text:
Part 1

Retrieving food from the kitchen was one of the easiest tasks Winter was asked to do. Winter found no challenge in the task. His naturally strong body provided him with exceptional strength and agility enabling him the ability to complete much more challenging tasks. Once he had managed to break down the front door of his master’s house when he was locked out. However, the only reward he got was a smack on the nose. Winter hated being a cat. He was powerless, enslaved and most of all, bored. The worst thing about his situation was the dependence he had on his family. They fed, sheltered and protected him, turning Winter into a lazy and reliant cat. He detested that. If only he could be free. He could become important, people would look up to him and admire his every virtue. These were the thoughts and dreams of Winter as he monotonously and unwillingly fetched food from his master’s kitchen day after day, year after year.

Rex moved on to his next house. He had been doing this for 24 years now and not once had he been caught. He would stalk his target, analysing his or her every move then noting it down in his private journal. These notes helped him decide whether to leave, capture or eliminate his victim. His new target was Winter.

The Fridge was 6 times larger than winter, but winter had 10 times the strength of an average cat. He opened the giant metal door using his right paw to grab the handle and his left paw to push off of the wall. This was his masters 5th beer in one night and soon he would be fast asleep. With his master’s wife and children away in Spain, Winter would have the whole house to himself tonight. But he wasn’t as happy as he usually was on these rare occasions. He had a strange and unexplainable feeling that he was not alone.

Rex had never been so scared in his entire 24 years of service. One moment he was on top of the fridge observing Winter’s activity, next he had a strong sharpened paw clamped around his neck, almost crushing his spine.
“If you don’t tell me everything I need to know about you and what you are doing here within the next minute, your eyes will be ripped from their sockets?” Winter roared in a loud and ferocious voice.
“Peace young one, I mean you or your family no harm.” The orange and white cat’s calm voice seemed to sooth Winter’s anger for he released his paw from Rex’s throat.
“I am a Shinobi Scout” Rex continued, “Sent by the Ocelot Shinobi of the Combined Kingdom. My leader is looking for possible recruits for our cause.”
Winter was amazed; people had spoken of cats causing trouble in the neighbourhood, some spoke of them as wild animals some thought they were some form of organised domestic cats. It never occurred to Winter that they were ninjas.
“Do I pass the test then, can I become a ninja” Winter asked, forgetting his master’s commands.
“Afraid not, none of my targets have ever caught me before and although you have display extraordinary levels of stealth and agility, my investigation is not complete and cannot carry on any further due to my discovery.”
Winter had him by the neck again.
“What do you mean I can’t join you, I have outsmarted, outmanoeuvred and outmuscled you and you claim to be a ninja yourself.” Winter was furious! This was his one chance to get away. He could become powerful and independent without the need of his worthless family.
“I agree” Rex replied, “I have been bested. Yet, those are not the only elements required to become a ninja.” Winters claws were closing tighter around his neck. “Patience, loyalty and wisdom are vital assets of an Ocelot Shinobi.” The orange Shinobi was difficult to read but Winter detected fear within the Shinobi’s voice. He decided to take advantage of this.
“Let’s see if those assets help you if I take off your head and feed it to my master.”
Rex was a loyal companion to the Ocelot Shinobi but was not willing to risk his life saying no to Winter and besides, Winter had proven to be highly talented cat and anyone could learn patience and loyalty.
“Bring everything you value with you, once you leave with me there is no turning back.” Rex had regained the authority in his voice but Winter did not take anything with him for he valued nothing from this household.

Part 2

Although the Dojo was deep under ground, very old and not so clean. The place smelled of opportunity and freedom, a smell that Winter had not experienced before. Winter was ordered to go immediately to the Dojo, 6 more new recruits had just begun training there. His instructor didn’t look like a ninja, but his face showed that he was wiser than everyone else in the room combined. On the other hand, his fellow recruits showed no qualities at all. They all appeared to be weak little runts pulled from rich families. Winter didn’t notice the 7th recruit standing behind him; he was a menacing cat. His dark grey hair and scarred face did not seem to show any form of sympathy as he shoved Winter to the ground.
“You’re standing in my spot, runt.”
Winter stepped away; he did not wish to start a fight on his first day, especially not with him.
“Attention class!” the instructors voice commanded, “Today you will learn the history of our clan and why we have sworn to protect the translation stone.” Winter was listening intently as the instructor continued, “Long ago humans and cats could speak to each other and lived side-by-side, as equals. The cats were much wiser and more intelligent. Whereas the humans were more reckless and greedy. The Master Cats were working on a massive project looking into the origins of the universe. When the humans found out about their project and demanded answers, the Master Cats refused to give them anything, for it was far too powerful for the hands of the reckless humans. The humans started war against the cats, capturing and torturing cats around the world in order to get information on the master cats’ project. The Cat Masters sensed that sooner or later the humans would find out so they locked away their new found information into the translation stone along with the humans ability to speak with cats. Our order, The Ocelot Shinobi of the Combined Kingdoms were ordered to protect this stone from the humans’ greed. The masters then killed themselves to remove any other source of the information of the universe. To date, our order has protected this stone for 6 millennia and continues to protect it. It is called the translation stone because, once activated, it will allow humans and cats to speak to each other again. One day the responsibilities of our order will be passed on to you and on that day, you must be ready. For now though I want to know each of your names and their meaning.” The grey cat answered first.
“My name is Akuma, son of Enma the powerful. Akuma stands for the devil and means I always get what I want.” The authority in his voice made the instructor a little scared.
“We’ll see about that” the instructor replied. “You, the white cat. What’s your name?”
“My name is Winter, it was given to me by my owners. It means that I can be as innocent and playful as snowflakes, but at the same time be as unpredictable and ruthless as a blizzard.”
As Winter left the Dojo with the others, he saw Akuma’s scarred face again. There was an evil look in his eye that made Winter think he was after the stone.

