text:
A University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee student died in a campus pool Monday while he and his roommate were practicing swimming for an aquatics test for the U.S. Air Force, officials said.
According to a report by the Milwaukee County medical examiner's office:
Connor J. Driscoll, 19, of Madison and his roommate, Samuel Hemes, arrived at the UWM Klotsche Center pool on N. Downer Ave. about 7:30 a.m. Monday.
Driscoll wanted to practice for an aquatics test for the U.S. Air Force ahead of an entrance exam this week. Hemes and Driscoll, who were the only swimmers in the pool, began swimming laps in different lanes.
"(Driscoll) swam underwater the entire 25 yards and his roommate waited until he was done with that, (Driscoll) turned to the roommate and gave him the 'thumbs up,' " the report said. "At that point the roommate began swimming laps in his lane. At the same time, (Driscoll), at the deep end of the pool (14 feet) went underwater and was doing flips and somersaults, according to the lifeguard. He came up for air and then appeared to sink; there was no struggle."
The lifeguard noticed and immediately called for her partner, according to the report.
Lifeguards jumped into the water and Hemes helped them pull Driscoll out of the pool and attempted CPR. A medical team from the Milwaukee Fire Department also tried to revive Driscoll with a defibrillator.
The roommate told investigators that Driscoll was "an extremely skilled swimmer," the report said.
Authorities are investigating, but their initial belief was that the death is related to a health condition and not suspicious, UWM spokesman Tom Luljak said Monday.
According to the medical examiner's report, Driscoll's father said his son had never had any medical problems.
Driscoll's doctor said Driscoll was diagnosed with a bleeding disorder and sleep disorder in 2007. A cardiac test showed nothing abnormal in 2010.
Hemes told investigators that three to four weeks ago Driscoll had carried another person on his back, piggyback style, and tripped and fell to the curb, striking his face, but had not sought medical help at the time.
An autopsy is scheduled for Tuesday.
Luljak said Driscoll was a sophomore in the College of Letters and Science with an undeclared major and was living off-campus with two roommates.
He was working at the Aloft Hotel in Milwaukee and had just helped his father with a home rehab project on Sunday.


