet David Antin had been my thesis advisor, and he was talking and writing about contemporary art. My MFA classmates Martha Rosler and Allan Sekula had published criticism soon after graduating, and each had received an NEA critic's grant. Their example pushed me along.
I wrote two reviews of 500 words and three short features and sent them to Art in America, Artforum, Art News and Arts Magazine. I received a note from Elizabeth C. Baker, the editor of Art in America, requesting that I call. I felt intimidated when we met, but she put me at ease by asking if there were artists whose shows I would like to review. I mentioned Willard Boepple, Joel Perlman, Bruce Robbins and Italo Scanga; Baker encouraged me to write about their exhibitions. I submitted copy before returning to California for the summer. She ran one of the unsolicited pieces I'd mailed in—on Lyman Kipp—in the July/August 1978 issue. The reviews we had agreed on ran in the September/October issue.
I began teaching in Philadelphia in September 1978. The following January, Baker surprised me by asking me to cover the upcoming Whitney Biennial. I accepted her unlikely offer with trepidation, because I didn't know if I could write capably about painting. Influenced by Leon Golub's sociological analysis of the Whitney's painting Annuals 1950-1972 [Artforum, March 1973], I described the '79 Biennial as a sort of trade fair for powerful Manhattan galleries. The feature came out in the March/April issue. I focused on artists for whom my words could make a difference, writing at greatest length on Martin Puryear, who wasn't well known. I realized that criticism was advocacy, and, temperamentally, I preferred writing on artists who hadn't been much covered. Completing the short article gave me confidence.
Later the same year I proposed a long feature about bronze casting. As an artist I recognized—before critics did—that bronze was returning as a sculptural medium of choice after 50 years of disfavor. I wrote a detailed overview of casting and then treated the 11 artists individually, writing 250 to 500 words on each, a length I'd mastered doing my first reviews. The article ran in the Summer 1980 issue.
I used a similar approach for an extended December 1982 piece I initiated about 10 sculptors, well known in the '50s, who had faded from view in the following decades. I went to meet Reuben Nakian, Phillip Pavia and the remarkable Raoul Hague, among others. (Nine of these sculptors were included in Lisa Phillips's exhibition "The Third Dimension" which opened two years later at the Whitney Museum.) Baker helped me believe that these time-consuming projects mattered. Writing articles, I realized, gave me access to established artists, offered a continuing education in sculpture and provided visibility.
In 1983 she asked me to write a feature on Mark di Suvero. In treating a single artist in depth, I nuanced my approach, discussing both works I admired and works which dissatisfied me. When the story ran that December readers saw a di Suvero sculpture on the cover.
In early 1985 Baker accepted my proposal for a collection of interviews with my sculptor peers; I wrote an introduction setting forth the ways our work was linked, and edited the ten tape-recorded conversations into monologues, which each artist revised and approved. While articles rarely ran ten pages, Baker spread the interviews and accompanying color pictures over 28 pages in the November 1985 issue and put Judy Pfaff's work on the cover. I would return to this interview format twice, including roughly 20 artists each time.
From the first Baker paired me with the editor and novelist Ted Mooney. We worked together for 30 years. Both of us admired Judd's startling ability to describe works and appreciated how his seeing supported his interpretation. Mooney had the gift of preserving my "voice" and meaning, while easing the abruptness of my prose. Baker oversaw everything; then everyone in editorial got a chance to add comments and corrections to galleys. It was Mooney's job to balance these pushes and pulls, while preserving the work he'd already done. I looked forward to his editing. Many of his changes were so subtle that I didn't notice them. If I felt strongly about a phrasing we would work it through.
I met the French sculptor Anne Rochette in New York in February 1986, and soon I proposed that we write together. She had written a little art criticism in France in the early '80s, and we shared a passion for looking closely at sculpture. Baker and Mooney accepted this uncommon arrangement, insisting only that during the back-and-forth of editing they would engage with but one of us. Since 1986, Anne and I have co-written almost everything we've published; we married in 1987. The choice of subject for almost all our articles has come from us. We rarely accepted assignments. We preferred writing features, since they allow a degree of analysis impossible in reviews, and readers remember them better. Baker let us tackle ever more complicated subjects, even though we'd moved to Paris in 1990 and could not write often, since we were juggling our studio practices and teaching jobs while rearing two daughters. When we took months, or longer, to pull together an article, her patience never flagged.
Anne and I understood that editors often saw word counts as sacrosanct, so we continually condensed our drafts. In practice, Baker never cut the texts we'd written, and Mooney never altered our meanings. Every review and article we submitted got into print; we always were paid. For long or laborious pieces we received more than scale. Baker and Mooney did shorten and rearrange the interviews we submitted; they weren't our words and we always found it hard to adequately condense what others had said. With all interviews we ran the final versions by the artists concerned. Sometimes articles would not appear as quickly as we hoped; we came to realize that Baker held the galleys until she had space in an upcoming issue.
We remain grateful for the ways Mooney, Baker and the magazine's editors improved our work. I rewrite obsessively, a habit aggravated when computers replaced typewriters. More than once I submitted copy, then kept revising and resubmitting it. Mooney had to carry his edits from version to version. He wasn't vengeful when another editor might have been.
Art in America was Betsy Baker's magazine as The New Yorker had been Harold Ross's, and then William Shawn's. Anne and I were privileged to write for her. We stretched to meet her standards, which ever remained just beyond our reach. We were treated wonderfully, and we always knew it.
Anne has more inclusive taste than I do, so we've covered artists I wouldn't have written about alone; my single-mindedness has meant that we've hewn closely to sculpture. We avoided writing on artists we knew personally, though we sometimes became friends with people we covered. I wrote one well-paid catalogue essay in 1987 for an exhibition of cast sculpture at Moore College of Art in Philadelphia. I thought it would be easy, since I was reprising material I'd covered in my 1980 article on bronze casting, but discovered that this format came along with constraints: the expectation that I would write more favorably than objectively. I've stuck to criticism since.
Typically, Anne and I divided up the works we wanted to discuss and wrote individually. Then she revised my paragraphs, and I hers. I would struggle ceaselessly with the ledes and the conclusions, while Anne dealt with ideas and textual flow; she has the better feel for vocabulary, despite English being her second language. Writing jointly we spent more total hours than we would have writing alone. By the end of an edit we averaged a scant 25 words per hour.
