text:
The Freedom in the World survey provides an annual evaluation of the state of global freedom as experienced by individuals. The survey measures freedom—the opportunity to act spontaneously in a variety of fields outside the control of the government and other centers of potential domination—according to two broad categories: political rights and civil liberties. Political rights enable people to participate freely in the political process, including the right to vote freely for distinct alternatives in legitimate elections, compete for public office, join political parties and organizations, and elect representatives who have a decisive impact on public policies and are accountable to the electorate. Civil liberties allow for the freedoms of expression and belief, associational and organizational rights, rule of law, and personal autonomy without interference from the state.
Freedom House does not maintain a culture-bound view of freedom. The methodology of the survey is grounded in basic standards of political rights and civil liberties, derived in large measure from relevant portions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These standards apply to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development. The survey operates from the assumption that freedom for all peoples is best achieved in liberal democratic societies.
The survey does not rate governments or government performance per se, but rather the real-world rights and social freedoms enjoyed by individuals. Freedoms can be affected by state actions, as well as by non-state actors, including insurgents and other armed groups. Thus, the survey ratings generally reflect the interplay of a variety of actors, both governmental and nongovernmental.
The survey includes both analytical reports and numerical ratings for 193 countries and 15 select territories1. Each country and territory report includes an overview section, which provides historical background and a brief description of the year's major developments, as well as a section summarizing the current state of political rights and civil liberties. In addition, each country and territory is assigned a numerical rating—on a scale of 1 to7—for political rights and an analogous rating for civil liberties; a rating of 1 indicates the highest degree of freedom and 7 the least amount of freedom. These ratings, calculated based on the methodological process described below, determine whether a country is classified as Free, Partly Free, or Not Free by the survey.
The survey findings are reached after a multi-layered process of analysis and evaluation by a team of regional experts and scholars (see below). Although there is an element of subjectivity inherent in the survey findings, the ratings process emphasizes intellectual rigor and balanced and unbiased judgments.
History of the Survey
Freedom House's first year-end reviews of freedom began in the 1950s as the Balance Sheet of Freedom. This modest report provided assessments of political trends and their implications for individual freedom. In 1972, Freedom House launched a new, more comprehensive annual study of freedom called The Comparative Study of Freedom. Raymond Gastil, a Harvard-trained specialist in regional studies from the University of Washington at Seattle, developed the survey's methodology, which assigned political rights and civil liberties ratings to 151 countries and 45 territories and—based on these ratings—categorized them as Free, Partly Free, or Not Free. The findings appeared each year in Freedom House's Freedom at Issue bimonthly journal (later titled Freedom Review). The survey first appeared in book form in 1978 under the title Freedom in the World and included short, explanatory narratives for each country and territory rated in the study, as well as a series of essays by leading scholars on related issues. Freedom in the World continued to be produced by Gastil until 1989, when a larger team of in-house survey analysts was established. In the mid 1990s, the expansion of Freedom in the World's country and territory narratives demanded the hiring of outside analysts—a group of regional experts from the academic, media, and human rights communities. The survey has continued to grow in size and scope; the 2007 edition is the most exhaustive in the Freedom in the World's 35-year tenure.
Research and Ratings Review Process
This year's survey covers developments from December 1, 2005, through December 31, 2006, in 193 countries and 15 territories. The research and ratings process involved 29 analysts and 16 senior-level academic advisors—the largest number to date. The 10 members of the core research team headquartered in New York, along with 19 outside consultant analysts, prepared the country and territory reports. The analysts used a broad range of sources of information—including foreign and domestic news reports, academic analyses, nongovernmental organizations, think tanks, individual professional contacts, and visits to the region—in preparing the reports.
The country and territory ratings were proposed by the analyst responsible for each related report. The ratings were reviewed individually and on a comparative basis in a series of six regional meetings—Asia-Pacific, Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Western Europe—involving the analysts, academic advisors with expertise in each region, and Freedom House staff. The ratings were compared to the previous year's findings, and any major proposed numerical shifts or category changes were subjected to more intensive scrutiny. These reviews were followed by cross-regional assessments in which efforts were made to ensure comparability and consistency in the findings. Many of the key country reports were also reviewed by the academic advisors.
Changes to the 2007 Edition of Freedom in the World
The survey's methodology is reviewed periodically by an advisory committee of political scientists with expertise in methodological issues. Over the years, the committee has made a number of modest methodological changes to adapt to evolving ideas about political rights and civil liberties. At the same time, the time series data are not revised retroactively, and any changes to the methodology are introduced incrementally in order to ensure the comparability of the ratings from year to year.
In the 2007 edition of the survey, several sub-questions were added to the checklist question guidelines; the checklist questions are used by the analysts when scoring each of their countries, while the guidelines—in the form of bulleted sub-questions—provide general guidance to the analysts about issues they should consider when scoring each checklist question. The new sub-questions include two on subnational elections (the last sub-questions under Political Rights checklist questions A.1. and A.2.) and one on the rights of noncitizens (the last sub-question under Civil Liberties checklist question F.4). (The checklist questions and guidelines appear at the end of this methodology essay.)
The number of countries analyzed by the survey increased from 192 to 193 in the 2007 edition of Freedom in the World. This change occurred as the result of the separation of Serbia and Montenegro into two separate countries. The number of related and disputed territories also increased by one, from 14 to 15, with the addition of Somaliland as a separate territory.
Finally, Freedom in the World 2007 focuses on developments from December 1, 2005 through December 31, 2006. This timeframe represents a change from the previous survey edition, which encompassed a 12-month, non-calendar-year timeframe of December 1, 2004 through November 30, 2005. Future editions of the survey will cover a 12-month calendar year. Thus, the 2007 edition alone reflects a 13-month, rather than a 12-month, calendar-year timeframe.
Ratings Process
(NOTE: see the full checklists and keys to political rights and civil liberties ratings and status at the end of the methodology essay.)
Raw Points – The ratings process is based on a checklist of 10 political rights questions and 15 civil liberties questions. The political rights questions are grouped into the three sub-categories: Electoral Process (3 questions), Political Pluralism and Participation (4), and Functioning of Government (3). The civil liberties questions are grouped into four sub-categories: Freedom of Expression and Belief (4 questions), Associational and Organizational Rights (3), Rule of Law (4), and Personal Autonomy and Individual Rights (4). Raw points are awarded to each of these questions on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0 points represents the smallest degree and 4 the greatest degree of rights or liberties present. The political rights section also contains two additional discretionary questions: question A (For traditional monarchies that have no parties or electoral process, does the system provide for genuine, meaningful consultation with the people, encourage public discussion of policy choices, and allow the right to petition the ruler?) and question B (Is the government or occupying power deliberately changing the ethnic composition of a country or territory so as to destroy a culture or tip the political balance in favor of another group?). For additional discretionary question A, 1 to 4 points may be added, as applicable, while for discretionary question B, 1 to 4 points may be subtracted (the worse the situation, the more points that may be subtracted). The highest number of points that can be awarded to the political rights checklist is 40 (or a total of up to 4 points for each of the 10 questions). The highest number of points that can be awarded to the civil liberties checklist is 60 (or a total of up to 4 points for each of the 15 questions).
The raw points from the previous survey edition are used as a benchmark for the current year under review. In general, a change in raw points is made only if there has been a real world development during the year that warrants a change (e.g., a crackdown on the media, the country's first free and fair elections) and is reflected accordingly in the narrative.
In answering both the political rights and civil liberties questions, Freedom House does not equate constitutional or other legal guarantees of rights with the on-the-ground fulfillment of these rights. While both laws and actual practices are factored into the ratings decisions, greater emphasis is placed on the latter.
In addition, for states and territories with small populations, the absence of pluralism in the political system or civil society is not necessarily viewed as a negative situation unless the government or other centers of domination are deliberately blocking its establishment or operation. For example, a small country without diverse political parties or media outlets or significant trade unions are not penalized if these limitations are determined to be a function of size and not overt restrictions.
Political Rights and Civil Liberties Ratings – The total number of points awarded to the political rights and civil liberties checklists determines the political rights and civil liberties ratings. Each rating of 1 through 7, with 1 representing the highest and 7 the lowest level of freedom, corresponds to a range of total points (see Tables 1 and 2).
Status of Free, Partly Free, Not Free – Each pair of political rights and civil liberties ratings is averaged to determine an overall status of "Free," "Partly Free," or "Not Free." Those whose ratings average 1.0 to 2.5 are considered Free, 3.0 to 5.0 Partly Free, and 5.5 to 7.0 Not Free (see Table 3).
The designations of Free, Partly Free, and Not Free each cover a broad third of the available raw points. Therefore, countries and territories within any one category, especially those at either end of the category, can have quite different human rights situations. In order to see the distinctions within each category, a country or territory's political rights and civil liberties ratings should be examined. For example, countries at the lowest end of the Free category (2 in political rights and 3 in civil liberties, or 3 in political rights and 2 in civil liberties) differ from those at the upper end of the Free group (1 for both political rights and civil liberties). Also, a designation of Free does not mean that a country enjoys perfect freedom or lacks serious problems, only that it enjoys comparably more freedom than Partly Free or Not Free (or some other Free) countries.
Indications of Ratings and/or Status Changes – Each country or territory's political rights rating, civil liberties rating, and status is included in a statistics section that precedes each country or territory report. A change in a political rights or civil liberties rating since the previous survey edition is indicated with an asterisk next to the rating that has changed. A brief ratings change explanation is included in the statistics section.