text:
FRONTLINE reports from Iraq on the miscalculations and mistakes behind the brutal rise of ISIS.
ISIS' growing foothold in Afghanistan is captured on film.
Get Our Newsletter
Follow Us
As a staff writer at The New Yorker and professor of journalism at the University of California, Berkeley, Danner writes about foreign affairs and American politics. In this interview he describes terrorism as "the new communism," because "it is being used as an ideological justification for use of U.S. power in the world." Danner says that Sept. 11 provided the Bush administration with a justification to pursue a doctrine of overwhelming power, but notes that this ideology existed prior to the attacks. He also criticizes the administration for being "coy" about its decision to go to war against Iraq, because it has not fully explained to the American public the broader intentions of some officials to remake the Middle East, nor explained the potential costs of such a plan. This interview was conducted on Jan. 16, 2003.
Can you talk about the pull on Bush, assuming he's at the center of the unilaterals and the multilaterals? What's the debate going on around him?
All of us are in the position of trying to figure out where the president's brain is, essentially, on foreign policy. He came to office as a governor with no foreign policy experience. More than that, he had hardly traveled abroad. So the first couple of years in this administration, as far as foreign policy, had been very much the education of George W. Bush.
There are figures within the administration whose views are very well known. They've been publicly articulated. Indeed, they've used public platforms very much to push their views within the administration. I'm talking about the so-called ideologues. Some of them are in the Defense Department: Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and others. ...
Those gentlemen are thought to advance a very ambitious view of the Middle East, and of what the war policy on Iraq could achieve in the Middle East -- that is, this would lead to a remaking of the Middle East. Democracy in Iraq would then put pressure on the mullahs in Iran, would promote some kind of democratic outcome there, would isolate the Syrians, would lead to a cutoff of Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and eventually lead to a Middle East peace agreement on the Israelis' terms.
Whether those sorts of arguments, those broad ideological ones, actually have captured the mind of George W. Bush, I think, is very much to be doubted. Whether Dick Cheney, however strongly he advances a hardline policy on Iraq, really believes in that kind of ambitious approach to the Middle East ... is also, I think, completely unclear. It's quite possible that, when you talk about hardline views, that you have people who want to get in and get out, and who see this as a matter of simply of regime change -- literally, of removing Saddam.
You have other people who have much broader views about the future of the Middle East, almost evangelical views. They're ideologues in a very large sense.
In that context, it's hard to know where George Bush fits in. I think the bottom line is that George W. Bush is a politician. He will listen, as many presidents do, to differing views within his administration. If he goes forward and makes war in Iraq, and invades and occupies the country, I think a lot of how the policy evolves will have to do with the kind of obstacles they encounter, and the political effect of those obstacles. The idea that this is fully foreign policy now, and someone like Paul Wolfowitz is in ideological control, I think, is very much a mistaken idea, because in the end, it will be the political leadership that makes the decisions. Those will be political decisions, based on how things go.
What do you mean by "political decisions?"
By "political decisions," I mean, in the end, this war will have to be salable to the American people, as all foreign policy is in this country. In that sense, we still are in the shadow of the Vietnam syndrome. Even though George W. Bush's father declared after the Gulf War that we have buried the Vietnam syndrome in the sands of the Persian Gulf, that syndrome still looms over us.
There will be great concern on the part of this administration to maintain the president's popularity, as all administrations want to do. There will be great concern if the war, in taking a very long time, or in raising a lot of complications that weren't there before, seems to risk the political future of George W. Bush. So in that sense, the obstacles, the unforeseen, will dominate how this policy evolves if war comes, in my view. ...
There's a difference of opinion. The old-style realists seem to be lined up with Powell. How do we assume that works on the president? How is it laid out? We've got opposing forces pulling on him. From what we've seen so far with the directions that have been taken, what have we learned?
You can identify two strains in this administration, one of which would be the Reaganites -- officials who take a somewhat ideological and almost evangelical view of the world. They would be officials who descend from Ronald Reagan's "Evil Empire" speech -- the notion that American power should be used to change the world, not simply to manage it. This itself dates back to people who backed a policy of rollback in the 1950s -- Douglas MacArthur, for example, Dulles to some extent. That's one group. You find many of them in positions in the civilian leadership in the Pentagon.
The other group would be officials who really follow in the path of Bush I, of the president's father. These are pragmatists, so-called realists. They believe that foreign policy is the patient management of alliances, competitions and, to some extent, conflict. You manage, you take things slowly, you use your allies, bring your power to bear in all sorts of ways, not simply military power. You recognize that the world, as it is, is a difficult place, where there will be evil people as well as allies, that those evil people cannot simply be destroyed, that in many cases they have to be lived with. Indeed, this strain, I would say, would be very uncomfortable with the words "good and evil."
Insofar as you recognize that there are two strains, we have a struggle going on here for George Bush's attention and for his allegiance, so far, the one thing we can say is that on one day the Reaganites win, on another day the Bush I faction wins. At least in the early prosecution of the Iraq policy, from the fall of 2002 onward, it seems to be that Secretary of State Colin Powell -- who is certainly, within the administration, a leader of those you can identify in the descendancy from Bush I, from the president's father -- has been winning this fight. He won the fight to put the policy in the United Nations. He won the fight to seek, struggle for, and finally achieve a resolution in the United Nations based on inspections. He won the fight essentially to try to manage this problem. So there is an early victory for him.
On the other hand, one could say that the national security document itself was a victory for the Reaganite forces, and above all, Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense. That document suggested that the United States must, above all, maintain preponderant power. This is a notion that was brought up in the early 1990s, in an earlier Defense Department document. But at the time that was leaked, it caused an enormous stir, and indeed had to be withdrawn. In the atmosphere after 9/11, this kind of thinking seemed a lot more plausible, a lot more congenial, and especially, a lot more publicly acceptable to the American people. ...
What's the connection to the war on terror?
The connection between the National Security [Strategy], as stated by the administration, and the war on terrorism is somewhat tenuous, which is a problem that the administration has been dealing with publicly ever since they announced, in preliminary terms, in the State of the Union address in January 2002, that Iraq would be next. George Bush didn't actually say this. But he did introduce the phrase "axis of evil," which was essentially an introduction to the next phase of the war on terror, which would be taking on these states, and particularly Iraq. ...
The problem is the connection between the axis of evil and the war on terror, though it is made again and again in Bush's speeches, has never been completely convincing to a lot of people in this country, which is why you've had attempts, particularly coming out of Donald Rumsfeld's Defense Department, to actually connect Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein. Those attempts have essentially met with ridicule. They've never been accepted. President Bush has had a problem again and again in justifying why an attack on Iraq is called for now, and why it wouldn't, as many critics assert, distract from the war on terror. There is, to my mind, no essential connection between the two.
What you're saying, in some way, is that 9/11 opened the door to a doctrine that had been thought about for a long time, which had nothing to do with the war on terrorism, but had a bigger-picture story of what this administration was all about, or a part of this administration was all about. Explain that to me. How did 9/11 create the new doctrine?
The attack of Sept. 11 made it possible for the administration to safely introduce a doctrine of overwhelming conventional power, and also to state, very clearly, that it was in the vital interest of the United States to prevent certain states, many other states, from obtaining weapons of mass destruction. The president says, again and again, "We must prevent the worst states from obtaining the worst weapons," the assumption being that, if indeed they obtain them, those weapons might go to terrorists. That was the ostensible connection.
My view is that, to some extent, this was a marriage of convenience between pre-existing ideas about weapons of mass destruction, their ability to deter the United States' conventional power, and the new opportunity presented by the war on terror -- that is, an opportunity to argue to the public that Iraq presented a vital danger to the United States. Why? Because Saddam Hussein might, in the next half-decade or so, obtain a nuclear weapon, and, having obtained it, he might give it to terrorists. [Although] there are many reasons why this is rather implausible as a public argument, it has been rather powerful.
The [2002] State of the Union speech, where [the Bush Doctrine] begins to be defined -- how historic was this? Put this in historical terms. This type of a doctrine, this type of direction in this war -- how radical is this?
It's been clear from the first days after the attacks of 9/11 that the Bush administration has been setting down a rhetorical basis for a new policy. They have succeeded in the time since those attacks in setting, as it were, an ideological flaw under U.S. policy that had really been lacking since 1989, or 1991. You can hear echoes again and again in President Bush's speeches, the speech to the joint session of Congress after the attacks, the State of the Union address -- the "axis of evil" speech, VMI, West Point -- of a vision of the world that is very familiar to American ears. That is, there is "us," and there is "them." There is "good," and there is "evil."
His speeches have divided the world into good and evil in a way that's very reminiscent of President Truman's Truman Doctrine speech in 1947. President Truman said very explicitly that there are two systems in the world today. There is "ours" -- free elections, free rights of assembly and so on, free press -- and there is "theirs" -- government by repression -- and it will be the policy of the United States to support free peoples, wherever they are threatened.
It was an all-embracing, evangelical policy of American power in the world. American power would be used to support ideas, the ideas of freedom, everywhere where they were threatened. ...
Terrorism has become the new communism. Terrorism is being used as an ideological justification for use of U.S. power in the world. That ideological justification was missing in the decade before George Bush came to power. The consequences for Bill Clinton were very clear, very often, in the interventions he tried to make -- Haiti notably, Bosnia -- it was hard to justify why indeed the U.S. had a vital interest in going into these places.
For that reason, the political basis for those interventions was very fragile. George Bush has succeeded in basing U.S. power on a new popular justification. It's a very strong one, but it has its own internal contradictions.
How unusual is it for this administration -- who, during the elections, of course, was seeming to pull back from the world -- that they would be the ones that would bring out this very aggressive series of policies?
It might seem that this aggressive policy coming from the Bush administration was somewhat contradictory. The president, after all, during his election campaign, had talked about a "humble" America. He had used that word several times in his second debate with Al Gore when talking about foreign policy.
In fact, though, if you look at the policy closely, you can see many connections between what they've been saying since 9/11 and what they had set out in the months before and the months since the administration took power. There are a number of themes. The most important, I think, is the notion of overwhelming U.S. power, and a thorough-going policy to prevent any challenges to it.
Connected with that is the necessity of eliminating weapons of mass destruction, the policy of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of states who would, by obtaining those weapons, be able to threaten the United States, or at least prevent the United States from using its power in the world.
So in a sense, the Bush administration took 9/11 as an opportunity to sort of vault its policy up, make it seem more plausible. But it was a policy that really pre-existed those attacks. The change that the attacks brought was that it made it very easy to come out with the policy more explicitly and without criticism.
One of the things you write in your article is that the administration has been "coy" about the decision to go to war with Iraq. What does that mean?
While the administration has said a lot about the threat that Saddam Hussein poses, they've said very little about the intentions of a war against him. And particularly, they've said very little about the broader intentions that some prominent members of the administration clearly hold: that is, broad intentions to remake the Middle East, as it were, a political project that's very ambitious, and that intends to essentially democratize the Middle East, the Arab world.
They've said little about this. They've said little about indeed what an occupation like this -- how much it would cost, how long it would take. In general, they've been focused almost entirely on the threat that Saddam Hussein poses. So mostly this has been an act of public diplomacy in simply supporting the idea of a war, rather than what indeed they're really talking about, which is an invasion, an occupation and a transformation. ...
It's clear from President Bush's public rhetoric thus far that he wants to emphasize the threat, and say absolutely nothing about the costs of the war. He has had many opportunities to talk about the billions of dollars this will cost, the number of years it will take, the difficulty of an occupation, the frustrations of trying to bring democracy to a country that has never had; how this will require sacrifice, both in financial and in human terms. He said almost nothing on any of these subjects. He's preferred to simply focus on the threat, and the notion of regime change.
"Regime change" itself is a phrase. It's like "surgical strike," as we remember from earlier years. That is, it emphasizes the illusion that one can, in some way, change regimes as if you could, you know, change your shirt. You can take one regime, take it out, put another regime in, and everything will be fine.
That will not be the way things happen. But he has chosen to take the short-term goal of trying to build support for a war, and worry about what comes next then. ...
What are the negatives, though, against bringing up this grand strategy? ...
It's clear the reason the administration doesn't bring up the grand strategy of bringing democracy to the Middle East is it's very ambitious; it's controversial, and it will divide Americans. Many Americans, from all we know, think it isn't necessarily the business of the United States to transform the Middle East. They might be willing to pay their tax dollars, and send their young men and women, put them at risk, to protect themselves from danger from a dictator with nuclear weapons, an erratic dictator. [But] they might be much more hesitant to do those things in support of a policy that's meant to transform regimes very far away, whose interest to the United States is obscure, and about whom they know very little.
So it's clear, from the administration's point of view, that those arguments are not necessarily winning arguments. They would probably be divisive. It also should be said that this policy of ambitious democratizing in the Middle East, while clearly dear to the heart of many powerful officials within the administration, is not necessarily the adopted policy of the Bush administration as a whole. Indeed, whether or not they try to follow through on these ambitions, we will only see when the war is fought.
You refer to it as "breathtakingly ambitious." What do you mean?
The policy is breathtakingly ambitious, because it talks about transforming regimes that have been in place, and have been harsh and dictatorial for decades. It talks about transforming a region in which, as you look around from Morocco to Baghdad, certainly the rule is much more the longevity of regimes than it is their proclivity to constant change.
The notion of making democracies out of many of these states is a terribly ambitious one, and it's unclear how it could be effected. Indeed, it's very unclear what the administration has planned for Iraq itself -- a complicated country with serious sectarian problems, with rivalries between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds -- and which has never been governed in any way democratically.
Which leads into the realists' fears about the outcome, and the ramifications, which is quite opposed to the view that you just defined. Can you help us figure that one out? What are the fears of the realists?
I think the fears of the realists over a policy of democratization are several. First, that it's not possible. Iraq, a country that is essentially a patched together country of three provinces of the Ottoman Empire, that has serious sectarian differences, that's been ruled by the minority Sunnis since its beginnings -- that to take that regime and to make a democracy out of it will be difficult, if not impossible. If indeed one seriously wants to accomplish that, it will require an American occupation of indeterminate length, perhaps five or 10 years; and that finally, the risks of that, not to mention the costs, are extraordinary.
The costs would be tens of billions of dollars a year in occupation costs, and possibly the loss of U.S. lives out to 10 years from now. The political costs are perhaps even more serious, which is, in the broad view, the United States is responding to a band of religious fanatics who attacked the country a year and a half ago in the name of destroying U.S.-backed regimes in the Middle East, that is in the name of imposing American imperialism in the Middle East. The U.S. is responding to that by occupying a major Arab country, which seems to be, if you put it in those stark terms, politically not very adroit.
One could see a long occupation in Iraq as being a perfect fundraiser and a perfect political help to Osama bin Laden and others who are sympathetic to his cause. ...
Some people talk about Wolfowitz [in] that first meeting on [Sept.] 15 at Camp David, looking at the horizon of what was in front of us in a very difficult war against small groups, cadres of terrorists all over the world, looking towards Iraq. How did that come into play? Could that have come into play as being a reason for the [National Security Strategy] that came out later and the direction that we took towards Iraq? Why did we turn to state sponsorships so quickly when it seemed that the focus was on terrorists?
There is a sense, when you look at the accounts of the meetings immediately after 9/11, particularly the Camp David meeting that Saturday, that states want to attack states. There is a need for a target less elusive, less difficult, and indeed larger than Al Qaeda. Iraq, in a sense, presented a much more palatable target than Al Qaeda, and indeed than Afghanistan.
We had enormous intelligence on Iraq. We knew where it is. We knew where their weapons were. We had been flying over it for a decade in the north and in the south. We had allies in the north, and the Kurds. More than anything, states like to fight states. Organizations like to have as their antagonists organizations similar to them. We know from the accounts of that meeting that there was a major attempt by Wolfowitz and, to some extent, Rumsfeld, if these accounts are to be believed, to bring Iraq to the forefront in the days immediately after 9/11, even though there was no evidence whatever that we know about that Iraq had anything to do with the attacks. ...
The 90s, Clinton is in power. Can you talk about in any way the debate that went on amongst the Reaganites within that [period]? ... Was there any part of that debate of that period in which one can actually see the [thinking behind] the formulation of the [National Security Strategy]?
Throughout the 90s you can see the efforts of a kind of shadow foreign policy Cabinet, among the officials who eventually took their chairs as senior members of the Bush administration. They spoke out clearly and loudly on issues like, for example, Iraq, and the need to do something immediately about Saddam Hussein. Even more than that, there was an argument made, and repeated and reiterated that military power and state power should not be used for supposed social work. That is, we shouldn't be trying to remake states like Bosnia and using the army for occupation duties; that military power is about war and that the focus of the United States should be on, ironically enough, on large states.
American policy should be focused on Russia and China. We shouldn't be dilly-dallying in places like Rwanda or Somalia, or Bosnia or Kosovo; that this was an unjust use, and a foolish use of American power and that using American forces as constabulary forces, that is as occupiers, as police forces, was a misuse of what the military was for. You can see the outlines very early on of the policy that Bush adopted.
So this "grand strategy," as it's called -- what does it entail in some beliefs in some members of the administration?
When we look at administration policy since 9/11, you can identify probably three phases. The first was the direct attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the escape of Osama bin Laden and the top members of Al Qaeda.
The second was sending counter-insurgency help to Yemen, Philippines, Georgia, to fight the war on terror by aiding allies, allied states, to fight local terrorist groups -- [many of them] allied in one way or another with Al Qaeda.
The third phase is Iraq, and a broader effort to spread democracy through the Middle East, at least in the minds of some administration officials, particularly at the civilian levels of the Defense Department. This will begin with an attack on Iraq, an occupation, a destruction of the present regime, the installation of another regime that will be, in some way, at least it is said, democratic.
That will lead, so the thinking goes, to pressure being placed on neighboring Iran and the theocratic government there. The mullahs, under threat, will increasingly democratize, and the democratic forces in Iran will gain the upper hand.
This will isolate Hezbollah, the terrorist political group in southern Lebanon, which is supported by the Iranian mullahs. It will undermine them and take away a growing threat to Israel. It will also isolate the Syrians. In the end, this process of democratization will lead to, it is hoped, the possibility of a Middle East peace much more on the Israelis' terms. That is, the Palestinians, in effect, their radical forces will be isolated and undermined by the loss of support from the Iranians and from Saddam Hussein, as well.
So this is a very broad, very ambitious policy, at least in the minds of some administration officials.
Some game of chess they're playing.
It's enormously ambitious; it's enormously risky. It relies on a lot of assumptions about what you can do with power. Napoleon said, "You can do everything with a bayonet except sit on it," by which he supposedly meant that you can do a lot of things with military force, but you cannot, in the end, govern with it. You can't create a politics with it.
And this administration believes -- very strongly, it seems -- that military force can be the answer to political problems, and can be the answer to the problem of political modernization which has bedeviled the Middle East for the entire modern period, the entire post-colonial period. They seem to believe -- at least some of them -- that vigorous military action in Iraq will set in train a series of events that will lead to regimes that are more representative, and in the end, less sympathetic to terrorism, that will not be breeding grounds for terrorism, as it were.
So this is their political response to 9/11 in its broadest terms, and it's a very ambitious one. It's also a very, very risky one. ...
As you look at this whole big picture, did we miss anything that you think is important to understand?
When you look at the administration's policy -- particularly the much-ballyhooed National Security [Strategy] -- which talks about preemption, the necessity of maintaining preponderant power, all of these very vivid phrases -- I think it's important to appreciate, not only what is new about that, but what is old. What is old is the notion of the United States as an exceptional power, as the one good power on the scene, the necessity to divide the world into the United States and the good forces, and the rest of the world, which is seen as evil.
This is an administration, which, in some sense, shows great pessimism about the world, a great sense that the world is threatening this country. In that sense, 9/11 came as something of a godsend. Certainly they didn't welcome it. But in an ideological sense, this idea of threat, the necessity to prepare for constant threat, the idea of eliminating threats before they can strike us and, above all, this idea of unilateral strong action, that the most powerful must do all it can to avoid any strictures on its power -- these were elements that preexisted 9/11.
[The events of] 9/11 allowed them to come into force, to come out and take a public role, in a way they never could have otherwise. It's important to see those, I think, as something not entirely new at all. Indeed, those tendencies have a very obvious history in American foreign policy that dates from the Truman Doctrine, and that also dates from the proponents of rollback in the early 1950s, people who thought that the idea of containing communism was profoundly un-American. "We shouldn't be content to let communism exist and wait until it crumbles," which was George Kennan's idea. "We have to go out and destroy communism, roll it back."
These were people like Gen. MacArthur, who tried to do that in the Korean Peninsula, and others, who advocated supporting the Hungarian revolution, for example, in 1956. They believed that the U.S. has to take an active role in pushing freedom forward, and even doing it through the ends of bayonets, through military force.
We see those tendencies in the present administration. They didn't spring whole cloth out of the ground. They have historical roots in American thinking about foreign policy, and American thinking about the country's role in the world. All of this comes from the same well of American exceptionalism.
Their argument would be that it's a very different world since the Soviet Union closed down shop -- that deterrence doesn't work against the enemies that we deal with?
That's right. The notion that deterrence is over fits into the idea of the constant threat. Indeed, this notion of Saddam Hussein -- that if he obtained a nuclear weapon he would be the predominant power in the region, and the U.S. would be able to do nothing to oppose him -- it is, in realistic foreign policy terms, ridiculous. The Israelis have scores of nuclear weapons. The Americans have thousands of them.
However terrible it would be for Saddam to obtain a nuclear weapon -- and it would be terrible -- it isn't altogether clear that this would be the end of the world as we know it. The United States would still have ways to deter him. The one thing that he could do is deter the United States from attacking him, or from overthrowing him, which, to me, is a very important part of their thinking. ...
The way they've so far dealt with the war -- how has it put them in a bind?
Beginning in late August, the Bush political strategy on the war has been consistent and brilliant. Essentially, the president has argued that in order to avert this threat of Iraq without war, we must be prepared for war. We must talk about war; we must send troops to the region; we must do everything up to fighting a war to avert a war.
Politically, both in the domestic sense and the international sense, this has been brilliant, because it's given cover to those, like domestic Democrats facing an election, who didn't want to oppose the president upfront. They were able to argue to their constituents -- and we're talking about every Democrat running, for example, for the Senate, with the exception of Wellstone -- they were able to tell their constituents, "Look, we are casting our vote in support of the president, but also in support of a policy that is our only hope of avoiding war."
Similarly, in the Security Council, eventually the administration was able to impose a point of view that essentially said, "In order to avert a war which we are fully willing to prosecute, you must vote with us to be ready to prosecute a war."
This policy of arguing that, to avert war, you have to prepare for war, be ready for war, and indeed be on the point of making war, has been brilliant politically in bringing along the president's political opponents, both internationally and domestically. It has also put him in something of a box. He indeed will be entirely prepared for war. The only one who will be in a position completely to avert it is Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime itself. It essentially is putting the decision-making power, to some degree, in their hands. It's starting a machine going, and the eventual destination is not entirely in the administration's hands. ...
home · introduction · view program · analyses · interviews · chronology · discussion · readings & links producer's chat · tapes & transcripts · press reaction · credits · privacy policy FRONTLINE home + wgbh + pbsi
white house photo copyright ©alan schein photography/corbis web site copyright 1995-2014 WGBH educational foundation
FRONTLINE on