Part 3

The instructor was furious. “What do you mean they won’t be graduating next week? The recruits have been training for a whole year now, I taught them myself! They are ready.” Chusuke was the leader of the Order and hated being shouted at, but his patience made him reply in a calm manner.
“I have visited the fountain of clairvoyance and it showed me, one of our new recruits activating the translation stone.”
The instructor didn’t believe for a second that one of his recruits would commit that crime, not even Akuma. The instructor continued shouting.
“The visions given from the fountain of clairvoyance have been proven wrong before, and I know more about my recruits than some sacred water does.” Around half the cats in the order believed in the fountain of clairvoyance. It is said that any who drink from the fountain can receive visions that can tell the future. Before the argument could continue however, Winter burst in the door with an urgent expression.
“Akuma is planning on activating the stone.” Winter described with a loud, panicked voice. “He is down in the crypts with 3 recruits and a group of humans. They could attack at any moment.” Chusuke burst into action.
“Winter, take the other 3 recruits and guard the stone. Everyone else will proceed to the crypts at once.” Winter, was quick to react, he got the other recruits from the Dojo and ran with them down the corridors of the underground base towards the translation stone.

One forceful punch to the throat and one of the recruits was dead instantly. Winter had broken the second recruit’s right arm and was twisting the cat’s neck when the third realised what was happening. He stood in a fighting stance and went in for a low kick to Winter’s left kidney but Winter was already behind him. The last recruit fell without a sound and without a head. Winter stepped silently over their bodies and carried on towards the stone vault.

title: My First Story: Winter and the Translation Stone.

question: What does the text say about Akuma?

answer: He's a mean-looking gray-haired cat in the same class as Winter, training to be a Ninja cat in the Order of The Ocelot Shinobi of the Combined Kingdoms. On the meeting day of the new recruits, he pushes Winter aside menacingly. There's a scar on Akuma's face, and Winter says Akuma looks evil, somehow. Akuma talks with an authoritative voice. He is the son of Enma the powerful, Akuma means the devil, and he always gets what he wants, he says. He's after the Translation Stone, which is not supposed to be activated. By the end of the story, Winter moves to counter Akuma and his recruits.

question: What does the story say about Winter?

answer: Winter is the protagonist of the story. He's a white cat, feeling stuck in a home. He's fetching beer for his master when he spots the Shinobi Scout, Rex. Winter forces him to forego his observations and induct Winter to the Order of The Ocelot Shinobi of the Combined Kingdom. Upon meeting the recruits, Winter is sure that the grey-haired, scarface cat Akuma is evil. He's sure Akuma is after the Translation Stone. His fears are realized about a year later, and Chusuke sends him with three more recruits to try and stop Akuma.

question: What does the story say about the Order of The Ocelot Shinobi of the Combined Kingdom?

answer: The Order is a secret organization protecting the Translation Stone, which is an ancient stone that can allow humans and cats to communicate. The Order was established after the humans found out about the investigation of cats into the nature of the universe, and the cats didn't want the reckless humans to obtain this knowledge. Both the knowledge and the ability to speak with humans are locked into the stone. The Order obtains recruits through scouting potential candidates extensively. Winter is an exception to that. They teach the initiates for about a year before graduation, which was delayed in the story due to prophecies about someone in the latest class activating the Translation Stone, which is forbidden.

question: What does the text say about dogs?


split: test

text:
The notes start off airy and light. Butterflies on the wind. The gust picks up as his voice does the same. The gravel and the softness mix like dirt on the riverbed.

I decide to call him Toothy. He's missing a front tooth, I can see the hole from here. He looks like his keyboard.

“We both agree, don't we?”

Her voice cuts through the music, but not completely.

“ 'bout what?”

“About us.”

I open my mouth to respond but the music grabs my attention. The girl has joined in now, soft voice and raindrop percussion. Her name is Soft Drums. Her black hair pulses to the rhythm of her movements.

I look around. The walls are covered in curtains of cheap beads and old posters.

“Well?”

Her voice is insisting. Trying to get through to me.

“I guess.”

“I know you're not happy.”