Trend Arrows – Positive or negative developments in a country or territory may also be reflected in the use of upward or downward trend arrows. A trend arrow is based on a particular development (such as an improvement in a country's state of religious freedom) which must be linked to a change in raw points in the corresponding checklist question (in this case, an increase in the number of raw points assigned to checklist question D2, which covers religious freedom). However, not all increases or decreases in raw points warrant trend arrows. Whether a positive or negative development is significant enough to warrant a trend arrow is determined through consultations among the report writer, the regional academic advisors, and Freedom House staff. Also, trend arrows are assigned only in cases where increases or decreases in raw points are not sufficient to warrant a ratings change; thus, a country cannot receive both a ratings change and a trend arrow during the same year. A trend arrow is indicated with an arrow next to the name of the country or territory that appears before the statistics section at the top of each country or territory report. A brief trend arrow explanation is included in the statistics section.
General Characteristics of Each Political Rights and Civil Liberties Rating
Political Rights
Rating of 1 – Countries and territories that receive a rating of 1 for political rights come closest to ensuring the freedoms embodied in the checklist questions, beginning with free and fair elections. Those who are elected rule, there are competitive parties or other political groupings, and the opposition plays an important role and has actual power. Minority groups have reasonable self-government or can participate in the government through informal consensus.
Rating of 2 – Countries and territories rated 2 in political rights are less free than those rated 1. Such factors as political corruption, violence, political discrimination against minorities, and foreign or military influence on politics may be present and weaken the quality of freedom.
Ratings of 3, 4, 5 – The same conditions that undermine freedom in countries and territories with a rating of 2 may also weaken political rights in those with a rating of 3, 4, or 5. Other damaging elements can include civil war, heavy military involvement in politics, lingering royal power, unfair elections, and one-party dominance. However, states and territories in these categories may still enjoy some elements of political rights, including the freedom to organize quasi-political groups, reasonably free referenda, or other significant means of popular influence on government.
Rating of 6 – Countries and territories with political rights rated 6 have systems ruled by military juntas, one-party dictatorships, religious hierarchies, or autocrats. These regimes may allow only a minimal manifestation of political rights, such as some degree of representation or autonomy for minorities. A few states are traditional monarchies that mitigate their relative lack of political rights through the use of consultation with their subjects, tolerance of political discussion, and acceptance of public petitions.
Rating of 7 – For countries and territories with a rating of 7, political rights are absent or virtually nonexistent as a result of the extremely oppressive nature of the regime or severe oppression in combination with civil war. States and territories in this group may also be marked by extreme violence or warlord rule that dominates political power in the absence of an authoritative, functioning central government.
Civil Liberties
Rating of 1 – Countries and territories that receive a rating of 1 come closest to ensuring the freedoms expressed in the civil liberties checklist, including freedom of expression, assembly, association, education, and religion. They are distinguished by an established and generally equitable system of rule of law. Countries and territories with this rating enjoy free economic activity and tend to strive for equality of opportunity.
Rating of 2 – States and territories with a rating of 2 have deficiencies in a few aspects of civil liberties, but are still relatively free.
Ratings of 3, 4, 5 – Countries and territories that have received a rating of 3, 4, or 5 range from those that are in at least partial compliance with virtually all checklist standards to those with a combination of high or medium scores for some questions and low or very low scores on other questions. The level of oppression increases at each successive rating level, including in the areas of censorship, political terror, and the prevention of free association. There are also many cases in which groups opposed to the state engage in political terror that undermines other freedoms.
Rating of 6 – People in countries and territories with a rating of 6 experience severely restricted rights of expression and association, and there are almost always political prisoners and other manifestations of political terror. These countries may be characterized by a few partial rights, such as some religious and social freedoms, some highly restricted private business activity, and relatively free private discussion.
Rating of 7 – States and territories with a rating of 7 have virtually no freedom. An overwhelming and justified fear of repression characterizes these societies.
Countries and territories generally have ratings in political rights and civil liberties that are within two ratings numbers of each other. Without a well-developed civil society, it is difficult, if not impossible, to have an atmosphere supportive of political rights. Consequently, there is no country in the survey with a rating of 6 or 7 for civil liberties and, at the same time, a rating of 1 or 2 for political rights.
Electoral Democracy Designation
In addition to providing numerical ratings, the survey assigns the designation "electoral democracy" to countries that have met certain minimum standards. In determining whether a country is an electoral democracy, Freedom House examines several key factors concerning the last major national election or elections.
To qualify as an electoral democracy, a state must have satisfied the following criteria:
- A competitive, multiparty political system;
- Universal adult suffrage for all citizens (with exceptions for restrictions that states may legitimately place on citizens as sanctions for criminal offenses);
- Regularly contested elections conducted in conditions of ballot secrecy, reasonable ballot security, and in the absence of massive voter fraud, and that yield results that are representative of the public will;
- Significant public access of major political parties to the electorate through the media and through generally open political campaigning.
The numerical benchmark for a country to be listed as an electoral democracy is a sub-total score of 7 or better (out of a total possible 12) for the political rights checklist sub-category A (the three questions on Electoral Process). In the case of presidential/parliamentary systems, both elections must have been free and fair on the basis of the above criteria; in parliamentary systems, the last nationwide elections for the national legislature must have been free and fair. The presence of certain irregularities during the electoral process does not automatically disqualify a country from being designated an electoral democracy. A country cannot be an electoral democracy if significant authority for national decisions resides in the hands of an unelected power, whether a monarch or a foreign international authority. A country is removed from the ranks of electoral democracies if its last national election failed to meet the criteria listed above, or if changes in law significantly eroded the public's possibility for electoral choice.
Freedom House's term "electoral democracy" differs from "liberal democracy" in that the latter also implies the presence of a substantial array of civil liberties. In the survey, all Free countries qualify as both electoral and liberal democracies. By contrast, some Partly Free countries qualify as electoral, but not liberal, democracies.
Freedom in the World 2007: Checklist Questions and Guidelines
Each numbered checklist question is assigned a score of 0-4 (except for discretionary question A, for which 1-4 points may be added, and discretionary question B, for which 1-4 points may be subtracted), according to the survey methodology. The bulleted sub-questions are intended to provide guidance to the writers regarding what issues are meant to be considered in scoring each checklist question; the authors do not necessarily have to consider every sub-question when scoring their countries.
Political Rights ChecklistA. Electoral Process
1. Is the head of government or other chief national authority elected through free and fair elections?
- Did established and reputable national and/or international election monitoring organizations judge the most recent elections for head of government to be free and fair? (Note: Heads of government chosen through various electoral frameworks, including direct elections for president, indirect elections for prime minister by parliament, and the electoral college system for electing presidents, are covered under this and the following sub-questions. In cases of indirect elections for the head of government, the elections for the legislature that chose the head of government, as well as the selection process of the head of government himself, should be taken into consideration.)
- Have there been undue, politically motivated delays in holding the most recent election for head of government?
- Is the registration of voters and candidates conducted in an accurate, timely, transparent, and non-discriminatory manner?
- Can candidates make speeches, hold public meetings, and enjoy media access throughout the campaign free of intimidation?
- Does voting take place by secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedure?
- Are voters able to vote for the candidate or party of their choice without undue pressure or intimidation?
- Is the vote count transparent, and is it reported honestly with the official results made public? Can election monitors from independent groups and representing parties/candidates watch the counting of votes to ensure their honesty?
- Is each person's vote given equivalent weight to those of other voters in order to ensure equal representation?
- Has a democratically elected head of government who was chosen in the most recent election subsequently been overthrown in a violent coup? (Note: Although a peaceful, "velvet coup" may ultimately lead to a positive outcome—particularly if it replaces a head of government who was not freely and fairly elected—the new leader has not been freely and fairly elected and cannot be treated as such.)
- In cases where elections for regional, provincial, or state governors and/or other subnational officials differ significantly in conduct from national elections, does the conduct of the subnational elections reflect an opening toward improved political rights in the country, or, alternatively, a worsening of political rights?
- Did established and reputable domestic and/or international election monitoring organizations judge the most recent national legislative elections to be free and fair?
- Have there been undue, politically motivated delays in holding the most recent national legislative election?
- Is the registration of voters and candidates conducted in an accurate, timely, transparent, and non-discriminatory manner?
- Can candidates make speeches, hold public meetings, and enjoy media access throughout the campaign free of intimidation?
- Does voting take place by secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedure?
- Are voters able to vote for the candidate or party of their choice without undue pressure or intimidation?
- Is the vote count transparent, and is it reported honestly with the official results made public? Can election monitors from independent groups and representing parties/candidates watch the counting of votes to ensure their honesty?
- Is each person's vote given equivalent weight to those of other voters in order to ensure equal representation?
- Have the representatives of a democratically elected national legislature who were chosen in the most recent election subsequently been overthrown in a violent coup? (Note: Although a peaceful, "velvet coup" may ultimately lead to a positive outcome—particularly if it replaces a national legislature whose representatives were not freely and fairly elected—members of the new legislature have not been freely and fairly elected and cannot be treated as such.)
- In cases where elections for subnational councils/parliaments differ significantly in conduct from national elections, does the conduct of the subnational elections reflect an opening toward improved political rights in the country, or, alternatively, a worsening of political rights?
- Is there a clear, detailed, and fair legislative framework for conducting elections? (Note: Changes to electoral laws should not be made immediately preceding an election if the ability of voters, candidates, or parties to fulfill their roles in the election is infringed.)