As I got older, I found it harder to write about my peers, so three times I took on subjects that sprang from personal experience, and for which I felt uniquely suited. I wrote solo in these pieces because I needed to write in the first person singular. I'd worked as a studio assistant in '71-'72; twenty years later I examined the subject of assistantship in a 26-page-long suite of interviews. Baker organized the January 1993 issue around my article, pairing it with a historical study of the complexities of attributing Rembrandt's paintings given his many assistants.
In March 2000 I published an important article on the disappearance of Bill Bollinger's oeuvre; it was the longest and most difficult text I ever wrote, and became the basis for a traveling survey of his work a decade later. And in February 2004 I explored the complicated issues surrounding the posthumous works produced by Bas Jan Ader's estate. The magazine carefully vetted my research, which passed unchallenged when published and helped protect Ader's sparse but crucial output.
In 2006 Anne and I undertook a series of interviews with 19 sculptors from Los Angeles. The article ran, at over 27,000 words, in November's issue. Baker's support determined whether a story of this length would be published. She risked more than we did. Her word was her word.
Over a quarter of the artists we've written about have died; almost all the others are still working and showing. For a number of them, our articles were their first appearance in the features section, rather than the reviews section, of an art magazine. Some of the people whom we covered at the beginnings of their careers are well known now. When I started in 1978 I did not imagine that my writing could become the part of art discourse that it has.
Print publications have been under enormous financial pressure since 2008. Mooney and Baker both left Art in America that year. I had hoped we could work together two score years, but it wasn't to be.
Anne and I decided to create this website since very little of what we had published—around 100,000 words of criticism and 57,000 words of interviews—was available on the Internet. Benoit Pieron did the site construction, including digitizing the photocopies. Over the preceding decades the writer, and now blogger, Dan Nussbaum edited some of the texts before we submitted them, and several times the sculptor Joel Fisher re-ordered tangled sequences of paragraphs. Nancy Princenthal edited the Simon Starling article, which ran in February 2010, and Faye Hirsch the second feature on Bill Bollinger, which appeared in the June/July 2011 issue. After leaving the magazine, Baker still made herself available to give our pieces a read-through. Elle est sans pareil.
Suggestions and inquiries are welcomed.
P.S. After writing this introduction I came across an unpublished interview Joel Fisher did with me in 1985. My reasons for writing and my approach have changed little over the decades:
"I started writing about art because I was living in New York in spring '78 and didn't have a studio to work in. I found I could best make myself think seriously about certain works or issues by writing on them. And as a critic I had access to people who weren't then available to me as a young sculptor. I've always tried to write as an advocate, making the best case possible for the work covered. I write about sculpture because it's what most concerns me. I'm not an art critic, but a sculptor who writes on sculpture."
Liquid Forms
Read More
Los Angeles
Read More
The Far Shore
Read More


text:
Former national security adviser John Bolton talked with NPR's Steve Inskeep on Sunday about his new book, The Room Where It Happened, his time in the White House and President Trump's impeachment.
Steve Inskeep: As you know, ambassador, the judge declined to block publication, but said you opted out of the national security clearance process. And this is a quote from the ruling: "Bolton's unilateral conduct raises grave national security concerns." And another quote: "Bolton was wrong." Do you accept that judgment?
John Bolton: Well, look, to begin with, we're very happy with ruling to stop the unprecedented effort by the Trump administration to prevent the book from being published at all. And we think that it was part of an effort by the president to suppress the book. We'll have a lot more to say to that as the litigation proceeds. And beyond that, because we are in litigation, that's really all I can say.
Although there is another vital point here. The judge reviewed a classified filing from the government in camera, in private, and said the judge is persuaded that defendant Bolton likely jeopardized national security by disclosing classified information. Did you disclose classified information to your knowledge?
I did not. It was never my intention to in writing the manuscript to disclose classified information. I've had years of experience with this and we went through the full prepublication clearance process at the NSC. And again, these are all issues to be discussed. That hearing that you mentioned was ex parte, that is to say, my counsel and I didn't participate in it. So there is a lot more to come here.
Without getting into too many details, because it sounds like you're reluctant to get too detailed, you just said you went through the full process. The judge said you opted out. You did not go through the full process. What's the difference there?
Well, I think it's going to become very clear as events go on here. There's much that needs to be done in the litigation. And this was the result of about an hour and a half, two hour hearing. So there'll be an evidentiary story to develop and a story to tell.
When you say you went through the full process, do you mean all the details were checked and they just didn't give the final clearance? Is that what you mean to say?
The government itself in its papers says that the NSC senior director concluded and told me that there was no classified information in the manuscript. The government said that.
Now the judge did say that the risk here for you, if they were to find classified information in the book, was that you could lose all royalties. You could lose a lot of other things as well. Was there something about this book that is so important that it is worth risking all your income and perhaps a lot more for?
Well, look, in the Trump administration, the rules don't apply in many respects. I wrote this book as a matter of philosophy and belief in the importance of putting the facts about the Trump administration before the American public, for them to make up their mind. I felt I had an obligation to do it. I explain that in the book itself.
And I knew there would be trials and tribulations when you displease Donald Trump. Ask his niece who he's now saying signed a nondisclosure agreement that prohibits her book from being published. So this is all par for the course. And I didn't look forward to it. Don't get me wrong, this wasn't anything I thought would be pleasant. But I have been determined and was vindicated, I think, by the court in laying the story before the American people. They will be the ones who decide.
In retrospect, would have been better to tell some of this story before Congress during the impeachment proceedings?
Well, you know, it's it's an important question. I addressed that in the book as well. My view is that the way the House Democrats set up the impeachment process, that they, in effect, set themselves up for failure, right at the beginning. I considered their strategy to be impeachment malpractice.
They didn't take any of the steps that one would think would make sense, to reach out to Republicans who might be sympathetic to considering the president's behavior. There was nothing akin to an Ervin committee process, as there was during the Watergate days. And the consequence of the very narrow focus that the Democrats adopted without consultation outside their own narrow circle, as far as I can tell, and their rush to get it done so that the impeachment proceedings didn't interfere with the Democratic presidential nomination had the effect of pushing House Republicans into a corner.
And so what ended up was a bitterly partisan debate that prefigured essentially what was then going to happen in the Senate. So if the objective of the process really was to seek impeachment and conviction, the entire strategy going in was misguided. If it was simply to do some virtue signalling, well, that probably was accomplished. But when the advocates of impeachment adopted this flawed strategy, that doesn't require the rest of the country to go along with it. And I think their failure actually makes it harder to talk about some of the conduct I try and lay out in the book.