“How do you know that?”

I know her. She's getting unconfortable. Her hands are getting cold. She wraps them around her mug. The hot chocolate smells so sweet. Too sweet. Brings back memories of saccharine winters.

I do the same with my cup but the tea's gone cold. Don't ask me how, I don't know why.

She says something but I can't hear it. A third band member has run in through the front door. He's all bed hair and guitar straps. He carries in a gust of cold air from the street. The smell, too. He's been smoking.

He sits down and joins in the singing.

A short, hairy, bearded man with a cap that says “Barista” brings him a smoking coffee. Smoking Bed Hair thanks him with a nod and interrupts his singing to take a sip.

I look at her. She sighs.

The song's beat changes. Smoking Bed Hair has pulled out his guitar. Toothy is on the percussion, and Soft Drums in on the piano. Nothing makes sense anymore. I frown.

“I think I'm not the right one for you.”

It's crazy. She can't bring herself to say it. It has to sound like it's my fault. It's not that we're wrong for each other. It's that she's wrong for me, so it's my taste that's in question.

“How do you know that? I'm the one who should know that.”

“I guess.”

“Listen to them. They're so good.”

“Really? Tooth Guy doesn't even sing in the mike.”

“I've been calling him Toothy.”

She starts smiling, then stops herslef. She didn,t come here to smile.

“And the other guy's guitar is out of tune.”

I don't care about that. He's playing it, and playing it well.

“I don't know, Smoking Bed Hair seems to handle it pretty well.”

She stifles another smile.

“So you don't have anything to say?”

“ 'bout what?”

She lets her look speak for her. I would try to guess what it's saying, but the music is louder.

“I think I'm going to buy their album.”

She gets up.

The notes swell around her. It's like she's a part of the symphony. I look up at her.

“So I'll see you at home?”

She sighs and rolls her eyes.

“I guess.”

She closes her coat around herself and walks outside. I see her pulling out her phone. She smiles as she sees a message, then puts it down and loses her smile while walking away.

It'll be fine. She'll come back. She left her hat on the table.

The music's great here. Tea's pretty good, too.

title: [RF] Dreaming (Feedback requested!)

question: What does the couple talk about at the bar?

answer: Whether they should break up.

question: What are the nicknames the narrator comes up with for members of the band?

answer: Toothy, Smoking Bed Hair, and Soft Drums.

question: Why is the woman upset with the man at the end of the conversation?

answer: At the end of the conversation they fail to resolve whether they will break up.


text:
The knockout stage of the 1991 FIFA Women's World Cup was the second and final stage of the competition, following the group stage. It began on 24 November with the quarter-finals and ended on 30 November 1991 with the final match, held at the Tianhe Stadium in Guangzhou. A total of eight teams (the top two teams from each group, along with the two best third-placed teams) advanced to the knockout stage to compete in a single-elimination style tournament.
All times listed are local, CST (UTC+8).
 Format
In the knockout stage, if a match was level at the end of 90 minutes of normal playing time, extra time was played (two periods of 15 minutes each). If still tied after extra time, the match was decided by a penalty shoot-out to determine the winner.
The quarter-final match-ups depended on the two third-placed teams which qualified. FIFA set out the following schedule for the semi-finals:
* Match 23: Winner Match 19 v Winner Match 20
* Match 24: Winner Match 21 v Winner Match 22
The third place play-off match-up was:
* Match 25: Loser Match 23 v Loser Match 24
The final match-up was:
* Match 26: Winner Match 23 v Winner Match 24
 Combinations of matches in the quarter-finals
In the quarter-finals, all matches were played on 24 November 1991. The specific match-ups and schedule depended on which two third-placed teams qualified for the quarter-finals:
 Qualified teams
The top two placed teams from each of the three groups, plus the two best-placed third teams, qualified for the knockout stage.
 Bracket

title: 1991 FIFA Women's World Cup knockout stage

question: Where was the final match for the 1991 FIFA Women's World Cup held?

answer: The final match was held at the Tianhe Stadium in Guangzhou.

question: How long is extra time played in football?

answer: Extra time consists of two halves. Each half is 15 minutes each.

question: What date was the quarter-finals of the tournament played?

answer: It was played on 24 November 1991.

question: How many teams qualify for the knock-out stage of the competition?

answer: Eight teams - top two from each of the three groups and the two best-placed third teams.

question: Write a ~5 sentence summary.

answer:
The 1991 FIFA Women's World Cup final match was held at the Tianhe Stadium in Guangzhou. For the finals, any extra time played will be 15 minutes for each half. The quarter-final matches will be played on 24 November 1991.