- Are election commissions or other election authorities independent and free from government or other pressure and interference?
- Is the composition of election commissions fair and balanced?
- Do election commissions or other election authorities conduct their work in an effective and competent manner?
- Do adult citizens enjoy universal and equal suffrage? (Note: Suffrage can be suspended or withdrawn for reasons of legal incapacity, such as mental incapacity, or conviction of a serious criminal offense.)
- Is the drawing of election districts conducted in a fair and nonpartisan manner, as opposed to gerrymandering for personal or partisan advantage?
- Has the selection of a system for choosing legislative representatives (such as proportional versus majoritarian) been manipulated to advance certain political interests or to influence the electoral results?
1. Do the people have the right to organize in different political parties or other competitive political groupings of their choice, and is the system open to the rise and fall of these competing parties or groupings?
- Do political parties encounter undue legal or practical obstacles in their efforts to be formed and to operate, including onerous registration requirements, excessively large membership requirements, etc.?
- Do parties face discriminatory or onerous restrictions in holding meetings, rallies, or other peaceful activities?
- Are party members or leaders intimidated, harassed, arrested, imprisoned, or subjected to violent attacks as a result of their peaceful political activities?
- Are various legal/administrative restrictions selectively applied to opposition parties to prevent them from increasing their support base or successfully competing in elections?
- Are there legitimate opposition forces in positions of authority, such as in the national legislature or in sub-national governments?
- Are opposition party members or leaders intimidated, harassed, arrested, imprisoned, or subjected to violent attacks as a result of their peaceful political activities?
- Do such groups offer bribes to voters and/or political figures in order to influence their political choices?
- Do such groups intimidate, harass, or attack voters and/or political figures in order to influence their political choices?
- Does the military control or enjoy a preponderant influence over government policy and activities, including in countries that nominally are under civilian control?
- Do foreign governments control or enjoy a preponderant influence over government policy and activities by means including the presence of foreign military troops, the use of significant economic threats or sanctions, etc.?
- Do political parties of various ideological persuasions address issues of specific concern to minority groups?
- Does the government inhibit the participation of minority groups in national or sub-national political life through laws and/or practical obstacles?
- Are political parties based on ethnicity, culture, or religion which espouse peaceful, democratic values legally permitted and de facto allowed to operate?
1. Do the freely elected head of government and national legislative representatives determine the policies of the government?
- Are the candidates who were elected freely and fairly duly installed in office?
- Do other appointed or non-freely elected state actors interfere with or prevent freely elected representatives from adopting and implementing legislation and making meaningful policy decisions?
- Do non-state actors, including criminal gangs, the military, and foreign governments, interfere with or prevent elected representatives from adopting and implementing legislation and making meaningful policy decisions?
- Has the government implemented effective anticorruption laws or programs to prevent, detect, and punish corruption among public officials, including conflict of interest?
- Is the government free from excessive bureaucratic regulations, registration requirements, or other controls that increase opportunities for corruption?
- Are there independent and effective auditing and investigative bodies that function without impediment or political pressure or influence?
- Are allegations of corruption by government officials thoroughly investigated and prosecuted without prejudice, particularly against political opponents?
- Are allegations of corruption given wide and extensive airing in the media?
- Do whistleblowers, anticorruption activists, investigators, and journalists enjoy legal protections that make them feel secure about reporting cases of bribery and corruption?
- What was the latest Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index score for this country?
- Are civil society groups, interest groups, journalists, and other citizens able to comment on and influence pending policies of legislation?
- Do citizens have the legal right and practical ability to obtain information about government operations and the means to petition government agencies for it?
- Is the budget-making process subject to meaningful legislative review and public scrutiny?
- Does the government publish detailed accounting expenditures in a timely fashion?
- Does the state ensure transparency and effective competition in the awarding of government contracts?
- Are the asset declarations of government officials open to public and media scrutiny and verification?
A. For traditional monarchies that have no parties or electoral process, does the system provide for genuine, meaningful consultation with the people, encourage public discussion of policy choices, and allow the right to petition the ruler?
- Is there a non-elected legislature that advises the monarch on policy issues?
- Are there formal mechanisms for individuals or civic groups to speak with or petition the monarch?
- Does the monarch take petitions from the public under serious consideration?
- Is the government providing economic or other incentives to certain people in order to change the ethnic composition of a region or regions?
- Is the government forcibly moving people in or out of a certain or areas in order to change the ethnic composition of those regions?
- Is the government arresting, imprisoning, or killing members of certain ethnic groups in order change the ethnic composition of a region or regions?
D. Freedom of Expression and Belief
Civil Liberties Checklist
1. Are there free and independent media and other forms of cultural expression? (Note: In cases where the media are state-controlled but offer pluralistic points of view, the survey gives the system credit.)
- Does the government directly or indirectly censor print, broadcast, and/or Internet-based media?
- Is self-censorship among journalists common, especially when reporting on politically sensitive issues, including corruption or the activities of senior officials?
- Does the government use libel and security laws to punish those who scrutinize government officials and policies through either onerous fines or imprisonment?
- Is it a crime to insult the honor and dignity of the president and/or other government officials? How broad is the range of such prohibitions, and how vigorously are they enforced?
- If media outlets are dependent on the government for their financial survival, does the government withhold funding in order to propagandize, primarily provide official points of view, and/or limit access by opposition parties and civic critics?
- Does the government attempt to influence media content and access through means including politically motivated awarding of broadcast frequencies and newspaper registrations, unfair control and influence over printing facilities and distribution networks, selective distribution of advertising, onerous registration requirements, prohibitive tariffs, and bribery?
- Are journalists threatened, arrested, imprisoned, beaten, or killed by government or non-governmental actors for their legitimate journalistic activities, and if such cases occur, are they investigated and prosecuted fairly and expeditiously?
- Are works of literature, art, music, and other forms of cultural expression censored or banned for political purposes?
- Are registration requirements employed to impede the free functioning of religious institutions?
- Are members of religious groups, including minority faiths and movements, harassed, fined, arrested, or beaten by the authorities for engaging in their religious practices?
- Does the government appoint or otherwise influence the appointment of religious leaders?
- Does the government control the production and distribution of religious books and other materials and the content of sermons?
- Is the construction of religious buildings banned or restricted?
- Does the government place undue restrictions on religious education? Does the government require religious education?
- Are teachers and professors free to pursue academic activities of a political and quasi-political nature without fear of physical violence or intimidation by state or non-state actors?
- Does the government pressure, strongly influence, or control the content of school curriculums for political purposes?
- Are student associations that address issues of a political nature allowed to function freely?
- Does the government, including through school administration or other officials, pressure students and/or teachers to support certain political figures or agendas, including pressuring them to attend political rallies or vote for certain candidates? Conversely, does the government, including through school administration or other officials, discourage or forbid students and/or teachers from supporting certain candidates and parties?
- Are people able to engage in private discussions, particularly of a political nature (in places including restaurants, public transportation, and their homes) without fear of harassment or arrest by the authorities?
- Does the government employ people or groups to engage in public surveillance and to report alleged anti-government conversations to the authorities?
1. Is there freedom of assembly, demonstration, and open public discussion?
- Are peaceful protests, particularly those of a political nature, banned or severely restricted?
- Are the legal requirements to obtain permission to hold peaceful demonstrations particularly cumbersome and time consuming?
- Are participants of peaceful demonstrations intimidated, arrested, or assaulted?
- Are peaceful protestors detained by police in order to prevent them from engaging in such actions?
- Are registration and other legal requirements for nongovernmental organizations particularly onerous and intended to prevent them from functioning freely?
- Are laws related to the financing of nongovernmental organizations unduly complicated and cumbersome?
- Are donors and funders of nongovernmental organizations free of government pressure?
- Are members of nongovernmental organizations intimidated, arrested, imprisoned, or assaulted because of their work?
- Are trade unions allowed to be established and to operate free from government interference?
- Are workers pressured by the government or employers to join or not to join certain trade unions, and do they face harassment, violence, or dismissal from their jobs if they do?
- Are workers permitted to engage in strikes, and do members of unions face reprisals for engaging in peaceful strikes? (Note: This question may not apply to workers in essential government services or public safety jobs.)
- Are unions able to bargain collectively with employers and able to negotiate collective bargaining agreements that are honored in practice?
- For states with very small populations or primarily agriculturally-based economies that do not necessarily support the formation of trade unions, does the government allow for the establishment of peasant organizations or their equivalents? Is there legislation expressively forbidding the formation of trade unions?
- Are professional organizations, including business associations, allowed to operate freely and without government interference?
1. Is there an independent judiciary?
- Is the judiciary subject to interference from the executive branch of government or from other political, economic, or religious influences?
- Are judges appointed and dismissed in a fair and unbiased manner?
- Do judges rule fairly and impartially, or do they commonly render verdicts that favor the government or particular interests, whether in return for bribes or other reasons?
- Do executive, legislative, and other governmental authorities comply with judicial decisions, and are these decisions effectively enforced?
- Do powerful private concerns comply with judicial decisions, and are decisions that run counter to the interests of powerful actors effectively enforced?
- Are defendants' rights, including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, protected?
- Are detainees provided access to independent, competent legal counsel?
- Are defendants given a fair, public, and timely hearing by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal?
- Are prosecutors independent of political control and influence?
- Are prosecutors independent of powerful private interests, whether legal or illegal?