But just so that I'm clear on this, though, ambassador, you eventually decided you were willing to testify before the Senate, which, of course, did not want your testimony. The Senate Republicans did not want to take testimony. By saying that you were willing to testify, doesn't that undermine your arguments for refusing the House, which did want your testimony?
Not at all. No. 1, and I lay this all out in a statement at the time, in January, I reprint the full statement in the book. I won't for the benefit of your listeners recite it from the text of the book. But the point was that this conduct by the House and how they treated Charlie Kupperman, the deputy national security adviser, whom they subpoenaed and then withdrew the subpoena. And the instructions that he received from the White House counsel's office was a demonstration that anything that might throw the Democrats' impeachment schedule out of kilter, they weren't willing to consider.
And I understand what their problem was with their presidential nomination. But let's be clear: Impeachment is probably the gravest constitutional responsibility the House has. And I'm sorry that that grave responsibility was affected by their own political calculus. But in effect, that's what the Ukraine allegations about Trump were all about, torquing legitimate government power around his own political interest. So this is part of the impeachment malpractice that I've complained about.
Now, let's talk about what you write about the president of the United States and about the process that you tried to impose or follow inside the White House. You talk about your hiring by the Trump administration and you write that no one could claim by this point, 2018, no one could claim by this point not to know the risks, "but I thought I could succeed." Why did you think that?
Because I felt from prior conversations with Donald Trump when he was a private citizen during the transition, briefly during the campaign, during transition, during his first year in office, I thought it was possible that you could have a more normal, more organized, more coherent, more consistent policy formulation and implementation process. That was my view. I think that I went in with my eyes open, but maybe I went in too optimistically. And so the story of the book really is what I found, actually obtained in the day-to-day life at the White House.
What was wrong on a day-to-day basis with the president's decision making process?
Well, this really, in a sense, is a book about how not to be president. The decision making process was not coherent. It followed episodically and anecdotally on what the president thought. At any given time, decisions could be made and reversed and then reversed again in very rapid fashion. Decisions were made without ultimate objectives and strategies in mind. And I think it was very frustrating and I don't think it was just frustrating for me. I think it was frustrating for, certainly in the national security area, all of the senior advisers, each of whom reacted in different ways and left at different times or remained.
You write about some of those advisers quite critically, and you say that the original adults in the room who were supposed to help guide the president early in the administration failed because they simply opposed the president and frustrated his desires. Do you feel you did any better?
Well, I think part of the problem at the beginning was that they — not all of them, to be sure — but enough of them, made it clear they thought they were the axis of adults, they were the only ones in the room that could keep things under control.
And that had an effect on Trump, who probably exacerbating his feelings going in, began, I think, not to trust most of the — ultimately came to trust most of the senior advisers. And I think a lot of opportunities were lost at the beginning. I tell in the book about a trip to the United Kingdom where the president was shown an exercise by British military together with U.S. military forces. He had never been to one, with just American forces before that. And there were areas that I felt could have been explored earlier that were very hard to go back on. So the early failures, I would say, made it worse. But ultimately, Trump is Trump, and that's where the responsibility lies.
Although did you end up in the same position as some of those early adults in the room? I think about North Korea to give one example that you write about a lot. You also ended up struggling desperately to keep the president from sabotaging his own goals or making bad concessions.
Well, and I think that as that policy and his actions evolved over time, the Korea issue was a major factor in my decision to resign. I try and explain in the book how this develops. You know, a lot of people on the outside look and say, well, "How could you have gone into the administration to begin with?" or "How come you didn't resign at this point?" or "How come you didn't resign at that point?"
And I would say, and I think this applies to many others in the administration as well, we thought we were trying to help out, pursue policies that protected American national security. And if you resign or think about resigning every time a presidential decision doesn't go exactly your way, you wouldn't last 24 hours in most administrations. It's part of the process is appreciating that it is the president's decision. And you work at it as long as you can, as long as you think you're making a contribution.
But you were frustrated again and again when it came to North Korea. I'm thinking of one particular incident in the run up to the Singapore summit, one of the summits between President Trump and Kim Jong Un. The summit is on. The summit is off. The summit is back on. The summit is off. And at one point, you say the president compared his courtship of Kim Jong Un to his dating life. In what way?
Well, he said that he always, back in the day, as they say, he always wanted to be the one who broke up with the girl first. He didn't want the girl to break up with him. And he used that to describe whether he would cancel the summit with Kim Jong Un first or whether we would risk the North Koreans canceling it. And I thought it was an insight into the president, candidly given, that showed how he approached this. As opposed to looking at it from the perspective of what our ultimate strategic interest was, in my view, would have been better not to agree to the summit to begin with.
And I might say, as we've seen just in recent weeks, where North Korea has literally blown up the office building that had been used as a liaison with the South Koreans, that this entire two-year-long effort with North Korea ended in diplomatic failure. But that allowed the North Koreans the time that they need to continue to pursue nuclear weapons and ballistic missile delivery systems.
Did the president have a kind of romantic approach to numerous dictators? He was, in your telling, always concerned about his personal relationship with it, with the individual dictator.
Yeah, I think that's an accurate description, and I don't discount the importance of personal relations between the top leaders of the countries, whether they're friends or adversaries. It's true at the secretary of state level, the secretary of defense level as well. But I think the president had a continued problem in discerning the difference between having a good personal relationship with Xi Jinping, let's say, and the U.S. having good relations with China in the sense of advancing American national interest. And I think it was this confusion that led us into a number of problem areas and are still causing us problems today.
Is this the reason that the United States has become reluctant to criticize China's human rights record, for example, or to criticize Russia?
Well, you know, I think that this is an example of how the president's policy is so often incoherent and how it responds to domestic political pressure. So, for I recount several incidents in the book with respect to the Uighurs, with respect to the anniversary of the 1989 massacre at Tiananmen Square and a number of other issues where the president said, "Well, you know, we have human rights problems, too."
Now, just recently, he signed legislation designed to clarify his power to exact sanctions on China against the Uighurs. But even as recently as Sunday afternoon, he was pointing out that doing so could interfere with trade negotiations with China. So it sounds like he's tough on one day, the next day he's not. And I think once the November election is behind us, if he wins, I think it's entirely possible he'll be right back to the trade negotiation.
Meaning that he'll drop the human rights concerns as soon as he's concerned about something else?
Well, I think once he's free of any reelection pressure, it's going to be revealed. What one of my greatest concerns is, is that he's not a conservative. And that's one reason I wrote the book. I think it's important to make it clear to Republicans and to Democrats that this is not the future of the Republican Party. And these are issues, whether Trump wins or loses in November — and I still think he has an excellent chance to win — that we're going to have a significant discussion over what the direction of the party should be.