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Timed for Valentine's Day, the "most romantic web series that will ever be," "Burning Love," has kicked off its second season on Yahoo. Executive co-produced by Ben Stiller, "Burning Love" is a "Bachelor"/"Bachelorette" parody that's a little less dark than The Onion's similarly reality show-skewering "Sex House." The first season starred Ken Marino as fireman Mark Orlando, while this second round stars June Diane Raphael ("NTSF:SD:SUV::") as Fresno dental hygienist/Mark rejectee Julie, who is also looking for true love in the best place possible — on television.
First season cast members Marino, Raphael, Michael Ian Black and Adam Scott are being joined by a crew of familiar faces from "The State," "Party Down" and the general comedy scene this season, including Jerry O'Connell, Michael Cera, Adam Brody, Colin Hanks, Joe Lo Truglio, Ryan Hansen, Rob Huebel, Paul Scheer, Nick Kroll, Nick Thune, Martin Starr and Kumail Nanjiani. The first two episodes are live below, with new episodes going up every Thursday and Friday starting today at screen.yahoo.com/burning-love.


text:
- Description
This Salamander ESP 75 CPV twin electronic sensor pump is designed specifically for one/two bathroom systems where there is a need to boost tank fed hot and cold supplies to baths, basins or showers which may be in negative and/or positive head.
The Salamander ESPCPV twin pumps are the first intelligent whole house and shower booster to combine positive and negative head system applications in one pump – with a built in pressure vessel and electronic system protection.
This extremely quiet high performance centrifugal pump is continuously rated.
All salamander pumps are fitted with a mains lead and an appropriately fused moulded 3 pin plug.
If you require assistance with selecting the correct pump for your needs please contact the Tapstore pump advice line on 0843 658 0062.
- Additional Information
Additional Information
Guarantee 2 Years Connections No Installation Guide Download Installation Instructions Here Manufacturer Salamander Performance Very Quiet Pressure Rating 2.2 bar Pump Dimensions 350.45mm (l) x 231.45mm (w) x 184.62mm (h) Specification Sheet Download Pump Specification Here -
Feefo Reviews - Average 0% (0 reviews)
This product has no reviews yet. - Reviews


text:
Hello, I wanted to send a note of appreciation to you for the effort, knowledge and professionalism of one of your employees. I had been looking for a very particular sound in a large china cymbal for quite some time. I narrowed the search down to the Meinl Byzance Tradional China line, as with all cymbals each one's sound will vary slightly from one to the other based on the weight and hammering. I spoke with Danny about this and he brought one in to try. That one was a little darker sounding than I wanted. Danny spoke to the Meinl representative and two more were sent over for a sound comparison. The effort paid off, I found exactly what I was looking for. Danny kept a positive attitude and was extremely helpful in finding me the right cymbal. It is a real pleasure dealing with knowledgeable professional people like this. Thank You, Ron Shea
8 & 10 Inch China
8 & 10 Inch China
Filter Results
- Brand
- Condition
Can't Decide?
We're here to help!
Alto Music is home to the most knowledgeable sales team in the world.
Give us a call today at
(845) 692-6922


text:
Buying into the idea of volunteering your skills as you job hunt? Keep these tips in mind:
1. Choose wisely. Make sure the job fits you. "Really scrutinize what you are getting into," says Jeff Foley, national workforce coordinator for the AARP Foundation Virtual Job Coach Program. "It will make a difference in your ability to do that job."
2. Find your passion. Try to find a cause to which you have a personal connection, Schmitt says. "You'll be much more productive, and feel much better at the end of the day."
3. Be at your best. Don't slack off because you're working for free. In fact, work even harder as a volunteer, Talley says. "This is what you're saying you want to do. People can see that you like what you're doing."
4. Don't assume they'll hire you. Take a volunteer job purely for the experience. If you're offered a staff position, then it's icing on the cake, right? Volunteering "may not be a means to employment," Winter says. "But a lot of people want to make good on a promise to give back. Some are looking to network and meet people."
5. Try professional organizations. Search for volunteer positions with organizations such as Taproot, Probono.net or Catchafire.org. But also shop job search engines such as Indeed.com for pro bono work.
6. Smile, be positive. Make them wish they could afford to pay you. "It's all about the attitude that people bring to the job," Talley says. "We lose sight of that. People want to be around folks they don't have to worry about."
You May Also Like
- Looking for a part-time job?
- Learn more about the AARP Driver Safety program and online course
- Shopping for health insurance? The health insurance marketplace is now open
Join AARP Now - Receive access to exclusive info, benefits, and discounts
- « Previous
- 1
- 2


text:
Comment Re:What The Fuck are they talking about? (Score 3, Informative) 335
Wen the ad was first published 24 hours ago, http://www.caseydonovan.com/ was directed to a page very similar to what's now at http://www.caseydonovan.com/home.html.
There was no splash page, that must be new, and probably added after Telstra panicked and started hassling the owner of Casey "dead gay porn star" Donovan.