- Is there effective and democratic civilian state control of law enforcement officials through the judicial, legislative, and executive branches?
- Are law enforcement officials free from the influence of non-state actors, including organized crime, powerful commercial interests, or other groups?
- Do law enforcement officials make arbitrary arrests and detentions without warrants or fabricate or plant evidence on suspects?
- Do law enforcement officials beat detainees during arrest and interrogation or use excessive force or torture to extract confessions?
- Are conditions in pretrial facilities and prisons humane and respectful of the human dignity of inmates?
- Do citizens have the means of effective petition and redress when their rights are violated by state authorities?
- Are there private/non-state actors operating in the country that engage in kidnapping for ransom, murder, or other violent crimes against the general population or specific groups?
- Is the population subjected to physical harm, forced removal, or other acts of violence or terror due to civil conflict or war?
- Are members of various distinct groups—including ethnic and religious minorities, homosexuals, and the disabled—able to exercise effectively their human rights with full equality before the law?
- Is violence against such groups widespread, and if so, are perpetrators brought to justice?
- Do members of such groups face legal and/or de facto discrimination in areas including employment, education, and housing because of their identification with a particular group?
- Do women enjoy full equality in law and in practice as compared to men?
- Do non-citizens—including migrant workers, asylum seekers, and non-citizen immigrants—enjoy basic internationally recognized human rights, including the right not to be subjected to torture or other forms of ill-treatment, the right to due-process of law, and the rights of freedom of association, expression, and religion?
1. Does the state control travel or choice of residence, employment, or institution of higher education?
- Are there restrictions on foreign travel, including the use of an exit visa system, which may be issued selectively?
- Is permission required from the authorities to move within the country?
- Does the government determine or otherwise influence a person's type and place of employment?
- Are bribes or other inducements for government officials needed to obtain the necessary documents to travel, change one's place of residence or employment, enter institutions of higher education, or advance in school?
- Are people legally allowed to purchase and sell land and other property, and can they do so in practice without undue interference from the government or non-state actors?
- Does the government provide adequate and timely compensation to people whose property is expropriated under eminent domain laws?
- Are people legally allowed to establish and operate private businesses with a reasonable minimum of registration, licensing, and other requirements?
- Are bribes or other inducements needed to obtain the necessary legal documents to operate private businesses?
- Do private/non-state actors, including criminal groups, seriously impede private business activities through such measures as extortion?
- Is violence against women, including wife-beating and rape, widespread, and are perpetrators brought to justice?
- Is the trafficking of women and/or children abroad for prostitution widespread, and is the government taking adequate efforts to address the problem?
- Do women face de jure and de facto discrimination in economic and social matters, including property and inheritance rights, divorce proceedings, and child custody matters?
- Does the government directly or indirectly control choice of marriage partners through means such as requiring large payments to marry certain individuals (e.g., foreign citizens) or by not enforcing laws against child marriage or dowry payments?
- Does the government determine the number of children that a couple may have?
- Does the government engage in state-sponsored religious/cultural/ethnic indoctrination and related restrictions on personal freedoms?
- Do private institutions, including religious groups, unduly infringe on the rights of individuals, including choice of marriage partner, dress, etc.?
- Does the government exert tight control over the economy, including through state ownership and the setting of prices and production quotas?
- Do the economic benefits from large state industries, including the energy sector, benefit the general population or only a privileged few?
- Do private interests exert undue influence on the economy through monopolistic practices, cartels, or illegal blacklists, boycotts, or discrimination?
- Is entrance to institutions of higher education or the ability to obtain employment limited by widespread nepotism and the payment of bribes?
- Are certain groups, including ethnic or religious minorities, less able to enjoy certain economic benefits than others? For example, are certain groups restricted from holding particular jobs, whether in the public or the private sector, because of de jure or de facto discrimination?
- Do state or private employers exploit their workers through activities including unfairly withholding wages and permitting or forcing employees to work under unacceptably dangerous conditions, as well as through adult slave labor and child labor?
Key to Scores, PR and CL Ratings, Status
|Table 1
Political Rights (PR)
|Table 2
Civil Liberties (CL)
Table 3
* It is possible for a country's total political rights score to be less than zero (between -1 and -4) if it receives mostly or all zeros for each of the ten political rights questions and it receives a sufficiently negative score for political rights discretionary question B. In such a case, a country would still receive a final political rights rating of 7.
1These territories are selected based on their political significance and size. Freedom House divides territories into two categories: related territories and disputed territories. Related territories consist mostly of colonies, protectorates, and island dependencies of sovereign states that are in some relation of dependency to that state and whose relationship is not currently in serious legal or political dispute. Disputed territories are areas within internationally recognized sovereign states whose status is in serious political or violent dispute and whose conditions differ substantially from those of the relevant sovereign states. They are often outside of central government control and characterized by intense, longtime, and widespread insurgency or independence movements that enjoy popular support.


text:
Next Media Animation's army of computer graphic animators churned out a story today neatly encapsulating the week's escalating hacker wars.
LulzSec, depicted as the bad guys in this video, are responsible for attacks against a number of sites including Sony, The Escapist, Minecraft and Eve Online.
Out of the swamp that is 4 chan, two groups of hackers emerged. The first, anonymous, practised hacktivism, using DDoS attacks against numerous targets such as Iran, the Church of Scientology and Amazon.com.
Lulzsec, on the other hand, are pranksters happy just to take down random sites for lulz. Lulzsec has been on the rampage, taking down the CIA website to win a twitter flame war while picking another fight with 4chan despite past associations.
4chan users are out to take down Lulzsec any way they can. Will the hackers of Lulzsec be applying their computer skills elsewhere soon?
Only time and more absurdly animated videos will tell.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Directory Listing
|Sticky Revision:
This commit was manufactured by cvs2svn to create tag 'rel-1-7-00'.
Changed $validAddress to be more permissive and suck less. The version that only accepts email from .rochester.edu domains is commented out.
Cleaned these scripts up a little. Instead of setting the PATH, it just uses the directory specified to call each utility with its full path. Also added some documentation and got rid of some cruft (which, of course, one can still pull out of CVS if needed). Incidentally, all the utilities used in these two scripts are from the netpbm package.
Got rid of a die that I put into makeL2H for debugging.
fixed bug the prevented statistics from students in unnamed sections or recitations from being displayed. Also replaced leading spaces by tabs
Changed pdf generation process in welcomeAction.pl to use ghostscript directly rather than calling ps2pdf. Removed $Global::externalPs2pdfPath and added $Global::externalGsPath.
added $externalLaTeX2HTMLSupportPath to section about LaTeX2HTML stuff... this variable is used by displayMacros.pl:makeL2H to set the path.
makeL2H now appends the contents of $Global::externalLaTeX2HTMLSupportPath to $ENV{PATH} before calling latex2html. this is kinda hackish, but it works. perhaps instead of this, we should set the path globally to something like '/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin'. (see the email i'm about to send.)
Course directory permissions are now set properly: demo => 755, working => 775
Adding xFunctions applets
This javaScript row reduction tool is used in some problems.
Fixed some assumptions made by system_webwork_setup: it no longer needs to be called from the main directory, but it uses the current directory as a guess for the main directory when it asks the question.
Protect against possibility that {debug} is not defined in AnswerEvaluator.
Made sure that num_cmp, fun_cmp and str_cmp return an answer evaluator when used in scalar context. In other words $ans_eval = num_cmp(234); will now work as expected -- you will get one answer evaluator which checks whether the answer is 234. Previously you had to write: ($ans_eval) = num_cmp(234); or else you would have the numeral 1 placed in $ans_eval since that is how many answer evaluators were created.
Fixed a misspelling of displaystr in the undeterminedExp subroutine
Fixed a careless mistake in localizing variables.
This is the new gif for version 1.7
moved back to system/
Added Zig's more general problem grader
added defaults.cws from /ww/webwork/courses/blankCourse. fixed comments, added $Id$ tag.
Modifications to documentation. Minor modifications to the way some defaults are set. New versions use set_default_options.
moved $psvn_digits and $htmlModeDefault into # Internal settings # section, changed $htmlModeDefault to HTML and $logAccessData to 0
Moved to ../
Modified the pod documentation
Modified NUM_CMP so that it always places a numerical value in $rh_ans->{correct_ans} even when the original answer is an exression to be evaluated by perl. Also modified prfmt so that it doesn't try to format arithmetic expressions using sprintf
Commented out an unnecesary line requiring List.pm
Added forking code to probSerHeader translation code in createTexSource().
Added mol (mole -- basic unit) and horsepower = 746W (watts)
Added forking code to createTexSource to fix weird PGtranslator problem.
Added a default value for tolerance to is_zero_array macro and removed the allow_unknown_defaults value. Changed the call to is_zero_array from tol to tolerance in FUNCTION_CMP. Previously, because of the mislabeling of 'tolerance' as 'tol' the tolerance value could not be set and was always being set to a default value.
Moved srand(time) out of loop around line 540. Otherwise (as Zig reports) many or all students get the same seed for new or reseeded problems.
made profEditCourseFiles.pl only recurse when dealing with header files, added "Edit Course index.html File" function to profHousekeeping.pl.
Added recursiveFindFiles subroutine (duplicate!), expanded pattern match to only show *header*.pg files rather than *.pg files.
added recursiveFindFiles subroutine, used it to replace `find` call for set header file editing form.