Why do you write that the president seemed to be practicing, quote, "Obstruction of justice as a way of life?"
Well, I think there were numerous instances where he did things involving American national interest, sometimes in the judicial context, sometimes in other contexts, that mixed impermissibly his personal political interests with the national interest. I think that was true in Ukraine and a number of other areas, Halkbank, Huawei, ZTE. These are issues that I think are very troubling.
I think it's a contrast with the way that prior administrations have acted. In the case of Ukraine, for example, compare what happened in 1992 when a number of Republican members of Congress suggested to President George H.W. Bush and Jim Baker that they ask Britain and other countries to look into the travels of the young Bill Clinton when he was at Oxford and Bush 41 and Baker said, "We are absolutely not going to ask a foreign government for help," whereas Trump did exactly that.
Trump did that in Ukraine. You feel that he was constantly doing favors for Xi Jinping in order to impress Xi Jinping. And you also write about a favor that he seemed to ask of China's President Xi involving the elections. What was it?
Well, it was stunningly clear, and I describe it in paraphrase in the book, because the government's preclearance, prepublication review process indicated that that's the way they wanted it. But there was a clear linkage between increased Chinese purchases of American agricultural products and Trump's reelection by benefiting farmers in key agricultural states whose electoral votes he needed.
He was asking for China to increase its farm purchases, U.S. farm purchases, in order for him, Trump, to get votes.
Yeah. Look, this was a long-standing discussion about picking up additional purchases of agricultural products by the Chinese to reduce the trade deficit, which was something that Trump focused on constantly. But I think it was clear from that and other comments that the real motivation was political. Now, again, every president has political considerations in mind, not just in national security decisions, but in domestic decisions as well.
The issue is whether the political factors are among those being considered or whether they are the driving, dominant force. And I think, really, that's why President Trump doesn't doesn't want to, didn't want this book published. It's not because he fears that foreign governments are going to read it. He's worried the American people are going to read it.
Robert Lighthizer, the trade negotiator, U.S. trade negotiator, when told about that revelation in your book, said, "It's completely crazy." That's a quote. And that he doesn't remember it happening. Was Lighthizer present when this conversation took place?
He was at that conversation in Osaka. I can tell you I feel very confident my recollection is correct, and that wasn't the only time it came up.
I want to ask about — oh, you mean the president of the United States asked for that kind of favor multiple times with Xi Jinping?
Well, they talked frequently about Trump's reelection, Xi Jinping saying that he wished that there weren't a two-term limit. And the president said, "Yeah, I've had people say to me that it's too bad about the two-term limit." I just thought this was the kind of back-and-forth with authoritarian leaders that did not reflect well on Donald Trump himself or the presidency or the United States.
Since your credibility has been questioned, I just want to note that throughout the book you give the dates and exact times of a lot of meetings. You give so many exact dates and times that the New York Times reviewer didn't like reading it for that reason. Were you writing from detailed contemporaneous notes when you put this book together?
Well, look, this, the book is my best recollection. It has gone through some editing because of prepublication review process, but it's a nearly 500 page book and there's a lot in there. I'd like to see what ultimately people specifically disagree with and what their characterisation is. And again, I'm sure this is something that others may want to write on, too. Ultimately, historians will be the judge of a lot of this. One day when the archives of the Chinese government are open to the people — they had as many observers on their side of the table as we did. They heard what the president said. I think they understood it.
But what I wonder is, at the end of the day, were you taking notes, taking home your notes, writing your recollections in real time, and then referring back to those notes when you wrote this book a year or two later?
All of the notes that I took were destroyed before I left the government.
So this is your recollection in every case?
I'm just going to leave it at that.
OK. Secretary of State Pompeo has also denied, I believe, a story in which you say that Pompeo passed you a note using a profanity to describe the president. Do you have anything to back up that other than your recollection?
No. Other than, we were sitting right next to each other at the table. And I think he wrote it on his notepad, put it in front of me. I nodded my head and he took it back.
You didn't write anything back going the other way?
No, no.
Was that kind of normal to be passing notes in class in a meeting where the president was talking?
Well, I think sometimes you pass notes directly to the president or have a word in his ear as the meeting is going on, of course, because in aid of the course of the discussion, you want to be prepared. And I think this is entirely normal. There's a small meeting and the conversation was predominantly almost exclusively between Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un. But no, I think that's perfectly normal.
Is the president fundamentally unfit for the job?
I don't think he's really competent to be president. It's put me in a very difficult dilemma. I voted for him in 2016 because I thought given the choice between him and Hillary Clinton, that that was the choice to make. But having seen him in operation for 17 months, I just cannot vote for him again. I'm planning to write in the name of a conservative Republican identity to be determined yet. But I will not be voting for Donald Trump and I will not be voting for Joe Biden.
You won't be voting for Joe Biden, why not?
Because I disagree with his policies. I've known him for many years. This is not a question of integrity, in my view. It's a question of philosophy. This is a very unhappy election for me. As I say, I face the same dilemma as I think many people did in 2016. And I chose at that time because I thought it was the best thing to do for the country to vote for Trump. But given my experience, I just can't see doing it again.
I am obliged to waste a few of our remaining seconds checking here, because The Daily Telegraph is just in the last few minutes reported, you said you're voting for Biden. I think you're telling me they're wrong.
That was — I don't know what the source of the confusion is there, but I can tell you that as I've said to you, I've said it in other interviews, that I'm neither voting for Biden nor Trump. I'm going to write into another name.
OK. A couple of other questions, ambassador. As it's become very clear, in recent months, critics of the president strongly disagree with you for not testifying at impeachment. I've heard scathing words about you when I mentioned that we're getting ready for this interview. Secretary of State Pompeo called you a traitor. Clearly, the supporters of the president are not happy with this book. Do you mind being hated by people on all sides?
Well, you know, it's not something I set out to do. Feelings are very strong on the question of Donald Trump. And I think that's one of the problems with the distortion of our politics, is that everybody's in their corners lined up and everything Trump did is right or everything Trump did is wrong. And if you don't side with the way I want to do things, your morality comes into question. I think people need to calm down.
In the case of the Democratic criticism, with respect to impeachment, I thought their strategy was fundamentally flawed. And with all due respect, they failed to convict the president. They said, well that nonetheless, having impeached him, it will determine the future. I think they're 180 degrees backwards. The fact he was acquitted will empower him, not deter him.