text:
Do you want to make Ohio.com your homepage?
XOffensive tackle Joe Thomas and return man/wide receiver Josh Cribbs have been named to NFL Network's list of the top 100 active players.
Thomas and Cribbs were the only members of the Browns to make the list. Current NFL players voted to determine who made the cut.
Thomas' standing as the 43rd-ranked player was revealed tonight on NFL Network's "The Top 100: Players of 2011." Cribbs' place at No. 84 was unveiled last month.
Thomas, who has earned a Pro Bowl selection in each of his four NFL seasons, is one of 13 offensive linemen who cracked the top 100. Cribbs, who was named to the Pro Bowl in 2007 and 2009, is one of 18 wide receivers on the list, though he obviously made the cut because of his reputation as an elite kick returner.
Browns running back Peyton Hillis did not make the top 100. Hillis, who was also denied a Pro Bowl bid despite his stellar 2010 season, finished 11th in the league in rushing yards (1,177) and tied for sixth in rushing touchdowns (11). He also had 61 catches for 477 yards and two touchdowns.


text: HOUSTON, TX – FEBRUARY 17: Recording Artists, 2 Chainz and Drake, smile during 2013 NBA All-Star Game on February 17, 2013 at Toyota Center in Houston, Texas. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. Mandatory Copyright Notice: Copyright 2013 NBAE (Photo by Bruce Yeung/NBAE via Getty Images)


text:
Two Car Crash on Brannon Stand and Flowers Chapel
Matt BosterViewed: 5118
Posted by: Matt Boster
Date: Jan 30 2014 7:10 PM
Dothan Fire and Dothan Police are on scene of a wreck on Brannon Stand and Flowers Chapel one person were injured and taken to the hospital by ambulance. The area where the wreck is located is closed until all can be cleaned up. Dothan Police Traffic Division is handling the investigation into the cause of the crash.
<- back


text:
ACParadise Network:
American Cosplay Paradise
American Cosplay Experience
American Cosplay Snapshots
Cosplayer TotallyToastyAri > Costume of Pirate Lady (Original: Historical / Renaissance)
- Most Recent Photo
- Series
- Original: Historical / Renaissance
- Character
- Pirate Lady
- Year Completed:
- Construction Difficulty:
- Very Easy
This Costume has been retired
About this Costume
- Construction Details:
Made entirely from scraps in my fabric bins! Wore it to the Renaissance Faire in August 2008!
- Personal Thoughts:
- The back of the top turned out to be my favorite part! I also loved making the boot cuffs!
Add a Comment


text:
Bark, Barque (?), n. [F. barque, fr. Sp. or It. barca, fr. LL. barca for barica. See Barge.]
Formerly, any small sailing vessel, as a pinnace, fishing smack, etc.; also, a rowing boat; a barge. Now applied poetically to a sailing vessel or boat of any kind.
2. Naut.
A three-masted vessel, having her foremast and mainmast squarerigged, and her mizzenmast schooner-rigged.
© Webster 1913.
Barque (?), n.
Same as 3d Bark, n.
Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.
Sign up
Need help? email@example.com


text:
India Calling Info
international dialing information
Quick LinksWorld Times
Call India from... |
India's Telecom Circles / Service AreasFor a variety of purposes, India's telephony regulators have divided the country up into a number of regions, called 'Telecom Circles' or 'Telecom Service Areas'. You will see reference to these telecom circles in various situations. For example: when looking for telephone numbers or telephone directories you will generally need to search by telecom circle. Or when reviewing telephone service plans and coverage areas for the telephone companies, you will see these may vary by telecom circle. Also, if a telephone company wants to operate in a specific telecom circle, they must purchase a license for that circle, usually through an auction process. At present, there are 22 Telecom Circles or Service Areas. They are broken down into 4 groups: 'metro circles' and then 'A', 'B', and 'C' circles. The 'metro' circles cover very dense population centers in the very largest Indian cities: Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai. The 'A', 'B', and 'C' circles cover various geographic territories of varying population sizes. 'A' circles are the largest in terms of population coverage. 'C' circles contain the smallest population. The borders of the circles roughly correspond to the borders of the Indian states -- but there are exceptions. For instance, some smaller states are folded into larger neighboring states, some other smaller states are combined together to form one circle, etc. Note that as of a July, 2007 memo from the India Department of Telecommunications, 'telecom circles' are now officially called 'telecom service areas'. Nevertheless, the terminology 'telecom circles' is still widely used.
India's Telecom Circles / Telecom Service AreasHere is a list of India's 22 telecom circles, including Metro, A, B, and C category service areas. Officially, telecom circles are now called telecom 'service areas', but both terms used to mean the same thing. The circles listed below are the officially recognized circles as stated by the India Department of Telecommunications. India telephone companies may or may not conform to this exact usage. India Telecom Circles-- click headers to sort by column --
Population coverage is estimated in Millions. * The Tamil Nadu circle now includes the Chennai Metro Circle. Until 2007, the Chennai Metro Circle was broken out separately. Coverage Areas for India's Telecom CirclesThe coverage of India's 22 telecom circles mostly corresponds to the borders of the India states. However, there are numerous and varying types of exceptions. The listings below break out the coverage areas for each telecom circle showing areas that are both included and excluded from the circle. Metro Circles'Metro' circles are broken out only for the countries 3 largest cities. Until fairly recently, there were actually 4 metro circles, including a 4th for Chennai. But then a few years ago, the Chennai metro was merged into the Tamil Nadu telecom circle, leaving the current 3.
Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Chennai Metro used to be a fourth Metro Circle, but it was folded into Tamil Nadu Circle in 2007. Nonetheless, the Chennai Metro is still often referred to and data continues to be tracked on it's performance. A Circles'A' circles cover areas that contain one or more very large cities, e.g., Bangalore in Karnataka, Chennai in Tamil Nadu.
Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: * Tamil Nadu telecom circle now includes the Chennai Metro area which used to be a separate standalone telecom circle. That said, Chennai Metro Telecom Circle continues to be used as a subcircle within Tamil Nadu. When used, it refers to the areas served by Chennai Telephones, the Maraimalai Nagar Export Promotion Zone (MPEZ), and the Minzur and Mahabalipuram Exchanges B Circles'B' circles cover areas that contain mid-sized urban areas and larger towns.
Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: C Circles'C' circles cover areas that are largely rural.
Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: Includes: Excludes: --------------------- Source: India Department of Telecommunications (pdf) Maps of India's Telecom CirclesHere are several maps of India's telecom circles from authoritative sources. Telecom Circles AbbreviationsAbbreviations are commonly used to refer to India's telecom circles. Most often the official ISO or UN location code for the state or city is used, but other variations are also fairly common: Telecom Circle Abbreviations-- click headers to sort by column --
Note: The Chennai Metro is technically no longer a separate telecom circle having been folded into the Tamil Nadu Circle in 2007. However, it is still often referred to. Additional Telecom Circles InformationFor more information on India's telecom circles / service areas, please visit these sources:
India telephone companiesIndia telecom industry |
★ 2017 Editor's Choice ★Our 2017 Editor's Choice is Pingo. Our in-depth analysis shows that Pingo delivers superior value. ☆ Pingo $10 bonus ☆
Recommended Calling CardsWe recommend these calling cards for making Recommended VoIP ProvidersWe recommend these VoIP providers for |


text:
Drug Rehabilitation in Dadeville MO
Throughout the years, psychologists and professionals have really been able to produce all sorts of treatment for drug dependency. Physicians have created various alternatives, that choosing one drug reliance treatment method can likely take a while. Being addicted to drugs need to never ever be seen as a small problem. Substance dependency is serious. Those who are addicted to things most notably need a great deal of attention, as it is a really fragile situation to be in. Physicians have been able to develop all sorts of treatments that make the procedure less difficult and frightening for clients to attain the life you deserve.
The idea of entering drug rehabilitation is an intimidating one. They are ruining your life and family. Rehabilitation from addictions can be frightening. You require to be aware that help is the biggest present you can offer yourself to eliminate problems. You need to believe this is the only choice you have if you truly wish to live a happy, healthy life, or just desire to live and not die. Whether your problem is drugs, speed, liquor or a mix of the 3, the medical professionals in any of the hundreds of treatment centers throughout the nation will help you beat your drug dependency.
Finding The Best Price For A Drug And Alcohol Rehab Centers
The most intense, and crucial aspect on the roadway to healing is the release of the drugs from your body. If you were to try cleansing on your own, you would be grabbing the first needle or pipe you might discover in less than 24 hours, blowing your opportunities of healing out of the water. You experience psychological withdrawal signs such as depression, stress and anxiety, state of mind swings and suicidal thoughts. Physically you vomit, experience chills, cramps, muscle pains and sleeplessness. When you have the courage to check out a drug treatment center, the medical personnel monitors you 24 hours throughout this tough time, alleviating these symptoms with medication till the process ends. You won't regret drug rehab. Armed with this knowledge you can find the best drug rehab in the surrounding 65635 area.
A behavioral treatment essentially assists patients to take part in the whole recovery process. It modifies the patients behaviors and attitudes connected to their drug abuse to enhance their opportunities of a much healthier way of life. These treatments may even boost the precision of medications that assist people to remain on their treatment. Treatments for substance addiction can only be delivered through different settings with various behavioral methods. This might be the most important thing when choosing your drug and alcohol rehab centers in Dadeville.
Selecting A High Quality Inpatient Drug Rehab
The story behind your addiction is unique. The personnel at your chosen treatment facility understands this. Their goal is to see you prosper, not only during your stay with them, but as soon as you leave the center. Although there are many substance rehabilitations offered to choose between, no two are exactly the same. Becoming sober will not make you robotic. Remember to pick the best drug rehab center near you, today.
The finest drug rehab centers are understood for their efficiency and provision of individually sessions of therapy where the sessions are targeted at working on the client's psychiatric problems. In addition, such sessions can likewise consist of lessons on yoga and meditation in addition to addition access to psychiatric experts. Such benefits offered by the numerous rehab centers make picking fairly challenging. There are some personal factors to consider when selecting a drug rehabilitation. These are just a few things too keep in mind when choosing your drug rehab facility for you.
How To Find The Perfect Rehab Programs
You can not stress enough the importance substance rehabilitation plays in the function of someones recovery. The assistance, understanding and therapy you receive while under the thoughtful care of the staff is the only chance you can have to break the ties that bind you. The benefits surpass the drawbacks. Excellent luck overcoming addiction, and We wish you a healthy and speedy recovery.
Apart from a track record of treating their patients with success through its ads in your area this need to not be the only meter stick in choosing. Calling individuals who have gotten treatment or are informed about the efficiency of a rehabilitation center is also a beneficial way to properly choose. Lastly, think about that a smaller sized rehabilitation center likewise has a higher probability for an one-on-one treatment which is important in the later of phases of treatment.