Expanded "edit header file" functionality to do a recursive search.
moved from ../
moved to templates/
moved from webwork/ww_prob_lib/macros
Added more comments which go in the webworkCourse.ph file explaining how the defaultReply address works.
Changed feedback.pl so that it access the course environmen. Student feedback now has a ReplyTo field which contains the student and Global::defaultReply.
The webworkCourse.ph file now contains information on setting the $smtpSender, defaultFrom and defaultReply variables
added this to the repository
Two changes. One is to use Global::smtpSender for smtp The other is to fill in a default from email address for the student
define variables smtpSender, defaultFrom, defaultReply
okay, actually commented out all the courseScripts lines this time.
Revererted to profSendmail from system with bug fixes (see below). The previous version incorporated Bill Wheelers initial checking of the validity of email addresses. However Bill has improved (or at least changed) this a lot. He has sent us a new version, but we do not have time to check it out. We will add the functionality later Bug fixes, etc. SMTP is now called with the address $smtpSender. Default values for headers now work
commented out lines that chmod courseScripts directory (as I recall, that directory is no longer used).
Actually changed the value of $Global::externalLaTeX2HTMLInit. Sorry about that. :P
Added 'allow_unknown_options' in is_a_zero_array filter to avoid error in function_cmp routine.
Reordered some config items, changed $externalLaTeX2HTMLInit.
Renamed latex2html.init.98.1 latex2html.init.98.1p1 to make it able to be referred to as "latex2html.init.$Global::externalLaTeX2HTMLVersion".
Unreferenced file -- removed.
Modified lines 505-10 so that when a problem is viewed for the first time, process_answers from PGtranslator.pm is still run with empty imput. This means that the correct mesages from problem graders will be displayed (and erroneous error messages will not be displayed) the first time a problem is viewed.
moved latex2html init files to lib.
moved latex2html init files into lib. Changed $Global::externalLatex2HTMLPath.
Fixed makeL2H to use $Global::externalLatex2HTML{Path,Version,Init} vars.
removed all reference to courseScripts directory (which is no longer used by individual courses). Also the default now in setting up a course is to have the macros directory implemented. Added comments on the webworkCourse.ph file explaining how the macros directory works.
Moved from blankCourse, changed index.html from 0644 to 0664.
Updating pod documentation
Updating pod documentation
Removed warning message about avg_problem_grader, since now avg_problem_grader is also installed in PGtranslator and can be used as a default grader. (std_problem_grader can also be used as a default).
More adjustments to documentation for answer evaluators
The pod documentation is now read from the mainDirectory as defined in Global.
More documentation added.
Added pod comments to PGanswermacros for some of the filters. I also rearranged the structure of the file slightly to make it easier to add the pod documentation.
Added code to handle warning messages for the paperHeader.pg file as well as the problems. Made sure that the warning messages are protected for TeX ONLY when the output will be hard copy (i.e. when the list @PG_COMPILE_ERRORS is empty.) otherwise the warning messages are left as HTML
Added logPrint to error messages when the TeX code cannot be converted into a .dvi file. This allows useful feedback when there is a pure tex error -- i.e. the .pg file compiles correctly but the resulting TeX is not well formed. Also added some code that adds warning messages after each problem (except the screen/pageheader file) with some extra formatting so that messages can be handled by the TeX processor. If this latter code is adequate it should probably be abstracted and moved to Global near where the PG warnings handler is defined. Currently the code modifies the Global::WARNINGS variable VERY far away from the definition of that variable. It would be better to have a couple of subroutines in Global that "print" the WARNINGS string, perhaps protecting the characters that upset TeX, and another subroutine which clears the WARNINGS variable. Meantime keep testing the error output -- it's looking better.
> STRANGE BUG fixed the strange bug!
Rewrote downloadAllSets to mak sense, fixed error reporting, fixed several "used only once" warnings, enhanced filename handling for downloaded files (this is very nice -- it can tell whether we're getting one set for multiple students or multiple sets for one student :), changed temp file naming scheme. what fun!
Edited l2h_sticky_answers to stop unwanted combining when answers used multiple fields.
No longer needed since welcomeAction.pl version 1.9
1. Fixed prepareHardcopy. Actually works now. 2. Incorporated old error reporting code into downloadAllSets This file is incredibly hairy and should be cleaned up/split up a.s.a.p...
added variables for paths to hardcopy generation programs
Changes made to best approximation parameters -- added set_default_options call. Removed some warning messages.
AnswerEvaluators can now handle ans_hash as an input (this allows the answerevaluator to be used as a filter in another answer evaluator Cosmetic changes made to the error reporting when the debug flag is set.
Edited check_eigenvector to include debug option and fixed post-filter to prevent crashing.
Made small corrections at lines 417 and 484 which were causing compile time errors in /ww/logs/error_log. (One was redefining rh_flags subroutine, the other was an uncommented fragment of a print statement.
This was an unreferenced copy of latex2html.init.96.1
Modified warning so that warnings when end in \n (or in ~~n for .pg files) do not have the extra stack information appended. This may sometimes make for cleaner output messages.
Made sure that the error handlers have Global:: prefixes
Changed names in calculate difference vector subroutine to make the process a bit clearer. There is still more work to be done.
Minor changes to the #!/usr/bin/perl line
Changed package name for error handlers to Global:: (from main::) to match the change which occured in Global.pm version 1.6 where the handlers were moved inside the Global.pm package. $SIG{'FPE'} = \&Global::PG_floating_point_exception_handler; $SIG{__WARN__}=\&Global::PG_warnings_handler; Warning messages from within problems and from within macros should now work again.
replaced \&main::PG_floating_point_exception_handler by &Global::PG_floating_point_exception_handler since the exception handler was moved under the package Global section of Global.pm when the BEGIN block was moved in version 1.6 It's possible that the floating point exception handler available for bad answers hasn't been working properly for awhile.
removed commented out copy of subroutine longmess
Changed $tthpath to pull path from %envir rather than hardcoded path. Yay!
Added $envir{'externalTTHPath'} to defineProblemEnvir in each file. This will work with dangerousMacros.pl to specify the path to TTH.
forgot to save
Added variables for TTH path and LaTeX2HTML path, version, and init file path, as part of an effort to de-hardcode paths.
Disabled documentation file mangling -- the documentation files no longer need to me mangled!
Added index.html file as a placeholder for removed docs. This allows browser requests for the directory to yield a useful error message rather than "FORBIDDEN"
1. Set all "WeBWorK docs" links to http://webwork.math.rochester.edu (rather than /webwork_development_html/docs/) 2. Changed IMG link for logo to be relative (../images/)
Bringing the common courseScripts version of PGcomplexmacros.pl up to date with the version of PGcomplexmacros.pl found in the WW_Prob_Lib2 macros directory.
fixed section that writes webworkConfig.pm so that setting $cgiDebugMode=1 (in Global.pm) actually turns on debugging.
added additional comments regarding $cgiDebugMode.
Fixed bug so that now functions with negative values are handled correctly Line 2451 has been replaced by line 2452
Now script checks if problem set data exists before deleting classlist data
added check tp prevent deleting a classlist record if problem set data exists
initial setNumber to '' if not defined to prevent a pink screen
added line 3618 so that only capital E's will be used in scientific notation
moved config stuff to the top of the file moved BEGIN block to the bottom of the file added comments added $cgiDebugMode flag and explanation
modified section that writes webworkConfig.pm so that it respects the $Global::cgiDebugMode flag.
Continuing standardizing spacing and fixing comments.
added Regression.pm
initial report
modified documentation
updated from version 0.06 to version 0.07
Fixed bug in the reading fields. Added defaultfrom and defaultreply addresses from Global.pm
Added defaultreply and defaultfrom addresses which are used by Profsendmail.pl
modified documentation
peviewing empty an empty answer no loger gives a pick screen
Change MatrixReal to MatrixReal1
Changed references to MatrixReal to MatrixReal1 This might break problems involving matrices or ones involving answering questions with arbitrary constants (e.g. indefinite integral) I believe I have caught all of the instances in which this name is used.
Removed unneeded scripts (as per discussion with gage, apizer). Added BEGIN-block method for library inclusion to command-line scripts.
Renamed MatrixReal.pm to MatrixReal1.pm
corrected a misprint
changed comments
Replaced $piece1 with $piece3 in line 336 and following to avoid a "my" conflict. I also commented out oldivy which contained a print statement and therefore wouldn't compile within the problems. These are temporary fixes, for this file in order to enable it to compile.
just corrected spelling
Renamed normal to normal_prob, and inv_normal to normal_distr (modified all the problems in the library accordingly.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Added .cvsignore telling CVS to ignore all *_log files in the logs directory.
Fixed errors in sourceAlias Modified parts of alias so that PG_restricted_eval was not used. (This is unnecessary as long as we use forking to create a child with the same namespace.)
Added _PGgraphmacros_init subroutine
Added Distributions to the module list
Corrected the #!/usr/local/bin/webwork-perl line
Added a commented out line which, when uncommented, can be used to debug the evaluation of modules.
initial report
added -PGstatisticsmacros_init; cosmetic changes
Continuing to edit the file to fix spacing and ordering of subroutines.
Removed already-commented-out routines which were no longer needed.
made 'infty' an acceptable limit of integration for normal function
Fixed headers to include $Id$
Split evalutesToNumber into subroutine is_a_numeric_expression. No changes in functionality.
Added "evaluatesToNumber" subroutine. In conjunction with fix_answer_for_display filter, this now fixes a bug with displaying student_ans in a problem that allows strings for valid answers.