For the quarter-finals, a total of eight teams will be seeded. Those teams will comprise the top two from each of the three groups and the two best-placed third teams.


text:
Footsteps echo in the long stone corridor. Small chains can also be heard. The man is panting, running towards a wooden door with golden engravings. He rams in the door, forgetting about the doorknob. The door hits the Jester, who then falls to the ground and breaks his nose. In the middle of the room, is the leader. Without wasting an instant, he yells

“Sire! We are under attack!” Yells the Subreddit knight.
“What?” Screams the leader, standing up
“Yes sire! Castle Repost is breaching our walls! It won't be long now!”
“What are they after?”
“The same thing as always, they wish to break Castle AdviceAnimal's walls and reach the Front Page fortress!”
“This shouldn't be a problem, our Downvote cannons are always charged! Tell me what happened!”
“They managed to outnumber us. They silently shot down our defenses with their Upvote Cannons. From that point, they burned the front gate and slowly walked in.”
“Where are they now?” Asks the Leader
“We managed to arm our comment guns and slow them down, but soon they will overpower us.” The knight explained
“Did you try calling on an ally Castle? Like Castle Funny or Castle Aww?”
“We did, but they said they could not arrive for a few days. We sent messages to Castle Atheist and Circle-Jerk, we have no response yet, but I'm sure they will refuse.”
“What about the citizens?”

A cannon shot is heard, then a smashing sound. Screams flood the air, followed by another explosion and screams of glory.

“We tried to make them leave by the secret tunnels, but many citizens took to arms and jumped into the fight. Many died and are still dying. The ones that decided to escape found that most of the tunnels were blocked. We lost many.” Explains the Knight, a hint of sadness in his voice.
“How many men do we have left?”
“When I left, a few were still standing. A few of our men have been captured and enslaved. The Fortress was still untouched, but, as we heard, that has changed.”
“Then follow me, we shall gather what few we have and craft some plan that might turn the table.” Commands the King.

The King opens the door. A few cats run away from the room. The Jester stands up and runs to the corridor, where a cannonball smashes through and hits him. The Knight goes first, but turns left. The King follows him. They walk through the stone corridors and passageways, on their way seeing the Castle Nobles running awry. The Scumbag Brain is hitting a door, trying to get in, while the Scumbag Steve and Stacy are pushing people aside, running in circles. As the Knight and King finally arrive to the armory, they realize that it's completely empty.

“Where are they all?” Asks the King
“At the walls, fighting off the enemy. We were lucky not to encounter them.”
More screams are heard, this time closer to them. Again, the same victory cries are heard.

“We don't have any time left. The enemy is here, searching for me. We have to act now.”
“All the weapons we have left are here. A few pounds of black powder, some swords and dagger and two shields.” Counts the Knight, as he locks the door.

The King walks and sits in a corner. As he does this, the door blasts open in a cloud of fire, smoke and blood. The King screams as portions of his newest friend splatters his robes. As the smoke dies down, an orange arrow smashes into the wall next to his head.

“So, you managed to outlive all of your little guards? No matter, you will join them soon enough.” A voice chuckles.
“So you are the new general that managed to recruit all of these newbies? You are new yourself, but competent.” Tells the King.
“Why thank you, but don't think complements will save you. I am here on a mission.” Exclaims the General
“You are competent, but still inexperienced. Exactly like your army.”  Explains the King
“And why is that?” Asks the General
“Because you didn't think this through. The worst place to be when you attack a Fortress, especially when you confront someone, is the armory.” Slowly says the King
“Explain.” Demands the General
“Let me show you.” The King says

The General and his army intensely stares at the King, while he reaches into his back pocket with his left hand. He slowly pulls out a gun.

“Downvote gun, one of the most powerful ever built” Says the King.
“Don't even think about shooting me or yourself.” Confidently says the General.

The King lets out a little laugh. He slowly points the muzzle to his left. The entire audience looks left, over to a pile of swords and daggers. As fast as he can, the King takes a shield and shoots to his right, on a pile of black powder. As the audience looks right, they see a large flash of light, then another ball of fire, smoke and blood fill the room. Screams are heard, but no victory cries are heard this time. When the smoke falls, the King uncurls from behind the shield and stands up.

“Time to rebuild, again... Will these attacks ever end?” He sighs

As he walks out of the room, he looks at all the damage done to the Fortress and the Kingdom. A cat walks to him and starts cuddling.

- “I really need a bath.” He whispers.

title: The attack of the Repost

question: What is this story a metaphor for?

answer: This story is a metaphor for a bunch of trolls storming a subreddit. The "weapons" in the battle "downvote" cannons and the name of the attacking castle "repost." The king in the story is a metaphor for a subreddit admin.

question: Where does the King chose to make his last stand?

answer: The King choses to make his last stand in the armory. This is because within the armory is located the "downvote gun" which allows him to downvote all the attackers' posts at once.


text:
Earlier this week, we posted a pretty crazy interview with _THE MEG_ director Jon Turteltaub, wherein he explained to us that his vision for the film was for it to be a gory, rated R shark attack flick. “_I am so disappointed the film wasn’t more bloody or disgusting_,” Turteltaub openly told us, adding _“THE NUMBER OF REALLY HORRIFYING, DISGUSTING AND BLOODY DEATHS WE HAD LINED UP THAT WE DIDN’T GET TO DO IS TRAGIC._”

Turteltaub actually filmed some gorier deaths, but during post-production the studio made the decision that _The Meg_ would have to be a PG-13 film. So, well, bye bye gore.