text:
TORONTO - The former chief financial officer of Sino-Forest Corp. will pay a total of $6.3 million and testify against other former executives of the China-based forestry company which collapsed under allegations of fraud.
Under a settlement Monday approved by the Ontario Securities Commission, David Horsley agreed to pay $5.6 million to settle class action lawsuits in Ontario and the U.S. and another $700,000 to the provincial regulator to offset investigative costs.
Horsley was accused of failing to ensure the company complied with securities law and acting contrary to the public interest.
OSC vice-chair James Turner said the chief financial officer is an important gatekeeper in ensuring the integrity of reporting in the financial markets.
"In this case, I think it's fair to say Mr. Horsley substantially failed in his role as CFO," Turner said Monday in approving the provincial commission's portion of the settlement.
"He failed investors and he failed our capital markets."
In addition to the financial penalties, the OSC banned Horsley for life from being a corporate director and officer.
Sino-Forest was once the most valuable forestry company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, but collapsed after public allegations of fraud by investment firm Muddy Waters Research prompted investigations by the OSC and police.
Investors lost billions of dollars when the company's stock plunged in 2011 and Sino-Forest ended up being taken over by its creditors in a restructuring under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act.
Turner said the $5.6 million to settle the lawsuits was an essential component of his decision to approve the deal.
"This settlement would not be acceptable to me but for the making of that payment," Turner said.
"In effect, the payment into court is comparable to the administrative penalties that I would impose in this matter — had it come before me. So we end up on the same position through this mechanism."
Horsley was not accused of fraud and Turner said there were several factors that were in his favour that helped soften the commission's penalties against him.
He said there's no evidence that Horsley was dishonest, reckless or wilfully blind, but he admitted to being unaware of significant problems that should have been communicated to investors.
Turner also noted that Horsley's co-operation in settling the case will reduce the commission's future costs by avoiding a full-blown hearing. In addition, he has agreed to testify at hearings for other former Sino-Forest senior executives that are scheduled to begin in September.
Five other executives — Allen Chan, Albert Ip, Alfred C.T. Hung, George Ho and Simon Yeung — are accused of lying to investors and misleading investigators by engaging in a "complex fraud scheme to inflate the assets and revenue of Sino-Forest," according to OSC documents.
OSC lawyer Hugh Craig suggested Horsley was unsuited to be the CFO of a company like Sino-Forest, which had most of its operations in China even though it was listed on the TSX and did much of its business in Chinese — which Horsley didn't read or understand.
In addition, Horsley had no prior experience in a forestry company or in a multinational company with significant operations in a foreign jurisdiction.
"He admits that he didn't have what he needed to have to do the job and placed undue reliance on the representations made to him by members of the overseas management," Craig said.
Horsley didn't speak at the hearing but his lawyer, Peter Wardle, said that his client's "sin" was one of "omission" rather than "commission" of a crime.
"No evidence has emerged from staff's lengthy investigation that David Horsley was involved in, or had any knowledge, of any fraudulent scheme carried out by others at Sino-Forest," Wardle said.
Horsley stepped down as chief financial officer at Sino-Forest in April 2012 and parted ways with the company in September 2012. He had joined the company in October 2005, prior to the rapid rise in the value of the company's stock prior to the allegations against it.
From June 2006 to March 2011, Sino-Forest stock soared by 340 per cent — from $5.75 per share to $25.30.
— Follow @DavidPaddon on Twitter.


text:
expand Menu
English–US & Canada
1 Room: 1 Adult, /Room 0 Children/Room
Rooms & Guests
(Age-based rates may be available)
Hotels For…
Deals & Packages
Get our best rate available when you book directly on Marriott.com
See brand exclusions and guarantee terms.
View and Manage Reservations
Find specific reservations, including those made by phone or when not signed in.
Sign In to My Account
Sign In to view your current reservations.
Remember me What's this?
Remember me
Your Stay: 1 Rooms, 1 Guests/room Edit
Marriott Rewards® members get our lowest rates when they book direct. See Details
Map View
Fairfield Inn & Suites Arlington Near Six Flags
DFW Airport Marriott South
Courtyard Dallas Arlington South
Residence Inn Dallas DFW Airport South/Irving
Fairfield Inn & Suites Dallas DFW Airport South/Irving
Arlington TX
PointSavers offers up to 33% in point savings, depending on the hotel category and number of nights requested. This hotel is offering Seasonal Awards, so you can use fewer points when you book a stay during these dates.
2500 East Lamar Blvd Arlington, Texas 76006
0.6 miles from Six Flags Over Texas
View Rates
4151 Centreport Drive Fort Worth, Texas 76155
4.8 miles from Six Flags Over Texas
New Lobby
711 Highlander Boulevard Arlington, Texas 76015
5.6 miles from Six Flags Over Texas
2200 Valley View Lane Irving, Texas 75062
6.4 miles from Six Flags Over Texas
4210 West Airport Freeway Irving, Texas 75062
6.6 miles from Six Flags Over Texas
Nights 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
My dates are flexible
Rewards number
(proof of eligibility required at check-in)
About special rates
Backed by our Best Rate Guarantee
See details
I am currently staying at the Key Bridge Marriott. I ordered dessert tonight,... --vojimen
Join the conversation


text:
Astell&Kern AKR01 Balanced Armature In-Ear Monitors
"Astell & Kern AKR01 Jimmy Moon at Astell & Kern was kind enough to lend me a pair of AKR01's for review. Big thanks to him. Anyways, review ahead! What are they: I notice that I haven't seen coverage for these at all, and I wanted to tell you what they are about. The AKR01 is based off the Final Audio Heaven IV design, and is voiced to work well with..." --wolfetan44
• Pro quality sound reproduction • Acoustically-tuned and balanced high end 12.5mm Neodymium driver • Vertical earphone design delivers a high-definition sound stage • Noise-isolating technology further isolates outside noise and enables deep punchy bass for the ultimate audio experience • Copper-Clad Aluminum Wire (CCAW) voice coils for accurate and linear...
Spider TinyEar
" **** Please note that I received these from Spider Cable for free [ http://www.head-fi.org/t/564608/spider-gives-away-20pcs-tinyear-micro-driver-iem ] I've owned these IEMs for about a week now, and in that time I've used them exclusively and quite often. I don't have any IEMs in this price range (~$40) other than my Meelec M6 (which I haven't used in months because they..." --earthpeople


text:
Wheat production may not be a farmer's bread-and-butter crop in Shelby County, but thanks to an almost non-existent winter and a mild spring, most farmers in the county not only have enjoyed a slightly larger yield but also already have harvested their crops.
If you currently subscribe or have subscribed in the past to the Sentinel-News, then simply find your account number on your mailing label and enter it below.
Click the question mark below to see where your account ID appears on your mailing label.
If you are new to the award winning Sentinel-News and wish to get a subscription or simply gain access to our online content then please enter your ZIP code below and continue to setup your account.
ZIP Code: | |


text:
If You Hate Chick-fil-A's Anti-Equality Stance, You'll Love Starbucks
"Not every decision is an economic decision." –Howard Schultz
At last week's annual shareholders meeting, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz had a testy exchange with an investor who questioned whether it was a wise decision to support marriage equality. The shareholder argued the company's stance prompted a customer boycott, which led to disappointing earnings.
Apparently a 38 percent return isn't good enough for Tom Strobhar.
How Schultz handled Strobhar's question is nothing short of ballsy, and amazing, and his return was a thunderous applause when he said this:
"The lens we use to make decisions is the lens of our people. We want to embrace diversity … If you feel, respectfully, that you can get a higher return than the 38 percent you got last year, it's a free country. You can sell your shares of Starbucks and buy shares in another company. Thank you very much."
Watch the video, courtesy of Towleroad, and check out the rousing shareholder acceptance of his take-no-guff message:
So that's what being a good corporate citizen is like, eh? Strange!
Starbucks, it should be noted however, is not the anti-Chick-fil-A, as many are saying on Twitter. This is, in actuality, the same exact thing Chick-fil-A is doing, only on the other side of the issue. Both companies are putting money where their mouths are — only one, though, will be on the right side of history.
Drink up, folks.
• 12-Year-Old Asks Rhode Island to 'Choose Love' & Marriage Equality
• Hillary Clinton Comes Out For More Than Just Marriage Equality


text:
osx 10.8.5, max 6.15 32bit
I tried to figure out what you're talking about, but I've got no clue. I do not know where you found this example but it would be helpful to link to it or tell us where to find it.
Also, if you really think somethings broken, it is probably helpful to post your computer specs/Max version.
Good luck!
Oh! I found the example now! Sorry!
Max became non-responsive the first two times I tried to load it. The third time I loaded it it seemed to work perfectly, I got output of a wireframe samurai.
Here's my specs:
Windows 8.1 Max 6.1.3 32 bit
but can you fade between 2 different animations with your wireframe samurai without make him disappearing?
hi tobias. i believe this is a result of a past upgrade where the library we use for loading 3d models (assimp) changed the way they load certain mesh formats (specifically the ogre .mesh.xml format).
unfortunately, both the assimp library and the mesh format specification are out of our hands, so there's little we can do to rectify this.
however, model-animation blending should still work for other mesh file formats. if you can provide an example where this is not the case, please pass along.
Tobias: On second thought, no, the animations don't seem to work correctly for me. As you say, the samurai seems to disappear when an animation is meant to play.
Log in to reply
Let us tell you about notable Max projects, obscure facts, and creative media artists of all kinds.