Added system_webwork_setup functionality to ask for the group under which the webserver runs and chgrp the logs/ directory to that group. Thus, logfiles have been taken out of cvs, and only the directory remains. You can add the line $serverGroupName = "webwork"; to your system_webwork_setup.defaults file if you like.
Same as PG163macros.pl with a new name. subroutine ivy updated to improve readability.
fixed fact and step functions so they are recognizable functions again.i
Added PGcomplexmacros.pl and PGmatrixmacros.pl to CVS
Corrected "unrecognizable units" error message so it is displayed correctly.
fixed inv_romberg
new macros
Added postfilter fix_answers_for_display which incorporates all changes made in previous version.
Changed NUM_CMP so that the calculated versions of the student's answer and the professor's remain in the answer hash to be displayed by displayMacros. There are now slight clues, when using num_str_cmp that the instructor's answer is a string. I'm not sure anyone can find them easily. Further refinements should be able to remove them in any case.
added inv_romberg function which, given a function, a, and value computes b s.t. integral from a to b is equal to value.
added back the fact (factorial) function that has been accidentally deleted
Hints and Solutions now use basically the same mechanism. Fixed hugs in hints and minor bugs in solutions.
Simplified some of the scripts. Using forking there is no need to evaluate $main:: everytime, since it remains the same for both the parent (where the script is compiled) and in the child where the script is executed. There were other minor fixes to work around bugs in 5.6.0 which were fixed in 5.6.1
Modified num_cmp to use filters for string comparsions. Routed std_num_str_cmp through num_cmp routines.
Fixed problem in std_num_cmp arising from an earlier merge.
Corrected error in _PGanswermacros_init
Added _PGanswermacros_init subroutine
Added _PG......_init subroutines to these two files .
More refinement of the initialization routines in PGbasicmacros.pl and the way it is called from dangerousMacros.pl
Fixed an evaluation which was being done at compile time rather than at run time. This could cause the definition of 'main' to be incorrect. The evaluation was in an error message, so it has probably not been noticed.
Fixed problem in dangerousMacros.pl defining i so that it can be used as a complex number. Fixed htmlLink so that it gives a friendly error message about broken links when fed an undefined url.
Many modifications to courseScript scripts which will insure that the routines are re-entrant (i.e. they can be called via mod_perl and don't need to be re-compiled for every execution run.) Minor modifications to processProblem8.pl and to PGtranslator.pm
Fixed bug in rhomberg.
added two wrapper scripts
added POD script now works when invoked via perl (axed "use strict" and "our" vars) fixed bug in pager function
Modified the documentation for the trapezoid function.
Added unix-style filters to NUM_CMP and re-routed all numerical answer evaluators to num_cmp. Combined numerical_compare_with_units and NUM_CMP.
Added code giving students the choice whether or not to "show my old answers", i.e. to show storred sticky answers. The default for practice users and all users after the answer date is not to show these. Otherwise the default is to show them. This required a change everywhere processProblem is called.
Removing from dev 1-7-01 the files numericalmethods.pl and unit_processor.pl which are no longer used. They have been replaced by Units.pm and PGnumericalmacros.pl respectively.
added fact function to list of functions accepted fixed step and fact function so that they are seen properly in 'preview answer' usa
MAKEDEBUG now doesn't overwrite existing debug scripts.
added MAKEDEBUG and MAKEDEBUG.template to generate a debug cgi for each cgi-script. Ran MAKEDEBUG.
added test comment at top.
fixed cgi url in webworkConfig.pm: uses cgi/cgi-scripts instead of cgi/
added fact function
fixed logs/CVS chmod problem
fixed &fixFile to only write when changes were made (really this time)
another setup script test (changed #! lines)
nothing should change
init file is now put in cgi/ and courseScripts/ files are only written if they have been changed
modified use lib lines in cgi-scripts, scripts, courseScripts removed Global.pm updating and use lib line code from system_webwork_setup modified Global.pm to use webworkConfig (which is not in the repository!)
tthPath set to /usr/local/bin/tth
development version dev-1-7-01 from /ww/webwork/development 15-June-2001
initial import
Standard project directories initialized by cvs2svn.
|aubreyja at gmail dot com
|ViewVC Help
|Powered by ViewVC 1.0.9


text:
Sculptor inspires other to pick up the slack, and trash on National Mall
WASHINGTON Chris Cox, the colorful chain-saw sculptor who has taken it upon himself to clean parts of the National Mall during the government shutdown, is easy to spot: bushy beard, big South Carolina flag, oversize orange dolly that he uses to cart off garbage.
On Saturday afternoon, Cori and Dominick Langella, who had driven down from Binghamton, N.Y., walked up to him.
"You're the reason we're here," Dominick said. "We're here to support you."
The couple and more than 200 others gathered at the Mall, the area between the Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial, l on Saturday to help Cox pick up garbage. Many were drawn by a cleanup rally sponsored by several groups that were motivated by the man.
"We found inspiration in Chris Cox, in particular the nonpolitical nature of his work," said Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks, the Washington-based, tea party-aligned organization that helped organize the "Fix Up DC" event that included remarks and litter cleaning by political commentator Glenn Beck.
Cox's direct message swept across the country Wednesday after he was spotted outside the Lincoln Memorial mowing the grass.
"The building behind me serves as a moral compass, not only for our country but for the world," he told reporters that day, describing the Lincoln Memorial. "And over my dead body are we going to find trash pouring out of these trash cans. At the end of the day, we are the stewards of these buildings that are memorials."
On Saturday, Cox said that his chain-saw sculptures have hardly made him a rich man. But he plans to continue cleaning the Mall grounds until the government shutdown ends. He lives in South Carolina and is staying with friends in Northern Virginia. He spends $25 a day on gas to get to and from the Mall in his truck.
"Not to mention several hundred dollars in parking tickets," he told other cleaners on Saturday.
A supporter, familiar with local customs, told him it wasn't worth fighting the tickets.
Earlier in the day, another Cox supporter tried to offer him $20.
"Here, put that in your pocket," Wayne Ludlam told him.
"No, no, no. I'm not up here for money," Cox said.
Taking donations would distract from his message, he said.
Throughout the day Saturday, Cox was greeted by well-wishers. People took photographs with him, sometimes letting him hold their children for group shots. "It's humbling and it's flattering," Cox said.
At one point, he assembled two dozen garbage pickers around him for a large photo.
"This is the Memorial Militia!" he shouted.
"The trashmen!" a militia member added.
One of those trashmen was Brett Canfield of Annapolis, Md., who served with the Marines in Afghanistan. Canfield said he found Cox's nonpartisan message appealing given the huge gap between Republicans and Democrats.
"He's like, 'Screw the separation. Let's take a break. Let's get something done.' "
In Binghamton, the Langellas heard about Cox's efforts over the past several days. On Friday night, they watched a recording of Beck interviewing Cox and talking about how the political commentator was going be at the Mall on Saturday cleaning litter.
"Let's go to Washington," Cori Langella said.
"Do you want to? Okay, let's go," Dominick said.
They left their home at 4:30 a.m. Saturday.
After arriving at the Mall, they cleaned for more than four hours something that was a challenge for Dominick, a retired mechanic who has multiple sclerosis.
But he planned to return to the Mall on Sunday, if he could, to clean up after events taking place there. "We'll try to make it down in the afternoon," he said.


text:
Thank you for such a nice compliment on my 2 quilts! You made my night.
Thanks GB for the nice compliment on my daughter's dress!
Didn't see the dog bed comment at first! I didn't make the bed, it's a Perla bed! Since it has that odd shape there are very limited (and mostly expensive) covers available for it. The bed is just a plastic shell, it doesn't come with any coverings at all.
Thanks GB! It's still not quilted, I need some more experience with FMQ before I quilt this one. I spent too much time on it, I don't want to ruin it!
Hi Babs! I do remember! So cool you are gonna make this quilt now. And for your granddoggie . I know the Lorax fabric, think that will look great on this design. Looking very much forward to see it when done!!
Thanks barbs for your kind comments. Have a great day.
Thank you so much for the nice comment on my quilt today! That pattern was Sunday Charmer, the fabric is....Rose Parade by Moda. Loved it! I made it as a bday gift for my SIL.
thanks for the photo comments gramma! the feathered quilt is NOT fmq - i posted a thread about it - the machine embroidered quilt! all done on the embroidery machine!!!!! so i'm no more advanced than before! and i laughed at the purple quilt comment as that was my first ever quilt from wayyyyyy back in aug. 2011! i guess some of these old photos get shuffled up the rotation! regardless, thanks for the sweetness!
Thanks for your comments Babs, yes I am very lucky to have such a great space !
The bookcases I bought from 'Fantastic furniture' they are 2m high 80cm wide and the shelves are adjustable.
they were $90 each, a good investment as they can be used anywhere, but for now they're mine !!!! lol
Re my alphabet pictures. Made a baby blanket with the whole ABC set - these were designed by a man in Australia, I do believe, although I have seen a very similar set that someone else done. I did those about 5-6 years ago.
Senior Member


text:
It's a Wonderful Life (BLU)
Frank Capra
Amoeba Review
Sean Sweeney 12/16/2010
Somehow I never got hip to It's A Wonderful Life until more recent years. Though it's been a Christmas season staple ever since the 1970s when its copyright fell into the public domain, it managed to elude me my entire childhood. I think I may have blown it off as corny or lightweight, but I couldn't have been more wrong. It's A Wonderful Life, besides being incredibly moving, has themes that still pack a wallop.