And as far as the Republican critics are concerned, we're going to have a conversation within the party and within the society as a whole after the November election, whether Trump wins or loses, about the future of the party. And I think we ought to reserve judgment until we get to that point and then have the conversation to make sure the American people don't mistake the conservative Republican philosophy as being identical with Donald Trump, because it is not.
I want to ask about one other thing, where you seek to correct the record from your point of view. You write of disbanding an office within the National Security Council that was focused on pandemics. That received a lot of criticism when the pandemic arrived. You argue that, in fact, a different part of the NSC took over that task and that the NSC worked fine and even gave an early warning of the pandemic. And then you write this: "The internal NSC structure was no more than the quiver of a butterfly's wings in the tsunami of Trump's chaos." Is that one way to summarize your whole time at the National Security Council?
Well, it would certainly not be far from the truth. I mean, specifically in the case of coronavirus, and I do think this is important, whether it's in the context of the 2020 election or how somebody runs the presidency, in January and really even beyond that, Trump simply did not want to hear anything bad about the situation in China. He didn't want anything that could be seen as critical of Xi Jinping. He didn't want to hear anything about the extent of the virus or whether the Chinese had lied about its effects or covered up the spread of the disease. And he didn't want to hear anything about negative effects on the Chinese economy that could undermine the trade negotiations, No. 1.
And No. 2, he did not want to hear anything that could suggest trouble for the American economy, which he saw as his, but not unrealistically, he saw as his ticket to reelection. And that empty chair in the Oval Office is one of the things I think that explains the early failure to respond adequately. Not bureaucratic structures in the Centers for Disease Control or the National Institutes of Health or the Department of Health and Human Services or the National Security Council staff or the State Department. The fault lies in the Oval Office.
Would you give any advice to people who are still in the administration and perhaps are thinking now what you thought at one time, that you could do some good, good in there despite the failings of the president, as you saw it?
You know, having been through this myself and having seen others go through it the before and after me, I can't really offer them advice. This is an intensely personal decision. But I do think this: I don't think people should be criticized for believing in good faith that hanging in there in tough circumstances somehow is an abdication of their morality or their philosophy. I think people tried hard to do things right. Some had better success than others. But I don't think that, you know, unless you've walked in their shoes, it's — that criticism is not fair. As each person comes out, you know, as the alumni society grows, and I think this will be part of the conversation we have post-November, whether Trump wins or loses.
Ambassador John Bolton is the author of The Room Where It Happened. Thanks so much, ambassador. Enjoyed talking with you.
Glad to be with you. Thanks for having me.
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
There have been a lot of negative rumors and one-sided stories across Kenyan social media of late about the business changes at Angani, a Nairobi-based Cloud services company, and the subsequent platform outages that occurred. It's an unfortunate state, as people I've known and respected for many years have not tried to get the "other side of the story". A few have reached out, and after doing so have chosen to remain silent rather than go against the current meta-narrative that is being pushed.
That meta-narrative is, "white investors are abusing their money and privilege to push out black Kenyan founders of a company to steal it." This is factually wrong and will have long-lasting negative repercussions if not corrected. The racial overtones alone demean us all. We're better than this.
The real meta-narrative of this story is one of inexperienced management and the subsequent irresponsible behavior of startup founders, and how that reflects on the Nairobi tech ecosystem at large. It's about growing pains and learning, and also about a community coming to terms with the need for more professionalism when scaling and growing companies. It's about what independent board members and investors rights and responsibilities are.
To understand why these allegations are wrong it's first helpful to understand what drives investors (from any country) and their actions.
On Investors
Tech investors are driven to invest in companies that can scale, gain market share and subsequently make profit. They look for great teams that have good ideas that they can execute on and pivot with as the business landscape changes around them over they years. Typically investors have financial interests in numerous companies at any given time, and depending on how much capital they're injecting, they will take a seat on the board to represent their interests.
Because they have so many companies, the best case scenario is when a team is executing well and the investor has little need to be involved in anything but receive updates so he/she can help where asked. The worst case scenario is when you have to spend days or weeks working on a company and can't give attention to the other dozen companies you're supposed to be working with. In short, no one wants any drama.
That said, as an investor you're also a significant shareholder and typically represent a number of other shareholders when you have a board seat. When you're making decisions at board meetings, you're doing so for these people as well, and your mandate is to find a way forward that increases that shareholder value.
So what happened?
Unfortunately, at Angani, an all too common story emerged of inexperienced founders (knowledgeable, but inexperienced in management) who couldn't overcome personal differences in order to run a company, and had seen a decline in revenues over the preceding 3 months (37% in June, 17% in July and in August).
When you take a sizable investment your company isn't the same anymore, if things get tough (as they often do at some point in a company's life), then you'll have others outside of the original founding team weighing in to solve issues with you. In this case, that's what happened, and the independent board members did the job of oversight and governance. A number of viable options were proposed and considered, whether that be restructuring the company or changing executive positions, however two of the founders rejected any board recommended changes and opted instead, to leave the company instead and walk away.
Following this board decision was a period in which access to the company's key infrastructure was supposed to be handed over. This didn't happen, which precipitated even more issues that culminated in the platform failing and taking down client accounts. It was at this point when Angani issued a statement explaining the system failure.
This is far from the sensationally incorrect story of a hostile board takeover by investors. It's an old story that can happen across any industry in any country.
Final Thoughts
Startups fail. Sometimes this is due to bad ideas, business or operating models, others to poor financial management, and some to founder disputes. This happens everywhere in the world and is unfortunately the norm for tech startups.
However, we can't allow ourselves to change the dialog to something that it isn't. This isn't about race but instead the simple realities of how ugly and painful it is when a company goes through real management challenges. Nairobi has benefited from an openness to foreign talent and investment for many years – and it shows in the successes that have happened since. We should try to learn from this so that we don't repeat these mistakes or, worse, that we develop a reputation as a petty and unprofessional investment market and further scare away foreign investments.
We're one of the most dynamic and active tech communities on the continent, and because of this have high visibility to investors. Capital will not continue to flow to other startups in Kenya if investors believe that a gun can be held to their head on governance and oversight issues of their investments. There are other places that they can go where the community will be more investor friendly, and where they can fall back on the rule of law to protect themselves.
Our tech community is a work in progress, it takes all of us working together to make it better. We need to get this startup and growth stage of tech companies in Kenya right – we can do better, and we will.