text:
May 11, 2013, 04:32 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2013
Posts: 127
Muzzle brake question
Hi everyone, quick easy question really. Is a muzzle break looked at as seriously as a suppressor
Or is it just a simple add on to and existing firearm....There quite costly too for what you get. Are they worth even bothering with. Id like to take the suppressor off my 308 for some certain aspects when I'm shooting and either fit a muzzle break or just a cap that screws on the end to cover over the ugly thread that's there. Jamie |
May 12, 2013, 12:33 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2012
Location: Western WA
Posts: 144
I would only attach a brake if it was needed for recoil reduction. Gases vented to the side make the firearm seem louder to the observers to the side of the shooter.
In the USA a brake is nothing like a silencer (suppressor). I would just use a thread protector.
Lark is free! Last edited by Lark; May 13, 2013 at 02:06 PM. |
May 13, 2013, 04:13 AM | #3 |
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 44
A muzzle brake (b-r-a-k-e) is just another option to screw onto the end of your barrel. They are noisy, and can be annoying, but there are no legal implications to having one in a free state.
May 13, 2013, 07:03 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 28, 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,230
Generally all shooting ranges require hearing protection. So having a muzzle brake on a rifle becomes non issue.
And shooting without hearing protection is not a good way to shoot. |
May 13, 2013, 07:55 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 10,435
I'd bet that someone could make a "muzzle brake" that looks just like the inside of a silencer. Without the outer tube, there would be no noise reduction, so it might be legal. Or, it might not be. Just wondering when someone will push the limits of what is/is not a muzzle brake.
May 13, 2013, 09:57 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2013
Posts: 127
Thanks for replys, Lark I think I will just fit a thread protector. It sounds like it would be the wise option for pocket and rifle
May 15, 2013, 08:58 PM | #7 |
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,708
A silencer (suppressor) is not legally defined by appearance but by the fact that it reduces the sound level. A brake is not a suppressor, or vice versa, but a device that does both would legally be a suppressor, not a brake.
Jim K |
May 16, 2013, 10:56 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 12,625
It seems like the OP may be confusing flash suppressor/muzzle brakes with sound suppressors/silencers. Many folks just say brake or suppressor, and it is hard to know what they are referring to unless you are following the conversation closely.
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs. But what do I know? Summit Arms Services Taylor Machine |
May 17, 2013, 08:12 AM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 10,435
May 17, 2013, 09:36 AM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 10,589
As mentioned, muzzle brakes ARE NOT a controlled accessory, there are no hoops to go through to buy, install or use.
As too their usefulness and do they work. I have a few and I'd say yes, they are useful and they do work. I started out putting one on my 300 WM 1000 yard rifle. It reduces the recoil quite a bit, allowing my to enjoy my shooting a lot more. Also, and more important they reduce muzzle whip allowing for faster follow up shoots and allow you to better observe your hits or misses at distance. After the results I put one on my 375 H&H, which makes it a pleasure to shoot. I have a mold where I can shoot jacketed/cast bullets meaning I can shoot my 375 fairly cheap, only paying for primers and powder. I can shoot more, get more practice which makes me shoot it better. Without the brake my shooting would be limited because I'm a wimp when it comes to recoil. I shoot for fun, not to bet beat up by my rifles, and again, quick follow up shots. Kind of handy after spending hard funds for an elk hunt. It could mean a down elk or following an blood trail all night. I'm putting one on a light weight 308 I built for my grandson, meaning he can use hunting loads instead of light Trail Boss loads, he can learn to shoot instead of learning to flinch. Yeah they make noise, more so then without, but I don't shoot, and wont let any one else shoot on my range without proper ear protection. Also I don't shoot on a crowded range so I don't disturb anyone else. Before one condemns brakes, I'd like to see them try them. If anyone is close to Newcastle Wyoming, give me a shout, I'll take you to the range and you can shoot my rifles with and without a brake and see for yourself. This isn't an advertisement for muzzle brakes, I don't sell them, I don't make them and I don't install them on anyone's rifle but my own. I just want my fellow shooters to enjoy their shooting more, and I believe brakes will allow that.
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Oct '78 Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
May 17, 2013, 10:11 AM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
Re: Muzzle brake question
May 17, 2013, 01:01 PM | #12 |
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,708
Anyone can "push the limits" of legality provided that he doesn't mind stainless steel toilets and very thin mattresses. The bars are a bit inhibiting, though.
Jim K |
May 17, 2013, 01:13 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 10,435
May 17, 2013, 04:21 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2013
Posts: 127
Well kraigwy your post is pretty interesting really. I'm totally torn now
A muzzle brake would give the rifle a cool look to which is what I was looking for plus the added benefit of it's purpose. I've never seen one on a rifle before far less fired one. Long run I was hoping for the muzzle break and a new black synthetic stock to try and achieve the Tactical look to the rifle. I've looked at a few different muzzle breaks and there shape varies quite considerably....isn't there a standard shape that does the job or are they all up to the task...?? I'd think there would be some out there that are just not practical and you might get some useless artifact if your not sure what your looking at ?? What about these ?? http://shop.grizzlygunworks.com/Tikk...m1plqscsfapp06 Jamie Last edited by Scottish Highlander; May 17, 2013 at 04:23 PM. Reason: adding link |
May 23, 2013, 05:54 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2011
Location: Central KY
Posts: 536
Jamie, they absolutely work. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=523434
I've been to the range three times with mine installed so far, its pretty sweet having a near recoil-less rifle. The grizzly looks like most others; I see no reason why it wouldn't work.
~Mark NRA fo Life Member |
May 25, 2013, 02:42 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2008
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 1,396
If you're going to add a suppressor anyway, consider a muzzle brake that is used for a suppressor mount.
For instance, the Ops Inc 12th model 30 cal suppressor mounts on an Ops Inc Muzzle Brake. Surefire also has muzzle devices that mount their suppressors. Just a thought. |
June 26, 2013, 08:59 PM | #17 |
Junior member
Join Date: June 24, 2013
Posts: 208
I've never understood the usefulness(from a military perspective) of a muzzle break. I mean a 3 foot muzzle flash will draw just as much fire as a 10 foot muzzle flash; Right?
Oh hey this is cool, they gave me the option to decide whether or not I want to reply to a thread that's more than 33 days old. |
June 26, 2013, 09:42 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 1,037
A FLASH SUPRESSOR is what reduces that visible flash you are talking about. Also they seem to be more effective than you imply but still less effective than a sound suppressor which eliminates muzzle flash and reduces muzzle report significantly, while also reducing recoil. I also believe one of the reasons for having flash suppressors on military weapons is to protect the crown from damage, which it does quite well. |
June 26, 2013, 09:46 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
Re: Muzzle brake question
June 27, 2013, 12:33 AM | #20 | |
Junior member
Join Date: June 24, 2013
Posts: 208
The device on the .50 cal Barret both suppresses the flash and reduces recoil; Doesn't it? |
June 27, 2013, 12:06 PM | #21 |
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 23,708
It's brake, darn it! It slows the recoil like the brake on a car slows the car. It doesn't break the rifle!!!
Jim K |
June 27, 2013, 03:16 PM | #22 |
Join Date: November 29, 2012
Posts: 16
Anything that reduces the sound by 3 dB or more is considered a suppressor and must be registered.
June 27, 2013, 04:36 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Posts: 1,950
One of the most commonly used brakes is the Russian Ak 74.
When I built my Saiga 74, I put one on just to complete the look. I went with a real Bulgarian "zig-zag" 74 brake, not the cheap Tapco version, which is said to be worthless However, even though the 5.45 has little recoil to begin with, I have been amazed at how effective this brake is. When I shoot the rifle even moderately quickly, I can feel the muzzle being held down...and the recoil is nonexistent.
The past is gone...the future may never happen. Be Here Now. Last edited by amd6547; June 27, 2013 at 04:59 PM. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |


text:
Di Fino: These guys putting on quite an act
Plenty of early surprise Fantasy performers -- both good and bad -- to discuss at length. Our Nando Di Fino puts a theatrical spin on some not-so-obvious buy-low candidates.
Not every bit of baseball advice can be neatly packaged and explained using just numbers and MLB history.
Sometimes, Fantasy advice can be given best by drawing a parallel to something outside of sports. Fantasy is, after all, a game. And games are supposed to be fun.
In our annual lists of most popular and best team names, for instance, names are drawn from TV shows, movies and comic books. So it makes sense to take a quick peek outside of baseball to bring in some startingly similar parallels between pop culture figures and some of the game's more intriguing players.
Chipper Jones as Darth Vader ... Jones, who turned 40 on Tuesday, has already made it known that this will be his last season in the major leagues, making 2012 a farewell tour for the third baseman. While Jones has been all but written off by many owners on CBSSports.com (he's owned in 41 percent of leagues, started in 18), there's a case to be made that he has some Fantasy value left.
Consider his 2012 season. As of Thursday morning, Jones has a .278 batting average, with three home runs and 10 RBI. His career batting average is .304, although he has dipped to the .270 range over the past four seasons. Jones hasn't played in 162 games in his career; in fact, beginning in 1995, Jones has averaged about 140 games per season. His power has also dropped off -- with an average of 15 home runs over the last three years. But Jones does have some good left. He can lift a Fantasy team's average. He will supply some power. He's not a viable starting third basemen in mixed leagues with less than 14 teams, but he is a very solid bench player; someone you can plug in when a player like Alex Rodriguez or Kevin Youkilis hits the disabled list. Add the fact that Jones will be motivated to put up a good performance in his last year in the majors on top of all this, and it wouldn't be out of hte question to expect a 20 home run/.290 season.
This isn't meant to be a fiery defense of Chipper Jones -- like Vader, he has done some damage to good people (missed myriad games with injury/blown up Alderann, for instance) over the years. But he shouldn't be fully written off as hopeless just yet.
Jamie Moyer as Thornton Mellon ... In Back to School, Rodney Dangerfield's millionaire tycoon returned to college just for the heck of it. As old as he was, Mellon showed that he could still hang with a group of kids many years his junior. He passed all his exams, he threw bigger parties, re-did the dorms, and won a diving meet with a mix of creativity and natural talent. Jamie Moyer may not be the most exciting pitcher in the majors, but he is smart and has enough finesse to win games. He won't miss many bats, but in his return from Tommy John surgery this season, he built on his recent success as an ageless wonder and has put up a 2.28 ERA in four starts.
Moyer is currently owned in six percent of leagues and is started in just three. While he won't keep up the 2.28 ERA, it's hard to forget that, from 1996 to 2003, he rattled off seven seasons of sub-4.00 ERAs. His career ERA is 4.22, with a 1.32 WHIP, but he's such an aberration, that may not even be the most relevant bit of information with him. He's 49 years old and, in his only win so far this season, none of his pitches topped 79 mph on the gun. But he told the Washington Post's Cindy Boren that he feels like he has a new arm. "It's like when you buy something new," Moyer said. "It's that kind of feeling." Combine the "new arm" with several years of success and the wisdom and craftiness that comes with having faced hundreds of batters over the years, and Moyer could pitch his way -- slowly and methodically -- into eventual mixed league relevance.
Albert Pujols as Daenerys Targaryen ... So far in the second season of HBO's Game of Thrones, Daenerys Targaryen, and her slow-moving plotline, have been fairly absent. This is fairly disappointing, as, up to this point, she had been an All-Star of sorts -- showing an ability to withstand fire, serving as "mother" to three baby dragons, and learning a new language while leading the Dothraki people. She's currently in a desert; hungry, thirsty, and losing followers. She is, in effect, Albert Pujols -- in a strange land and simply adjusting.
He has yet to hit a home run this season, and his batting average is an almost-unbelievably low .222. His Average Draft Position was 2. He went no lower than sixth in our drafts. And, now, Milwaukee backup catcher George Kottaras has twice as many runs batted in (8-4), and is batting over .100 points higher.
But Fantasy Baseball isn't about now. It's about a month from now. It's about the last four years. Pujols has never hit fewer than 32 home runs in his career. "Fine," you might say, " Adam Dunn had a similar claim before last year, then switched leagues and saw his power drop." But the difference is that Dunn has never finished a season with an average above .267 or an OBP above .417. Pujols has never hit below .299, and his career OBP is .419.
We have the luxury of knowing what happens to Targaryen thanks to the novels that provide the source material for the HBO show; all we can go on with Pujols is this: his past suggests that he will have success. There is no real precedence to point to for this situation, outside of the tried-but-true mantra of, "don't panic." Dunn's situation doesn't apply. Prince Fielder success in Detroit provides a stark contrast to the, "he switched leagues and it takes time to adjust," argument. Pujols didn't just sign a playing contract with the Angels -- once his contract expires, he has a 10-year personal services contract with the team. He will be, in effect, the face of the franchise for a long time. It's not time to worry. If anything, it's time to act and see if a frustrated Pujols owner is ready to part with the slugger for a discount. Because as unbelievable as it is to see him be homerless through 72 at-bats, it's equally believable to be reading a story a month from now with the headline, "Pujols Homers In Ninth Straight Game." You'll want him on your team once he, figuratively, releases his dragons on everyone else.
Jack Hannahan and Aramis Ramirez as Dudley Moore and Kirk Cameron in Like Father Like Son ... In the 1987 classic, Like Father Like Son , Dudley Moore and Kirk Cameron switch bodies after Cameron's character drinks a brain-switching formula. After 90 minutes of hilarity, the two switch back. Order is restored.
Aramis Ramirez is currently batting .191 with seven runs batted in for the Brewers. Fellow third baseman Jack Hannahan , meanwhile, is hitting .333 with 13 RBI for the Indians. This wasn't supposed to happen. Hannahan had a .218 average with nine home runs in the closest he's ever come to playing a full season (436 at-bats in 2008 with Oakland). Hannahan is climbing up the Most Added charts in our Roster Trends section, jumping from six percent ownership to 16. Ramirez, meanwhile, has seen his start percentage slide from 94 percent at the start of the season to 77 percent for next week's lineups.
Hannahan is a career .235 batter; Ramirez has a career .283 average. Hannahan has 25 career home runs; Ramirez has hit 25 home runs (or more) in nine separate seasons. It's not a declining skills thing -- Hannahan is 32; Ramirez is 33.
To be a true parallel to the movie, both men have to learn something -- they don't return to their bodies as the same people they were before. Hannahan likely has more confidence being given the every-day job in Cleveland. While he won't hit .333 for the entire season, seeing Hannahan with 12 home runs and a .275 average by season's end isn't entirely out of the question (although a sticky situation may arise if he slumps and Lonnie Chisenhall -- currently batting .317 with four homers in Triple-A -- continues his torrid pace). Ramirez, meanwhile, may just "learn" that he's not a great April player -- his numbers are markedly worse in April than they are in any other month, to the tune of a .256 batting average.
Roy Oswalt as Winston Zeddemore in Ghostbusters ... In Ghostbusters, the team of ghost hunters are run ragged, putting an ad out for reinforcement help. Winston Zeddemore shows up one day and is hired. It's not a perfect parallel, as Roy Oswalt has expereince in his field, while Zeddemore was somewhat unqualified and just wanted a steady paycheck, but the idea is the same. Some team, on the precipice of greatness, is going to need one more piece to really make a push at the end. Zeddemore was a more-than-capable replacement; Oswalt could be far more.
Oswalt is currently owned in 20 percent of leagues, a number that should rise as rumors of Oswalt talking to teams or working out for teams pop up with more frequency in the next month or two. Oswalt has had a season ERA above 4.00 just once (2009 with Houston when he battled finger, wrist, and back problems), and carries a career 1.19 WHIP. He strikes out less than a batter per inning, but can help the right team at the right time. From a Fantasy perspective, a fresh Oswalt should provide a low ERA and WHIP -- assuming the back problems are behind him -- as well as a better chance at wins thanks, obviously, to being part of a better team. As more injuries mount up, the ownership percentages for Oswalt will climb. There may not be much time left to sneak him onto a roster before whispers get louder and owners scramble to pick him up.
Stay in touch with the most passionate Fantasy staff in the business by following us on Twitter @CBSFantasyBB or Nando Di Fino at @NandoCBS . You can also send our staff an e-mail at email@example.com .
Batting orders bump values
Chris Towers looks at nine newsworthy lineup decisions that could impact Fantasy players this...
Familia suspension Fantasy fallout
Jeurys Familia will miss the first 15 games of the season after being suspended. Chris Towers...
Is Diaz worth the leap of faith?
Why is everyone else so down on Cardinals shortstop Aledmys Diaz? Chris Towers tries to figure...
Under-radar spring developments
Matt Harvey, Greg Bird and Pablo Sandoval are three players whose spring performances you've...
Deep Sleepers from all 30 teams
Heath Cummings digs deep to find a deep sleeper on every team with an ADP outside of the top...
Podcast: Grab DeShields, Ryu
Rangers outfielder Delino Deshields is blazing this spring, and Hyun-Jin Ryu is in the Dodgers...