On first viewing it may take some nudging to get past the set up concerning stars talking and angels and what not. The Our Town piece of Americana, its lovable small town, seems overly cliched at first glance until you realize this is the movie that invented it. There is a reason these ideas are now called "Capraesque." This and other films (Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, Meet John Doe, etc.) established director Frank Capra and his wholesome characters whose decent values can take on the world as a style all its own. And then the great Jimmy Stewart enters the picture and anchors it with an epic performance.
As George Bailey of the town of Bedford Falls, Stewart starts out as an adventurous young 20-something dreamer about to set out on a trip for Europe until his father passes. Then the bank crashes of the late '20s leave him stuck at home with more responsibilities than he ever wanted. George loses his dreams when he gets stuck working in the family bank business with his goofy uncle Billy (Thomas Mitchell). Passing up on a "chance of a lifetime" business opportunity, he instead marries Mary (Donna Reed) and has a ton of kids. He becomes even more invested in Bedford Falls, the place he once dreamed of leaving, and the town becomes even more indebted to him as it's slowly being swallowed up by Mr. Potter (Lionel Barrymore) and George becomes the one thing standing between the good people of Bedford Falls and the greedy slumlord. After some serious mishaps, George grows depressed and suicidal. Before attempting to jump off a bridge he is visited by an angel named Clarence (Henry Travers) and is shown what Bedford Falls would have become (with strip clubs and beer halls) had he never existed. He realizes it's a wonderful life indeed.
Along with Vertigo, It's A Wonderful Life may be Stewart's signature performance, but with so many great roles and so many phases to his amazing career it's hard to choose. You have his earlier Capra hit, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington; his '40s comedies, Philadelphia Story (his Oscar winner) and Harvey; his Westerns, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (half the film the 50-something Stewart plays a fresh outta college kid) and Winchester '73 (all of his underrated others with director Anthony Mann); his Hitchcock films, Rope, Rear Window, and Vertigo; and then maybe my favorite Stewart flick, the Otto Preminger courtroom epic, Anatomy Of A Murder. It's a Wonderful career.
Just as it is unfair to compare apples to oranges or Charlie Chaplin to Buster Keaton, so is the comparison of director Capra to his edgier, but less celebrated contemporary Preston Sturges. Both employed an impressive stock company of character actors and both were on the cutting edge of comedy, though Capra's career went even further back to the silents before his breakthrough, It Happened One Night, in 1934. Sturges was a product of the 1940s. By the end of the decade both would be all but washed up. Sturges' brand of cynical comedy would morph into the work of Billy Wilder and other more complicated creators, while Capra's more hopeful style would be considered passé. It's A Wonderful Life was not well received in its day and would help to put the nail in Capra's coffin (though a few years later he would have a mini-comeback with State Of The Union).
The more one views It's Wonderful Life, and perhaps the older one gets, the deeper the affect the film has on the watcher. The politics are rather astounding, products of the depression era '30s rather than the communist scared '40s. George misses out on the big money but builds a neighborhood for the poor to live, even though he knows he won't make a dime from it. This is a film about the modesty of the American dream. George's house and others may be shabby, but they own it. George needs to learn that having people who love him and depend on him is just as spectacular as the adventures and larger than life accomplishments he thought he would have. His growth requires a Kafkaesque nightmare to learn it, like King Lear running mad or a twisted take on A Christmas Carol, this is a holiday film unlike any other.
It's A Wonderful Life was nominated for five Oscars: Best Actor (Jimmy Stewart), Best Director, Best Picture, Best Sound, and Best Editing.
2-Disc gift set.
It's A Wonderful Life has had just that. With the endearing message that "no one is a failure who has friends," Frank Capra's heartwarming masterpiece continues to endure, and after 60 years this beloved classic still remains as powerful and moving as the day it was made.
Product Details
- Starring: James Stewart, Donna Reed, Lionel Barrymore, Gloria Grahame
- Format: Black & White, Color, Dolby
- Language: English, French, Spanish
- Subtitles: English, French, Portuguese, Spanish
- Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
- Number of Discs: 2
- Rating: Not Rated
- Label: Paramount
- Release Date: 11/01/2011
- Run Time: 130 minutes
Special Features
- Exclusive Ornament
- The Making Of It's A Wonderful Life - A documentary featurette hosted by Tom Bosley


text:
This website uses cookies to deliver some of our products and services as well as for analytics and to provide you a more personalized experience. Visit our Cookie Notice to learn more.
By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. We've also updated our Privacy Notice. Visit our Privacy Policy to see what's new.
Other OSA Sites
The Optical Society offers numerous benefits to its valued industry members and we are pleased to announce we now offer complimentary public relations assistance for your company.
OSA understands how important it is for your company's products, services and positive image to be promoted to key media. The world of public and media relations in the optics and photonics community can be overwhelming. OSA's professional PR staff is here to help and share our expertise with you. We are pleased to offer the following tools and services (at no charge) to your organization:
OSA has partnered with Business Wire (www.businesswire.com) to offer the highest quality news distribution services available. Effectively engaging your key audiences with your company news is vitally important, and OSA's partnership with Business Wire provides you with powerful, targeted tools to do so. Business Wire is the global leader in commercial news distribution services for public and private organizations with technology news distribution options targeted to meet the needs of OSA Industry Development Associates.Business Wire's proprietary news network reaches general media, technology and science trade media, financial, consumer and research databases, disclosure media, regulatory services and the financial information systems serving capital markets around the globe. The breadth of Business Wire's news distribution capabilities, coupled with the special pricing and exclusive member benefits offered by the OSA program, is a cost-effective way of getting your company's news heard.
Special benefits for OSA Industry Development Associates include:
For more information, contact Leon Harbar at firstname.lastname@example.com.
OSA's Industry Development Associates PR Toolkit contains valuable information to help you shape your communications strategies. Highlights include:
Note: For access to the PR Toolkit, please send an email to firstname.lastname@example.com.
Any time your company issues a press release, statement or media alert, a link to the release on your site may be posted to OSA's Industry Development Associates News page at no charge. This site is accessible to the general public, including members of the media and industry analysts. Press releases can be posted online using the submission form on OSA's website.
OSA will provide its Industry Development Associate members with important information on editorial staff changes at key industry publications to ensure your list of media contacts stays as up to date as possible.
Each month, OSA features a different corporate member in the OSA Member Newsletter, highlighting recent company news, product releases or milestones.
Additionally, OSA may include your company's news and announcements in Industry Newsmakers, a quarterly e-newsletter sent to targeted industry press recapping corporate member news.
If you would like to discuss any of OSA's featured PR services, please do not hesitate to give a member of the PR team a call. We are happy to help with your public relations goals and strategies.
Media Relations
The Optical Society


text:
Ways to Give
You may make a gift to Lehman College through the Lehman College Foundation, a separate 501(c)3 organization whose purpose is to raise, manage and distribute funds to support the mission of Lehman College. You may also make gifts to the Lehman Center for the Performing Arts and the Lehman Art Gallery, both of which are separate 501(c)3 organizations.
Annual Fund
Your support for the Campaign for Lehman College will help the College build a permanent endowment. Unrestricted gifts to the Annual Fund provide direct support that will be of greatest benefit to students, faculty, and our campus: increasing scholarship and faculty funding, enhancing programs and facilities, and addressing critical needs as they arise.
Planned Gifts
- Gifts of appreciated property such as publicly traded securities or real property
- Gifts of stock from privately held corporations
- Gift of an established business
- "In-kind" gifts that can be directly utilized by the College
Other Ways to Give
- Endowed faculty chairs and professorships
- Student scholarships
- Named facilities
To learn more about planned giving or a major gift, contact Susan E. Ebersole, Executive Director, at 718-960-8350 or email@example.com.


text:
Search Our Jobs
- {{keyword}}
- {{$parent.googlePlacesAutocompleteEnabled ? location.description : location}}
Job Snapshot
Employee Type:
Bloomington, MN
Job Type:
Not Specified
Date Posted:
Job Description
TWIN CITY GRILL is hiring BUSSERS for our DINING ROOM team!
Classic American Grill
Homemade comfort foods and caring service on the first floor of the thriving Mall of America
Caring. Creative. Careers.
Join the Lettuce Entertain You family! Our 100+ restaurants are nationally recognized for great food and service and as great places to work. We hire and care deeply for people with creativity, passion and the drive to be the best. And we reward our teams with top notch benefits, career-long training and development and opportunities for growth.
Is this you?
- You take care of yourself. (Energy and stamina. You'll need both.)
- You care for others. (Teamwork and success. They are one and the same.)
- You care about guests. (Quality. The bar is high.)
If you want a career at a progressive company with a long-standing commitment to people, join our caring and creative team.
EOE. We participate in E-Verify / Participamos en E-Verify
Job Requirements
Responsible for assisting the service team in exceeding the guest's expectations. Assists with Coffee Person duties as directed. Teamwork, organization and good awareness are necessary for success in this position.