“_We shot or even did a lot of visual effects for [gory scenes]_,” Turteltaub explained. “_We just realized there’s no way we’re keeping this PG-13 if we show this. It’s too fun a movie to not let people who don’t like blood and people who are under, say, 14 years old into the theater. I was very hesitant to cut out a lot of blood and gore_.”

Sadly, the visual effects on those cut scenes weren’t ever finished, so we don’t expect to see them on home video. After all, it’d cost the studio millions to finish them. Sigh.

Crazy enough, star JASON STATHAM is now also speaking out about the original vision for _The Meg_ being flushed down the toilet in favor of a PG-13 action-horror movie, telling Collider that the movie being released this weekend isn’t exactly the movie he signed up for.

“_Script’s totally different_,” Statham explained, talking about how much the movie changed after he originally came aboard.  “_THERE WAS SO MANY DIFFERENT … SOMETIMES YOU JUST GO, “HOW DID IT HAPPEN? HOW DID IT GO FROM THIS TO THIS TO THIS TO THAT?” YOU JUST CAN’T KEEP A TRACK ON IT. I guess if you have the control to keep it a certain way you would, but you don’t. They have a movie to make. They have so many people deciding on what action stays and what scenes stay. How the characters … In the end they want to put something at the beginning. The whole thing at the beginning where I do a rescue on a sub? That was not in the script that I read. That was all brand new stuff, good or bad. I’m just letting you know_.”

He continued, “_I’m just saying it was radically different. John’s interpretation of this is a fun end of summer [movie]. IT’S FULL OF HUMOR. IT’S A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECTED TO A DIFFERENT TASTE OF WHAT MY OWN IS… I LIKE MORE GORY ADULT STUFF. I’m a lot older but I can’t speak for what this film could possibly speak to a younger audience. I might have made a film that not many people wanted to see. I’m not a filmmaker. I’m sort of an actor that’s going to portray a role. I go there but I’ve learned not to get too attached with your own idea of what something could be_.”

He adds, “_BUT YOU GO, WHERE’S THE FUCKING BLOOD? IT’S LIKE, THERE’S A SHARK._”

Speaking more positively about the film, Statham told Collider, “_I admire John’s sort of great spin that he’s done. He’s put this in a place which is totally unique I think. NO ONE WAS EXPECTING THE MEG TO BE A FUN SORT OF HUMOROUS RIDE OR ROMP OR WHATEVER. He’s put his very light-hearted way into it and not tried to make it like anything before. He’s trying to give it his own sort of stamp of tone_.”

[]

[]

Writer in the horror community since 2008. Owns Eli Roth's prop corpse from Piranha 3D. Has three awesome cats. Still plays with toys.

[]

question: Summarize Jon Turtletaub's original vision for the movie, The Meg?

answer: Jon Turtletaub is the director of the movie The Meg. According to Jon, his intent was to make The Meg a gory movie with disgusting bloody deaths and horrifying scenes. However, it seems the studio in charge of the production change its mind and convinced Jon to make the movie suitable for 13 and 14 year olds.

question: What made Jason Statham stick around the movie set even though script initially delivered to him has been altered so much?


text:
_WAG THE DOG_ is a 1997 American political satire black comedy film produced and directed by Barry Levinson and starring Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro.[1] The screenplay concerns a spin doctor and a Hollywood producer who fabricate a war in Albania to distract voters from a presidential sex scandal. The screenplay by Hilary Henkin and David Mamet was loosely adapted from Larry Beinhart's 1993 novel _American Hero_.

_Wag the Dog_ was released one month before the outbreak of the Lewinsky scandal and the subsequent bombing of the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Sudan by the Clinton administration in August 1998, which prompted the media to draw comparisons between the film and reality.[2] The comparison was also made in December 1998 when the administration initiated a bombing campaign of Iraq during Clinton's impeachment trial over the Lewinsky scandal.[3] It was made again in the spring of 1999 when the administration intervened in the Kosovo War and initiated a bombing campaign against Yugoslavia, which coincidentally bordered Albania and contains ethnic Albanians.[4] The film grossed $64.3 million on a $15 million budget and was well received by critics, who praised the direction, performances, themes, and humor.

Plot

The president is caught making advances on an underage girl inside the Oval Office, less than two weeks before the election. Conrad Brean, a top spin doctor, is brought in by presidential aide Winifred Ames to take the public's attention away from the scandal. He decides to construct a fictional war in Albania, hoping the media will concentrate on this instead. Brean contacts Hollywood producer Stanley Motss to create the war, complete with a theme song and fake film footage of a photogenic orphan. The hoax is initially successful, with the president quickly gaining ground in the polls.