text:
Things to do
in Abu Dhabi
during the Grand Prix
Fast cars, final race drama and fantastic weather – a long weekend at the Formula 1™ Etihad Airways Abu Dhabi Grand Prix delivers on every level. The world's best drivers compete for the last time in the F1™ season. Thrills on the track are complemented by some of the world's greatest performers and exciting events in the glamorous surroundings of Yas Island.
There are many things to do at the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix weekend across the rest of the city, whether you're visiting for a few days or longer. You'll need to check COVID-19 guidelines and regulations before you travel or visit these places. Also make sure you book in advance to avoid missing out.
On race day, you'll experience Yas Marina Circuit at its finest – packed with 60,000 of F1™ fans, incredible hospitality and tense racing on the track. For the other 50 weeks of the year, the circuit offers you a more hands-on experience.
Get behind the wheel of a supercar and take it for a speedy spin around the illustrious track. Channel your inner F1™ star in the Formula YAS 300 or feel the power of an Aston Martin GT4. Reach top speeds on the 406m acceleration strip with some drag racing or enjoy life from the passenger seat with a drifting experience instead.
Younger drivers can test their skills in the KartZone, for a fun family day's competition around the 1km track. After sitting behind the wheel, loosen up your limbs in the health and fitness hub.
Check availability and relevant guidelines on the official Yas Marina website.
After Yas Marina Circuit, the second place on any F1™ fan's list is Ferrari World Abu Dhabi. The theme park almost backs on to the racetrack, so you should easily spot its iconic red canvas emblazoned with the Italian brand's logo. Most of the rides and attractions are indoors, such as the scaled-down Ferrari F1™ cars that make up the junior Grand Prix. The world's fastest rollercoaster – Formula Rossa – takes you through the roof, hitting the top speed of 240km/h (149.1mph).
Cool off at Yas Waterworld with more than 40 rides, slides and attractions. As always, it boasts the biggest and best – home to the world's longest six-seater water coaster. Other futuristic attractions include Cinesplash, a 5D cinema experience, and a 550m rollercoaster with onboard water and laser effects.
From Bedrock to Gotham City, jump into Warner Bros. World™ Abu Dhabi and venture across its six lands. Take on the bad guys with the Justice League 5D ride or delve into the delightful chaos of Tom and Jerry. Nearly 30 rides across six lands, live entertainment, characters and more make it a great family day out.
Find out more about Yas Island.
South of the UAE capital and covering an area similar to the size of France is a huge desert expanse. Don't be fooled by its name, it couldn't be further from the truth. Sand dunes tower 300 metres high, and camels wander across the golden lands. It all creates a magnificent landscape a world away from the modernity of Abu Dhabi.
There are many ways to add excitement to the Empty Quarter. Book a desert safari and camp under the stars, living like many locals did before Abu Dhabi's impressive expansion. Adventurers can try dune bashing – speeding up one side of a large sand dune in a 4X4 then sliding down the other.
This is also a great spot to try sand surfing and skiing too. Start on the smaller slopes before building up to tackle the 300-metre Liwa dunes.
About a 20-minute drive from Yas Island is the burgeoning cultural hub of Saadiyat Island. The Louvre Abu Dhabi is at the heart of the district, collating global works of art by theme and periods. Across 12 galleries, you can admire works from 7th-millennium-BC Jordan to pieces by Picasso. Its lace dome roof and surrounding waterways are themselves works of art.
Saadiyat Beach is one of the most beautiful in the UAE, with white sands stretching to the turquoise ocean. Along the beachfront, you might encounter some of the island's original residents – Hawksbill sea turtles. Conservationists are working to protect this critically endangered species, with beach access via elevated boardwalks.
Nearby is the region's first ocean golf course, Saadiyat Beach Golf Club, home to an 18-hole championship golf course and extensive practice facilities.
The stretch of the Corniche Road covers most of the city's northwest shoreline. Marvel at the impressive city skyline to one side, with skyscrapers and modern architecture intertwined, or enjoy the calming ocean views on the other side as you stroll along this pedestrianised area.
Hop on a bike and cycle down the shorefront. Stop off to laze under a beach umbrella or on one of the many sunbeds on the public beach. You'll find various cafes to top up your energy levels with a light lunch or cold drink.
For shopping, enter the iconic World Trade Center Abu Dhabi. The Souk is a modern interpretation of a traditional Abu Dhabi market on the original spot of the city's commercial district. Explore its shops, full of Arabian artefacts, jewellery, spices and other delights.
When you've only got a short stay in the UAE capital or you just want to see the top spots, these are some of the best things to do in Abu Dhabi.
Opened in 2008 after 12 years of construction, the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque is a monumental feat of architecture. The third-largest mosque in the world welcomes millions of visitors each year to its culturally diverse place of worship. Syrian architect Yousef Abdelky borrowed inspiration from other Islamic countries and enlisted British, Italian and Emirati architects to help build the magnificent mosque.
The Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque boasts many world records and special features:
Entry is free and you can explore yourself or join one of the free guided tours that last about an hour. It's open seven days a week, from 9am to 10pm Saturday to Thursday and 4:30pm to 10pm on Fridays.
Visit during early morning or late evening for stunning sunrise or sunset photos. Dress modestly and cover up with a headscarf for women – although the mosque usually loans women an abaya to wear before entering.
Just opposite the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque is Wahat Al Karama. This touching memorial is dedicated to the fallen soldiers of the UAE.
Is there a classier way to relax in Abu Dhabi than indulging in afternoon tea in elegant surroundings? Le Cafe in Emirates Palace Mandarin Oriental, Abu Dhabi is the place to go for the most exclusive experience. Try their signature golden cappuccino – a frothy coffee topped with 24-carat gold flakes.
Head to Level 74 of Jumeirah at Etihad Towers where you can enjoy Parisian-style afternoon tea and take in the stunning city views through the wall-to-floor glass sides of the Observation Deck.
For a more authentic experience, head to Cafe Arabia. As the name suggests, its menu is firmly rooted in local cuisine. Browse the first-floor art gallery then sit on the open roof top terrace and tuck into traditional dishes.
Abu Dhabi's malls are grand, modern and filled with high-end stores selling fashion and more from the world's top brands. You can find them all over the city, from the Galleria on Al Maryah Island with more than 400 stores, to Yas Mall at the heart of Yas Island. Then there's the distinctive Marina Mall, which goes beyond the standard shopping trip with a zip line, slides and 18-metre freefall experience.