text:
Redirected from Dodge Rating
this wiki
The subject of this article was removed from World of Warcraft after the Warlords of Draenor opened the Dark Portal.
Dodge is a form of melee mitigation where the entire melee swing is avoided. Dodge is a passive ability possessed by all players for all classes and races. However this stat is the most important to players fulfilling a tanking role. Only close range melee attacks could be dodged; a ranged attack or a spell cannot be dodged. Players can only dodge attacks if they are facing their opponent, however a mob can dodge attacks that are from behind. Incapacitated targets (stunned for example) cannot dodge.
There are several ways that dodge is modified. You can increase you chance to dodge by increasing your dodge rating, defense, or agility which will all increase your effective chance to dodge or dodge percent(%). You can decrease your chance to be dodged with expertise. Expertise is only modified from expertise rating, some talents (such as Combat Expertise), and some passive racial traits for certain melee weapon types. Your chance to dodge a hit as well as have your hits be dodged is affected by the level of your opponent. Different classes and talent specializations will also vary the amount of dodge a player has.
Removal with Warlords of Draenor Edit
Dodge remains as a game mechanic for hit mitigation, but was removed as a stat bonus for items with the Warlords of Draenor expansion.
Formulas Edit
Class | Lv80 Rd | Base Dodge% |
Warrior | 84.74576271 | 3.66400 |
Paladin | 59.88023952 | 3.49430 |
Hunter | 86.20689655 | -4.08730 |
Rogue | 47.84688995 | 2.09570 |
Priest | 59.88023952 | 3.41780 |
Death knight | 84.74576271 | 3.66400 |
Shaman | 59.88023952 | 2.10800 |
Mage | 58.82352941 | 3.65870 |
Warlock | 59.88023952 | 2.42110 |
Druid | 47.84688995 | 5.60970 |
The amount of dodge you have is affected by your class, level, talents, agility, dodge rating, defense rating, and defense skill.
Dodge generally goes into two pools that are added together: undiminished and diminished dodge. Your undiminished dodge includes your class's base dodge, dodge from any talents (such as Anticipation), and the dodge your receive from your base agility.
During this section, a level 80 protection paladin with 400/400 defense skill will be used to demonstrate the formulas. Because the example is a paladin, b has the value of 3.2685, t is 5 from 5/5 Anticipation talents, Ab is 1.7664, and d was 14.3295. These sum to 24.36% which matches the dodge found on the character screen. Additional discussion about dodge from agility and diminishing returns will be explained below.
Dodge from agility Edit
Agility generates chance to dodge (dodge %). For level 80s, you can simply use the Rd value from the table above to find the rate. Note that the base agility (agility from your level and race) plus any agility from talents is undiminished. Agility from your gear and buffs will fall into the pool of diminished dodge. From the game interface, you can easily see what these two numbers are. Mouse over agility in the character window and the white number is your undiminished agility (this will include your talents) and the green number, if there is one, is the additional agility which will contribute dodge with diminishing returns.
Following our paladin example again, the paladin has a base agility of 92 and 22 additional agility from the [Frosthide Leg Armor] leatherworking enchantment. 92 at a rate of 52.083333 for paladins results in 1.7664% dodge from base agility (Ab). The additional 22 agility from gear adds 0.4224% dodge (Au), but will be subject to diminishing returns later on in the calculation.
Dodge from defense Edit
Defense skill, similar to weapon skill, is learned from attacking mobs. If your character is level 80 and 400/400 defense skill, your dodge is not modified. However, if your defense skill is not maxxed yet, your Ab calculation actually needs to take this into account.
"l" is your player level, and Fs is your defense skill. Following our paladin example again, this modification comes to zero because 80 * 5 = 400.
Defense rating, the defense from your gear and enchantments, also contributes dodge into the diminishing returns pool (Fu). First convert your defense rating to defense skill. At level 80, this is 4.92 for all classes (Rf). It's important that you floor the defense skill before continuing with the calculation. From your defense skill, you can calculated the undiminished dodge to add to the pool.
Following the example paladin again, she has 707 defense rating, divided by 4.92 and floored is 143 defense skill. (Note that defense skill accrued from defense rating is not affected by diminishing returns. Diminishing returns only applies to the additional dodge, parry, miss, and block chance from the defense skill.) This defense skill multiplied by 0.04 equals another 5.72% dodge added to the diminishing returns pool.
Dodge rating Edit
Dodge rating is the final source of dodge chance, and all of this chance goes into the diminishing returns pool (u). Like defense, it converts at a rate of 45.25 (Rd) for level 80s of all classes.
- NOTE: The example paladin calculations use the pre-3.2.0 dodge conversion of 39.348, rather than the new 45.25 conversion.
Again following the paladin example, the paladin has a dodge rating of 402. Divided by 39.348 this becomes 10.21% to add to the pool.
Diminishing returns Edit
The final step to solving d from the original equation is diminishing returns. Now we can total the pool that came from all three sources of dodge impacted by diminishing returns: agility from gear, defense rating, and dodge rating.
For our example paladin, this is 0.4224 + 5.72 + 10.21 to equal 16.35% of undiminished dodge. Now we apply the diminishing returns formula to calculate d.
Cd is the cap for dodge, and k is a constant, and these both vary per class. Using our example paladin, Cd is 88.129021 and k is 0.9560 for paladins. Calculate the equation and the result should is 14.32% of dodge as expected.
Abilities Edit
There are many class abilities that modify dodge or are related to dodging. Abilities that are learned through talents are listed in the talents section above.
Ability | Class | Tree | Ranks | Description |
Army of the Dead | Death Kight | Unholy | 1 | Summons an entire legion of Ghouls to fight for the Death Knight. The Ghouls will swarm the area, taunting and fighting anything they can. While channeling Army of the Dead, the Death Knight takes less damage equal to his Dodge plus Parry chance. |
Evasion | Rogue | Combat | 2 | Increases the rogue's Dodge chance by 50% and reduces the chance ranged attacks hit the rogue by 25%. Lasts 15 sec. |
Overpower | Warrior | Arms | 1 | Instantly overpower the enemy, causing weapon damage. Only useable after the target Dodges. The Overpower cannot be blocked, Dodged or parried. |
Revenge | Warrior | Protection | 9 | Instantly counterattack an enemy for (1454 + AP * 0.207) to (1776 + AP * 0.207) damage. Revenge is only usable after the warrior blocks, Dodges or parries an attack. |
Rune Strike | Death Knight | Frost | 1 | Strike the target for 150% weapon damage plus (150 * AP * 10 / 10000). Only usable after the Death Knight dodges or parries. Can't be Dodged, blocked, or parried. This attack causes a high amount of threat. |
Talents Edit
These are the talents that modify dodge or are related to dodging.
Talent | Class | Tree | Ranks | Description |
Anticipation | Shaman | Enhancement | 3 | Increases your chance to Dodge by an additional 3%, and reduces the duration of all Disarm effects used against you by 50%. This does not stack with other Disarm duration reducing effects. |
Catlike Reflexes | Hunter | Beast Mastery | 3 | Increases your chance to Dodge by 3% and your pet's chance to Dodge by an additional 9%. |
Counterattack | Hunter | Survival | 6 | A strike that becomes active after parrying an opponent's attack. This attack deals (AP * 0.2 + 342) damage and immobilizes the target for 5 sec. Counterattack cannot be blocked, Dodged, or parried. |
Feral Swiftness | Druid | Feral | 2 | Increases your movement speed by 30% in Cat Form and increases your chance to Dodge while in Cat Form, Bear Form and Dire Bear Form by 4%. |
Ghostly Strike | Rogue | Subtlety | 1 | A strike that deals 125% weapon damage and increases your chance to Dodge by 15% for 7 sec. Awards 1 combo point. |
Improved Defensive Stance | Warrior | Protection | 3 | While in Defensive Stance all spell damage is reduced by 6% and when you Block, Parry or Dodge an attack you have a 100% chance to become Enraged, increasing Physical damage caused by 10% for 12 sec. |
Lightning Reflexes | Rogue | Combat | 3 | Increases your Dodge chance by 6% and gives you 10% melee haste. |
Natural Reaction | Druid | Feral | 3 | Increases your Dodge while in Bear Form or Dire Bear Form by 6%, and you regenerate 3 rage every time you Dodge while in Bear Form or Dire Bear Form. |
Surprise Attacks | Rogue | Combat | 1 | Your finishing moves can no longer be Dodged, and the damage dealt by your Sinister Strike, Backstab, Shiv, Hemorrhage and Gouge abilities is increased by 10%. |
Turn the Tables | Rogue | Assassination | 3 | Whenever anyone in your party or raid blocks, Dodges, or parries an attack your chance to critically hit with all combo moves is increased by 6% for 8 sec. |
Unfair Advantage | Rogue | Combat | 2 | Whenever you Dodge an attack you gain an Unfair Advantage, striking back for 100% of your main hand weapon's damage. This cannot occur more than once per second. |
Weapon Mastery | Warrior | Arms | 2 | Reduces the chance for your attacks to be Dodged by 2% and reduces the duration of all Disarm effects used against you by 50%. This does not stack with other Disarm duration reducing effects. |
Enchants Edit
This is a listing of enchantments that provide dodge. For a complete list of all enchantments, see the enchantments by slot article.
Trinkets Edit
This is a listing of high level trinkets that provide a large amount of dodge rating. A complete list of all dodge trinkets can be found here.
Item | iLevel | Level | Instance | Mode | Details | Dodge | Use |
[Heart of Iron] | 226 | 80 | Ulduar | Heroic | Ignis the Furnace Master | - | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 432 for 20 sec. (2 Min Cooldown) |
[The General's Heart] | 226 | 80 | Ulduar | Heroic | General Vezax | 107 | |
[Furnace Stone] | 219 | 80 | Ulduar | Normal | Ignis the Furnace Master | 105 | |
[Defender's Code] | 213 | 80 | Naxxramas | Heroic | Zone | - | Use: Increases Dodge by 455 for 20 sec. (2 Min Cooldown) |
[Valor Medal of the First War] | 200 | 80 | Naxxramas | Normal | 40 | 84 | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 335 for 20 sec. (2 Min Cooldown) |
[Figurine - Monarch Crab] | 200 | 75 | - | - | Jewelcrafting (400) | - | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 300 for 10 sec. (1 Min Cooldown) |
[Indestructible Alchemist's Stone] | 200 | 75 | - | - | Alchemy (400) | 50 | |
[Shadowmoon Insignia] | 141 | 70 | Black Temple | - | Gurtogg Bloodboil | 32 | |
[Figurine - Empyrean Tortoise] | 125 | 70 | - | - | Jewelcrafting (375) | - | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 165 for 20 sec. (2 Min Cooldown) |
[Commendation of Kael'thas] | 115 | 70 | Magister's Terrace | Heroic | Priestess Delrissa | - | Equip: Melee attacks which reduce you below 35% health cause you to gain 152 Dodge rating for 10 sec. Cannot occur more than once every 30 sec. |
[Moroes' Lucky Pocket Watch] | 115 | 70 | Karazhan | - | Moroes | 38 | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 300 for 10 sec. (2 Min Cooldown) |
[Figurine - Dawnstone Crab] | 115 | 70 | - | - | Jewelcrafting (370) | - | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 125 for 20 sec. (2 Min Cooldown) |
[Charm of Alacrity] | 93 | 1 | - | - | [58] Voidwalkers Gone Wild | - | Use: Increases Dodge rating by 192 for 10 sec. (1 Min Cooldown) |
[Vigilance Charm] | 62 | 57 | Dire Maul | - | Immol'thar | 24 |
Notes Edit
- Greg "Ghostcrawler" Street, the Lead System Designer, posted about the upcoming changes in Patch 3.2.0 on the official forums. It was in response to some carefully researched numbers showing how overall avoidance was being lowered, and disproportionately to various tank classes:
This hurts druids slightly more than other tanks, but the emphasis is on "slightly." This is not the big druid nerf that some forum posters have predicted. We will continue to evaluate tank survivability and threat generation based on PTR tests with " Patchwerk" to decide if druids need to be nerfed or DKs buffed or look at Prot warrior dps or anything else.
This is also not the big avoidance "come to Naaru" that some posters predicted. Overall, we think avoidance is too high and the game would work better with lower tank avoidance, but suddenly dropping everyone's avoidance by 20 or 30% would be a very big change with many ramifications for healing and gear among other things. It would also feel like a big nerf to the many players who didn't understand why it would be better for the game in the long term. But I still expect it is coming at some point.Patch changes Edit
- Patch 6.0.1 (24-Apr-2014): Removed as a gear stat.
- Patch 3.2.0 (04-Aug-2009):
- The amount of agility required per percentage of dodge has been increased by 15%. This change required recalibrating the amount of dodge a player has with 0 agility by a slight amount as well, so all players will see their dodge percentage vary a small amount.
- The amount of dodge rating required per percentage of dodge has been increased by 15%. This is before diminishing returns. Combined with other changes, this makes dodge rating and parry rating equally potent before diminishing returns apply.
- Patch 1.3.0 (07-Mar-2005): Every time a creature Dodges, it will report a Dodge. We will no longer translate a creature's Dodge of a rear attack to a "Miss."
See also Edit
- Combat
- Combat rating system
- miss, evade, parry, block, absorb, and immune: Other ways to avoid damage.
External links Edit


text:
RBS fines for Libor to be 'substantial'
10 January 2013 Last updated at 22:17 GMT
Two senior executives at the Royal Bank of Scotland may be asked to step down following the rigging of a key lending rate.
RBS is also likely to face fines and penalties of hundreds of millions of pound for its involvement in the Libor scandal.
Robert Peston reports.