When the CIA learns of the plot, they send Agent Young to confront Brean about the hoax. Brean convinces Young that revealing the deception is against his and the CIA's best interests. But when the CIA — in collusion with the president's rival candidate — reports that the war has ended, the media begins to focus back on the president's sexual abuse scandal. To counter this, Motss invents a hero who was left behind enemy lines in Albania. Inspired by the idea that he was “discarded like an old shoe”, Brean and Motss ask the Pentagon to provide a special forces soldier with a matching name (a sergeant named “Schumann” is identified) around whom a POW narrative can be constructed. As part of the hoax, folk singer Johnny Dean (Willie Nelson) records a song called “Old Shoe”, which is pressed onto a 78 rpm record, prematurely aged so that listeners will think it was recorded years earlier, and sent to the Library of Congress to be “found”. Soon, large numbers of old pairs of shoes began appearing on phone and power lines, and a grassroots movement takes hold.

When the team goes to retrieve Schumann, they discover he is in fact a criminally insane Army convict. On the way back, their plane crashes en route to Andrews Air Force Base. The team survives and is rescued by a farmer, an illegal alien who is given expedited citizenship for a better story. However, Schumann is killed after he attempts to rape a gas station owner's daughter. Seizing the opportunity, Motss stages an elaborate military funeral for Schumann, claiming that he died from wounds sustained during his rescue.

While watching a political talk show, Motss gets frustrated that the media are crediting the president's upsurge in the polls to the bland campaign slogan of “Don't change horses in mid-stream” rather than to Motss's hard work. Motss states that he wants credit and will reveal his involvement, despite Brean's offer of an ambassadorship and the dire warning that he is “playing with his life”. After Motss refuses to change his mind, Brean reluctantly orders his security staff to kill him. A newscast reports that Motss has died of a heart attack at home, the president was successfully re-elected, and an Albanian terrorist organization has claimed responsibility for a recent bombing.

Cast

-   Robert De Niro as Conrad Brean
-   Dustin Hoffman as Stanley Motss
-   Anne Heche as Winifred Ames
-   Denis Leary as Fad King
-   Willie Nelson as Johnny Dean
-   Andrea Martin as Liz Butsky
-   Kirsten Dunst as Tracy Lime
-   William H. Macy as Agent Charles Young
-   Craig T. Nelson as Senator Neal
-   John Michael Higgins as John Levy
-   Suzie Plakson as Grace
-   Woody Harrelson as Sgt. William Schumann
-   Suzanne Cryer as Amy Cain
-   David Koechner as the director
-   Jay Leno as himself
-   James Belushi as himself
-   Michael Belson as The President

Production

Title

The title of the film comes from the idiomatic English-language expression “the tail wagging the dog”,[5] which is referenced at the beginning of the film by a caption that reads:

Motss and Evans

Hoffman's character, Stanley Motss, is said to have been based directly upon famed producer Robert Evans. Similarities have been noted between the character and Evans' work habits, mannerisms, quirks, clothing style, hairstyle, and large, square-framed eyeglasses; in fact, the real Evans is said to have joked, “I'm magnificent in this film.”[6] Hoffman has never discussed any inspiration Evans may have provided for the role, and claims on the commentary track for the film's DVD release that much of Motss' characterization was based on Hoffman's father, Harry Hoffman, a former prop manager for Columbia Pictures.

Writing credits

The award of writing credits on the film became controversial at the time, due to objections by Barry Levinson. After Levinson became attached as director, David Mamet was hired to rewrite Hilary Henkin's screenplay, which was loosely adapted from Larry Beinhart's novel _American Hero_.

Given the close relationship between Levinson and Mamet, New Line Cinema asked that Mamet be given sole credit for the screenplay. However, the Writers Guild of America intervened on Henkin's behalf to ensure that Henkin received first-position shared screenplay credit, finding that—as the original screenwriter—Henkin had created the screenplay's structure as well as much of the screen story and dialogue.[7]

Levinson thereafter threatened to (but did not) quit the Guild, claiming that Mamet had written all of the dialogue as well as creating the characters of Motss and Schumann, and had originated most of the scenes set in Hollywood and all of the scenes set in Nashville. Levinson attributed the numerous similarities between Henkin's original version and the eventual shooting script to Henkin and Mamet working from the same novel, but the WGA disagreed in its credit arbitration ruling.[8]

Music

The film featured many songs created for the fictitious campaign waged by the protagonists; these songs include “Good Old Shoe”, “The American Dream”, and “The Men of the 303”. However, none of these pieces made it onto the soundtrack CD. The CD featured only the title track (by British guitarist/vocalist Mark Knopfler) and seven of Knopfler's instrumentals.