If you want traditional Arabian shopping, head to one of the many souks. On Al Mina Road lies the Carpet Souk – a maze of more than 100 carpet shops selling handmade carpets and rugs. For a smaller, more valuable souvenir, the Gold Souk at Madinat Zayed Shopping Centre dazzles and delights with jewellery, diamonds and precious stones on display.
The Abu Dhabi skyline is jaw-dropping from any angle, but for the best views, you need to get up high. Ray's Bar on the 62nd floor of Conrad Abu Dhabi Etihad Towers delivers a bird's eye view over the Corniche and surrounding islands. Sit back and sip something sparkling as you breathe it all in.
Marina Mall is a more family-friendly option. Ride its iconic glass-fronted lift to the top of its viewing tower. The spaceship-shaped summit provides full 360-degree views that will leave the whole family lost for words.
While Abu Dhabi is marvellously modern, you'll still find pockets of nature. The Mangrove National Park is a prime spot for biodiversity where you can kayak through the mangrove forests, salt marshes and mudflats. Look out for crabs, herons and all sorts of fish – even the odd dugong and dolphin.
The edge of a desert isn't usually where you'd expect to find flamingos, but you will at Wathba Wetland Reserve, around 25 miles south of the city centre. Explore the walking trails and sit in the hides to watch around 4,000 bright pink flamingos during their migration between September and April.
Most of Abu Dhabi's buildings can be traced back a few decades, however Qasr Al Hosn's foundations date back to the 1790s. It overlooked coastal trade routes with a watchtower protecting the settlement. Today, it's a museum nestled in the city skyline - its white fortress walls protecting artefacts from 6000 BC.
For more recent history, there's the Abu Dhabi Heritage Village. This place explores the desert life many of the city's ancestors followed, with reconstructed traditional buildings and a museum.
Discover everything that goes on at race day with our rundown of all the entertainment, events and exciting things to do at the F1™ Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.
Learn how long the track is, the layout of the circuit, lap records and more interesting information about the home of the F1™ Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.
Follow our in-depth guide to Yas Island. Find out where's good to stay, the best attractions when travelling with children, as a couple or friends and unmissable spots.
The currency used in Abu Dhabi is the UAE dirham (AED). Dirham notes are available in 1,000, 500, 200, 100, 50, 20, 10, and 5 denominations. One dirham comprises 100 fils, with a quarter, half and one denomination coins available.
Abu Dhabi International Airport is about 20 miles from the centre of Abu Dhabi. It is located to the east of the city, close to Yas Island. There are three passenger terminals, with various parts of the city easy to reach by bus or taxi.
Saadiyat Island is one of the most luxurious places to stay in Abu Dhabi, home to many five-star hotels and large villas. Yas Island is near to some top attractions ideal for families, while hotels close to the waterfront on Al Maryah Island offer amazing views for romantic dinners by the coast for couples.
Abu Dhabi enjoys a year-round warm climate, so pack light, loose-fitting clothes for your visit. The dress code is quite modest so cover your shoulders and knees when out and about – particularly if you're visiting religious sites. In your hotel, the dress code is typically more relaxed.
From December to February in the UAE winter, the nights can feel a little cool so bring a layer for sitting out in the evening.


text:
Health Benefits Of Olive Oil
Discover health benefits of olive oil, skincare products and wonderful remedies using olive oil in this website, which has been designed to help you learn about many benefits of this wonderful oil.
Hi, my name is Lolita, and I'll be your guide here at health-benefits-of-olive-oil.com.
I love to cook, and I love to cook with fresh, natural ingredients - especially olive oil!
The ingredients that you use every day, like oil and seasonings, have a more profound impact on your health than the ingredients you only use occasionally, so choosing healthy every day options is important.
I love the taste of olive oil like I do wine! I cook with it every single day, and I love that it is so good for me. That's why I started this site, so I could share the benefits of olive oil.
I'm hoping you find this site informative and fun. You'll find pages about when and where the olive tree was domesticated, how people consume olives and olive tree leaves, and even how to safely dispose of your used cooking oil. I'll also explain how you can use olives for medicinal and cosmetic purposes what an incredible little fruit!


text:
Any credible review of highway infrastructure needs will conclude that additional highway expansion, preservation and maintenance investment is necessary. However, the amount of that need, and the amount that can be fulfilled through cost management and prioritization of projects, must be determined. While there are many "wish lists" for highway spending, it is critical that the amount of additional funding be based solely on priority spending needs that will actually contribute to improving the state's business climate and quality of life.
There are two ways that the need for additional funding can be assessed. The first way is by reviewing the conclusions of various federal and state organizations that have reviewed the issue from both a national and state perspective. The second approach is to evaluate various indicators such as traffic growth vs. lane additions, pavement condition and trends, congestion levels and trends, transportation investment funding trend-lines, etc. The following sections explore each of these indicators of need, with a final section drawing conclusions about new funding needs.


text:
Here at Edwards Kia our mission is to provide you with the same exceptional level of service that led you to purchase a Kia vehicle in the first place.
We offer a comprehensive selection of Genuine Kia Parts and Accessories, so you can accessorize your vehicle to fit your style. Whether you purchased your vehicle from us or not, Edwards Kia is your #1 destination for auto service and repair in Council Bluffs, IA.
Among the many auto repair services, Edwards Kia offers Council Bluffs-area services, including:
Kia America, Inc. (KUS) may, from time to time, provide preliminary templates for its authorized dealers ("Dealers") to use for a variety of advertising or marketing purposes ("Templates"). Such Templates are, if provided, for the convenience of Dealers and are intended to facilitate advertising marketing efforts; provided, however, that Dealers are not required to use such Templates, or any part thereof, for advertising or marketing or any other purpose. In the event KUS provides any Templates to Dealers, (a) KUS does not represent or warrant that any such Templates comply with any applicable law, including without limitation any advertising laws or state regulations, and (b) Dealers are solely responsible for ensuring that the Templates and any use of the Templates for advertising or marketing complies with any and all applicable laws and regulations.
You don't have any saved vehicles!
Look for this link on your favorites:
Once you've saved some vehicles, you can view them here at any time.
Call Now3134 S 9th Street • Council Bluffs, IA 51501
Get DirectionsOpen Today! Sales: 8:30am-6pm
Open Today! Service: 7am-6pm
Open Today! Parts: 7am-5:30pm


text:
> Knowledgebase > FAQ > Viewing Article
How does renewal work; will you charge me automatically?
Automatic payments
First and foremost: we never charge your Credit Card or Paypal account automatically. We do not store customer's payment information, therefore we are technically unable to auto-charge you. All payments to Bandwagonhost are user-initiated, without exception.