- Be able to work a variety of hours, days and shifts, including weekends
- Get along with others and be a team player
- Be genuinely committed to ensuring that the overall guest experience exceeds expectations, including greeting guests with a warm, sincere smile and anticipating their needs
- Use tact and good judgment when dealing with guest challenges, responding to guest needs with patience and courtesy
- Follow all steps of service
- Assist service team with all food and beverage service
- Comply with all safety and sanitation (including handwashing) guidelines and procedures
- Be proficient in the use and operation of all necessary tools and equipment
- Follow all rules, policies, procedures and conditions of employment, including those outlined in the Employee Handbook
- Other duties will be assigned as needed
- Clean and reset tables and transport dirty dishes to bus tub/tray or dishroom
- Effectively service a minimum of an eight table station
- Communicate in English in order to comprehend and perform/follow job requirements in written and spoken direction
- Perform more than one task at a time, calmly and effectively in an extremely busy and stressful work environment
- Work in a confined, crowded space of variable noise and temperature levels.
- Lift and move up to 10 pounds, frequently lift and/or move up to 25 pounds and occasionally lift and/or move up to 50 pounds
- Safely and effectively use and operate all necessary tools and equipment
- Stand and walk for an entire shift, including moving safely through all areas of the restaurant, which may include stairs, uneven and slick surfaces
- Accessibility varies by location


text:
Classic baseball musical gets a New England makeover
The Boston Red Sox have replaced the long-vanished Washington Senators in the revised version of "Damn Yankees" that opens the 2014 season at the Goodspeed Opera House in East Haddam.
Joe DiPietro, who won a Tony for his "Memphis" book in 2010, did the tweaking of the original script. In addition to shifting the setting from the District of Columbia to Boston, the musical has been moved back in time from 1955 to 1952, the year that Red Sox star Ted Williams was called into service in the Marines.
The new version is able to take advantage of the legendary Red Sox/Yankees rivalry which suits the show's leading man, Stephen Mark Lukas, who grew up in Massachusetts.
"My family is very excited because they are all Red Sox fans," Lukas said during a rehearsal break last week. "It's set during a time when the Red Sox were a great team, but they just couldn't beat the Yankees. They were their Achilles heel."
Lukas plays Joe Hardy, the rabid middle-aged Sox fan who sells his soul to the devil to become a young baseball star who can lead the Boston team to a pennant win. Along the way, he bonds with someone else who made the same bargain, the ravishing Lola, who was once "the ugliest girl in Providence, R.I."
For Lukas, the show is another classic checked off his wish list. He's already appeared in "South Pacific," "Oklahoma" and "Little Me" and he just completed 18 months with "The Book of Mormon" on the road and on Broadway.
"I've been having a blast. It's classic Americana," Lukas said of "Damn Yankees."
The show is Lukas' first job at Goodspeed, which he said is living up to its reputation as "a wonderful playground" for musical theater, where actors have more time to work on a show than is common in regional theater. ("Damn Yankees" starts performances Friday, April 11, and will run through Saturday, June 21.)
"They have a great music department. They do a lot of research, and they give you the time to find out what works," he said.
Lukas thinks Connecticut audiences will get a special kick out of the revised script, since the state is a hotbed of both Sox and Yankees fans.
The actor believes the show has endured because of the wish fulfilment aspect, but also the examination of a road not taken by an older person. "The story goes all the way back to the Faust legend. Getting a wish granted, but then all of the trials and tribulations that come with it. And finally just wanting to go back to the way things were before," he said.
"Joe is an interesting character to play because he's an old man trapped in a young man's body," the actor said of the character who starts to miss his old life so much that he rents a room in his wife's house. (She has no idea who the new Sox star used to be.)
"The scenes with Meg are very poignant because they have a lot of layers. They're challenging," Lukas added.
After working on "The Book of Mormon" for many months, Lukas believes one of the reasons the show by the "South Park" creators has been such a huge hit is that -- despite the many off-color moments -- it's in the same great American musical comedy tradition as "Damn Yankees."
"I had a wonderful time doing that show because it comes from an enduring part of pop culture. It's a comedy with a payoff at the end that is so heartwarming," he said, adding that there is also something "old-fashioned" about the hot-ticket success of the show. "It's a throwback to those Broadway hits where people bought their tickets six months in advance and then went knowing they were going to have a great time."
email@example.com; Twitter: @joesview
Goodspeed Opera House, 6 Main St., East Haddam. Friday, April 11 to Saturday, June 21. $28-$75. 860-873-8668. www.goodspeed.org.


text:
Monday, January 24, 2011
Witches' Sabbath
Posted by Rot at 7:05 AM
Labels: art, artist, devil, francesco goya, satan, witches, witches' sabbath
4 comments:
- Hopsy the beer drinking clown said...
Goya is brilliant! I really like his painting of Saturn devouring his son and who can forget his classic painting "The Spell", another witchcraft inspired work.
- January 24, 2011 at 4:51 PM
- K.O. said...
Very interesting article! I had only heard of Goya by name before but now am totally intrigued by his "Black Paintings."
- January 25, 2011 at 2:36 AM
- Unknown said...
Cheers for the link to my Goya post. Intriguing blog you have here!
Keep up the amazing work!
Have you ever seen Michael Hussar's work? A modern artist whose work fits your theme nicely - his Memling portrait is my favourite.
Kind Regards
- January 30, 2011 at 3:00 AM
- Rot said...
I saw Hussar's work a while back on creepmachine but have never posted about him.
And I don't know how I ever missed his Memling painting...so thanks!
- January 30, 2011 at 3:13 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
I just wanted to let you know that I had trouble with the cookie dough being very sticky. I wrote about this below, but I just thought I would let you know up front that I couldn't make it exactly like the directions said I should.
I hope that you enjoy this recipe review!
|The Ingredients
|Pour dry cake mix into a mixing bowl.
|Combine egg, Cool Whip Free, and dry yellow cake mix together.
|Mix ingredients together until well blended.
|My cookie dough came out VERY sticky. I put it in the fridge and even after several hours it was too sticky to roll into balls.
|Instead of rolling into balls, I used my cookie scooper to make the dough into rough shapes.
|I didn't roll the dough into powdered sugar. I just sprinkled some sugar on top of the dough before baking.
|After 10 minutes in the oven the cookies were done!
|I let them cool a little before eating them!
|They were delicious!!
|These cookies are so soft and chewy, which is my favorite!!
. . . . . . . . . .
Cool Whip Cookies
Source: sewzy1
1 egg
8 ounces Cool Whip Free
1 box yellow cake mix
1/2 powdered sugar
Mix egg, Cool Whip Free, and dry yellow cake mix together.
Roll teaspoon size balls into powdered sugar and bake on cookie sheet at 375° for 10 minutes.
Serves: 36; 2 PointsPlus per serving/cookie


text:
Is it too late now to say sorry?
Justin Bieber made a crystal clear announcement Tuesday via Instagram, when he wrote a lengthy statement to fans explaining why he will no longer take pictures with them.
"If you happen to see me out somewhere know that I'm not gonna take a picture I'm done taking pictures," he wrote. "It has gotten to the point that people won't even say hi to me or recognize me as a human, I feel like a zoo animal, and I wanna be able to keep my sanity."
U.S. & World
Stories that affect your life across the U.S. and around the world.
Bieber continued, "I realize people will be disappointed but I don't owe anybody a picture. and people who say 'but I bought ur album' know that you got my album and you got what you paid for AN ALBUM! It doesn't say in the fine print whenever you see me you also get a photo."
Rapper T.I. reposted Justin's message on Instagram with a caption that supports the distressed singer. "I know a lot of people gon say u tripping...But I FEEL The exact same thing lil bro. S--ts outta hand. Life should be lived...not recorded," he wrote, but reassured fans that he's still willing to pose for a snapshot. "***But I'll still take a pic from time to time...just respect when I don't."
Fans had mixed reactions to his decision. One user commented, "Just saw your concert in Boston, you signed up for this job. You created the fan base. We all support you. I don't think that it is right to deny your fans the pleasure of taking a picture with you, that to them was a chance of a lifetime. Yes I understand if they are overly aggressive and make you feel uncomfortable that you sent them a picture, but to deny those who support you no matter what you get your self into. We want you to succeed and be happy. You are a celebrity, this is your life. You have to accept that and treat your fans with kindness."
However, another commenter wrote, "Can u imagine having hundreds of ppl run up to u every minute when ur out in public its probably very overwhelming for him! He cant take a picture with everyone he see's obviously stop hating on someone when u have absolutely no idea what he's going through look at it in his point of view..."
It's no secret that the last few months have been emotional for Bieber.
On Saturday, the singer sat on the ground in front of the crowd during his concert at Philadelphia's Wells Fargo Arena and began to cry while belting the lyrics to his song "Purpose," which is said to be about his newfound relationship with God.
The 22-year-old's decision to turn away fan photos comes shortly after announcing his cancellation of all meet-and-greets.
In March, shortly after kicking off his world tour, Bieber made the announcement on Instagram, telling fans that while he enjoys meeting people, he ends up "feeling so drained and filled with so much of other people's spiritual energy that I end up so drained and unhappy."
He later wrote, "The pressure of meeting peoples' expectations of what I'm supposed to be is so much for me to handle and a lot on my shoulders. Never want to disappoint but I feel I would rather give you guys the show and my albums as promised. Can't tell you how sorry I am, and wish it wasn't so hard on me...And I want to stay in the healthy mindset I'm in to give you the best show you have ever seen."
Bieber is scheduled to perform 114 shows in total during his globetrotting tour, which is slated to conclude Nov. 29 in London.
Musicians Performing Live on Stage
Justin Bieber Just Got a Brand-New Tattoo on His Face and the Meaning May Surprise You