Songs as listed in the film's credits

-   “Thank Heaven for Little Girls”: written by Lerner and Lowe, performed by Maurice Chevalier
-   “I Guard the Canadian Border”: written by Tom Bähler and Willie Nelson, performed by Nelson
-   “The American Dream”: written by Bähler, performed by Bähler
-   “Good Old Shoe”: written by Edgar Winter, performed by Nelson and Pops Staples
-   “Classical Allegro”: written by Marc Ferrari and Nancy Hieronymous
-   “Courage Mom”: written by Merle Haggard and performed by Merle Haggard and the Strangers
-   “Barracuda”: written by Heart, referenced by Woody Harrelson in character
-   “I Love the Nightlife”: written by Alicia Bridges and Susan Hutcheson
-   “God Bless the Men of the 303”: written by Huey Lewis, performed by Lewis, Scott Mathews, and Johnny Colla
-   “Wag the Dog”: written and performed by Mark Knopfler

Reception

On Rotten Tomatoes, _Wag the Dog_ has an approval rating of 85% based on 75 reviews, with an average rating of 7.3/10. The site's critical consensus reads, “Smart, well-acted, and uncomfortably prescient political satire from director Barry Levinson and an all-star cast.”[9] On Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average rating, the film has a score of 73 out of 100, based on 22 critics, indicating “generally favorable reviews”.[10]

Roger Ebert awarded the film four out of four stars and wrote in his review for the _Chicago Sun-Times_, “The movie is a satire that contains just enough realistic ballast to be teasingly plausible; like _Dr. Strangelove_, it makes you laugh, and then it makes you wonder.”[11] He ranked it as his tenth favorite film of 1997.[12]

Accolades

The film was nominated for two 70th Academy Awards: Dustin Hoffman for the Academy Award for Best Actor, and Hilary Henkin and David Mamet for Best Adapted Screenplay.[13] The film was also entered into the 48th Berlin International Film Festival, where it won the Silver Bear – Special Jury Prize.[14]

TV series

On April 27, 2017, _Deadline_ reported that Barry Levinson, Robert De Niro, and Tom Fontana were developing a TV series based on the film for HBO. De Niro's Tribeca Productions was to co-produce along with Levinson and Fontana's company.[15]

“Wag the dog” term and usage

The political phrase _wag the dog_ is used to indicate that attention is purposely being diverted from something of greater importance to something of lesser importance. The idiom stems from the 1870s. In a local newspaper, The _Daily Republican_: “Calling to mind Lord Dundreary's conundrum, the Baltimore American thinks that for the Cincinnati Convention to control the Democratic party would be the 'tail wagging the dog'.”[16]

The phrase, then and now, indicates a backwards situation in which a small and seemingly unimportant entity (the tail) controls a bigger, more important one (the dog). It was again used in the 1960s. The film became a “reality” the year after it was released, due to the Lewinsky scandal. Days after the scandal broke, Bill Clinton ordered missile strikes against two countries, Afghanistan and Sudan.[17] During impeachment proceedings, Clinton also bombed Iraq, drawing further “wag the dog” accusations[18] and with the scandal still on the public's mind in March 1999, his administration launched a bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.[19]

In January 2020, after the U.S. airstrike assassination of Iran's Gen. Soleimani, various references to Wag the Dog made the news.[20] Many referred to Donald Trump's tweets from 2011 to 2012 suggesting then-President Barack Obama would essentially “wag the dog” to get re-elected, noting the hypocrisy of the current situation.[21]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13] “Awards” on IMDB.com

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

title: Wag the Dog

question: Summarize what the article says about Sergeant Schumann.

answer: Sergeant Schumann is conceived by Brean and Motss to match the idea that a war hero was "discarded like an old shoe." They have the pentagon find a soldier whose name matches. Folk singer Johnny Dean (Willie Nelson) records a song called "Old Shoe" to act as a rallying cry behind the cause of the abandoned hero. When the team retrieves Schumann they discover that he is in fact a criminally insane Army convict. Schumann is killed after he attempts to rape a gas station owner's daughter, so they cover it up and give him a hero's funeral saying he died in the rescue attempt.

question: Who does the film star?

answer: The film stars Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro.

question: What correlations were there between the film and real life?

answer: "Wag the Dog" is about a president making advances on an underage girl in the Oval Office and subsequent military actions taken specifically to distract the public from it. The film was released one month before the outbreak of the Lewinsky scandal and the subsequent bombing of the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Sudan by the Clinton administration in August 1998. The comparison was also made in December 1998 when the administration initiated a bombing campaign of Iraq around the time of the impeachment trial. It was made again in spring of 1999 when the administration intervened in the Kosovo War.


text:
[]
Rudy Giuliani and Lev Parnas. Photo: Aram Roston/REUTERS

Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman were carrying out President Trump’s scheme to pressure Ukraine to investigate his domestic rivals. This morning, the two men were arrested on campaign-finance charges as they attempted to leave the country.

The campaign-finance charges involve Parnas and Fruman allegedly violating federal law by funneling several million dollars to Pete Sessions, a former House Republican from Texas. Sessions was valuable to their operation because he publicly demanded the firing of Marie Yovanovitch, the U.S. ambassador (who was subsequently fired.) Lachlan Markay detailed the connection between Parnas, Fruman, and Sessions earlier this week.

But ultimately, the campaign-finance violations are a small part of their overall plot. Parnas and Fruman were the rough equivalent of the Watergate burglars. A July profile of the two, by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, creates the distinct impression that both men are goons. Not _violent_ goons, but people who specialize in highly unethical or illegal activity that may involve organized crime.