Renewal status explanation
Unless you cancel the renewal, our system will automatically send a new invoice on the renewal date. If you have funds in the account, they will be used automatically to pay the invoice.
If your account does not have enough credit balance to cover the invoice, we will notify you and you will have 7 days to pay the due invoice. After 7 days of non-payment the service will be suspended.
To verify whether or not renewal is active please use this link: https://bandwagonhost.com/clientarea.php?action=products
If Renewal is set to ON, it means that a new invoice for the next period will be issued on renewal date.
If Renewal is set to OFF, it means that the VPS will be terminated (cancelled) automatically on renewal date and no invoices/warnings will be sent out.
How to restore service renewal
If you had previously cancelled the renewal and would like us to reactivate it, please follow these steps:
1. In most cases Renewal can be enabled by the customer by following this link: https://bandwagonhost.com/clientarea.php?action=products (click Restore link)
2. If Restore link is not available please create a ticket
Can I renew service ahead of time?
We are unable to offer renewals ahead of time. If you plan to leave for a long period of time and would like services to be renewed without having to make manual payments, you can simply add funds to your account. The funds will be used automatically to pay any future invoices. If you'd like to add funds to your account please click here.
Can I change my billing term (renewal cycle)?
Of course, please check out the following article: https://bandwagonhost.com/knowledgebase/22/How-to-change-billing-cycle.html
VPS Features
All VPS come with the following:
- PPP and VPN support (tun/tap)
- Instant RDNS setup
- Full root access
- Powered by KiwiVM
Satisfaction Guarantee
Thinking about switching to us?
- Instant setup
- 99% uptime guarantee
- Anytime cancellation
- 30-day money back guarantee


text:
An intelligently designed, interactive learning environment is often referred to as the child's Third Teacher. We differentiate ourselves by integrating the learning spaces with the curriculum, this interface of our stimulating Learning Design Spaces ensures a greater cognitive bandwidth and applied conceptual understanding and learning.
Design Concept:
The concept behind the campus planning is based on the age old Indian concept of a "Gurukul". The buildings are spatially arranged around a central congregation space with a carnival theme for the younger children in the primary school and a high tech or contemporary theme for the older children in the secondary school. The courtyards form the heart of the campus. The landscape and outdoor sports facilities have been seamlessly integrated with the building thus creating a symbiotic relationship between the two. The design encourages and fosters an understanding and love for nature, champions' outdoor play in the courtyard and beyond, and encourages the use of natural materials to harmonize the connection with the environment, helping children become better stewards of the earth. Areas of the structure vary in shape and size to create a 'village of forms' that provides great architectural scale and experiential variety, along with intuitive way finding and flawless interaction between programs and activities. The design seeks to encourage and inspire children to think about their role in the community and the world.
Studio M:
Since Studio M (based in Chicago, USA) joined the GDS family, they are part of this journey with the determination to create innovative 21st-century learning spaces and encourage students, educators, parents, designers, and the media to share ideas. Our collective objective was to design schools to support a variety of learning styles, enhance learning by integrating technology, support a small, neighbourhood school culture, create schools as centres of community, engage the public in the planning process, make healthy, comfortable, and flexible learning spaces, and to consider non-traditional options for school facilities and classrooms.


text:
Course / Workshop on Resilience of Infrastructures June 24, 2015
Lecturers: Aleksandar S. Jovanovic, Cameron MacKenzie, Helmut Wenzel
Modern society depends more and more on the effective and reliable operations of infrastructure systems (infrastructures), such as those delivering energy, water, sanitation, shelter, information, emergency response and other critical services. These, on the other side, need to be assessed on their resilience in case of large and/or cascading events. Whilst most people fully agree about the importance of resilience, common agreement about the resilience assessment approaches, methods and tools is still an issue.
The course will look at these issues primary from the engineer point of view and, after preparing the overview and information about the state-of-the-art focus on some practical examples highlighting aspects of the practical quantitative assessment of resilience.
Course Units
Target Attendees
Engineers, managers at all levels, inspectors, legislators and other professionals dealing with risk, safety and resilience of infrastructures as well as students, will profit from the course by:
Venue address:


text:
We are committed to providing the highest standards in relation to the safeguarding of the children and young people entrusted to our care.
We support all students by:
- Providing a caring, safe, and positive environment within the school
- Encouraging communication, self-esteem, and self-assertiveness
- Effectively tackling bullying and harassment
- Promoting all aspects of the Equality Act 2010
- Training all staff in Child Protection and Safeguarding to the appropriate level and ensuring they are aware of safeguarding procedures within our school
- Providing the infrastructure for effective reporting, record keeping, and working in partnership
We expect all staff and visitors to our school to behave in a way which ensures our children are safeguarded at all times. This includes a duty for any safeguarding concerns to be reported to the Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL) or Deputy Designated Safeguarding Lead (DDSL).


text:
Free Stuff: Mondo's 'Batman: Mask Of The Phantasm' 20th Anniversary Poster Signed by Bruce Timm & Dana Delany
Two Christmases ago marked the 20th anniversary Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, a film that's arguably its creators' most perfect expression of their enduringly influential animated vision of DC Comics' dark knight — a vision that many believe is the most perfect expression of Batman in any medium. While Warner Bros. has yet to announce any plans for a high definition reissue or any other offerings connected with the special occasion, the film fanatics at Mondo — purveyors of extremely fine illustrated film posters and other cinematic celebrations — decided to honor Mask of the Phantasm with an anniversary event in connection with the famous Alamo Drafthouse of Austin, Texas, where they screened the film in its original 35mm format for a sold-out house. As always, Mondo came prepared with an extremely limited quantities of an original screen-printed poster, which serves as an update of the film's original theatrical one-sheet and an homage to the aesthetic legacy of co-directors Bruce Timm and Eric Radomski's work. Naturally, being a Mondo release, the poster is no longer on sale except on the collectors' market, where it fetches hundreds.
Now, ComicsAlliance was in attendance that night in Austin, and we were lucky enough to procure a variant edition of the poster -- illustrated by Phantom City Creative -- to offer to our readers in this giveaway contest. It took us quite a while, but we finally tracked down Timm as well as Andrea Beaumont herself, actor Dana Delany, who graciously signed the poster in the presence of former CA editor Andy Khouri, making this a truly one of a kind collectible.
Winning is easy: just demonstrate how ferociously loyal a ComicsAlliance readers you are by using the contest widget above. Here are the official rules.