Parnas and Fruman were working with Rudy Giuliani, who represents the two as their lawyer, to encourage various Ukrainians to investigate Trump’s opponents in Ukraine. Their work initially focused on discrediting the Mueller investigation, and later evolved to include pursuing unsubstantiated allegations against the Biden family. At the same time they were advancing Trump’s agenda, they were working on a side hustle in which they tried to push Ukraine’s state-controlled energy sector to sign them up to export liquid natural gas. The gas proposal appears to be their payoff: They could let Ukraine know they represented Trump, and Ukraine would therefore have an incentive to throw some business their way, despite their lack of expertise in the inner workings of the energy business.

Parnas and Fruman managed to meet both with President Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and get photographs of both meetings. Those photos were important to burnish their credentials as legitimate representatives of the Trump administration.

What happens next? In an ideal world, federal prosecutors will get them to cooperate and turn over evidence of any misconduct by Giuliani or other political higher-ups on whose behalf they were working when they slipped up and violated campaign-finance law. In practice, they are probably not very likely to flip. Trump has made it very clear that he will use the pardon power in wantonly corrupt fashion to protect anybody working on his behalf. Their lawyer, John Dowd, is also Trump’s own former lawyer, and floated the prospect of pardons to Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn before.

The Wall Street _Journal_ reports Fruman and Parnas had lunch with Giuliani yesterday, before their arrest at the airport with one-way tickets to leave the country. This might be taken as more reason to suspect that the men charged with carrying out Trump’s foreign policy in Ukraine had a less than innocent state of mind. CNN reports that the FBI and federal prosecutors are examining Giuliani’s financial dealings with his two clients, but did not say he is a target of the investigation.

Trump told reporters this afternoon he does not know Fruman and Parnas, despite having met and been photographed with them. He also expressed his hope that Giuliani is not indicted. Neither comment indicates enormous confidence in the innocence of the three figures.

The arrest of Parnas and Fruman is more evidence that Trump’s Ukraine scandal left a wide swath of evidence. Trump had to sideline legitimate diplomats, including the unfortunate Yovanovitch, and empower a bunch of lowlifes in order to turn U.S. diplomacy in the country into a low-rent extortion plot. It certainly doesn’t help him that a couple of his rather seedy accomplices are now under arrest.

_This post has been updated._

Trump’s Watergate Burglars Just Got Arrested

question: Who are Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman?

answer: They were hired to carry out President Donald Trump's scheme to pressure Ukraine into investigating domestic rivals. They allegedly violated federal law by funneling millions of dollars to Pete Sessions, a former House Republican from Texas, who publicly demanded the firing of U.S. ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

question: Who do Parnas and Fruman work for?

answer: They work for Rudy Giuliani, who represents them as their lawyer, to get the Ukrainians on their side. Effectively, Parnas and Fruman are "goons" who specialize in unethical or illegal activity involving organized crime.

question: How were Parnas and Fruman able to pass as legitimate representatives of the Trump administration?

answer: They met, in person, both President Trump and Donald Trump Jr, and took photographs of both meetings. The photographs helped to burnish their reputations and credentials.

question: What happens now that the truth is known?

answer: In a perfect world, federal prosecutors would get Parnas and Fruman to cooperate, turning over evidence of misconduct by Giuliani and other political higher ups. However Trump has made clear that he will use presidential pardon power wantonly to protect anybody who worked on his behalf.

question: Write a ~5 sentence summary.

answer: Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are Ukranian goons who specialize in highly illegal and unethical activity. They were brought on the Trump administration under the guise of legitimate representatives in order to help coerce Ukraine into investigating Trump's domestic rivals. They worked under Rudy Giuliani, who represented the two as their lawyer. They polished their reputations as representatives by taking photos with President Trump and Don Jr., but now that the truth is known, ideally they will cooperate in handing over evidence of misconduct by Giuliani and other political higher ups. However, this seems unlikely as Trump has stated that he would use presidential pardon power to aid anybody who worked for him if need be.


text:
BACKGROUND
GEOGRAPHY
ALLIED PLAN
SALAMAUA-LAE
HUONPENINSULA AND FINISTERRE CAMPAIGNS

Operation Postern - The Markham Valley/ Huon Peninsula Campaign of 4 September 1943-24 April 1944 saw a largely Australian force clear the Japanese from the Huon Gulf and the Huon Peninsula and ended with the fall of the major Japanese base at Madang, to the north-west of the Huon Peninsula. It was carried out as part of Operation Cartwheel, the overall plan to isolate the powerful Japanese base at Rabaul.

BACKGROUND

The Japanese had first arrived in the Huon Gulf in March 1942, when they captured Lae and Salamaua, helping to secure the sea route between New Guinea and New Britain. They also became key bases during the Japanese campaign in Papua New Guinea, which began with the capture of Buna and Gona on the north coast, and peaked with the Japanese advance over the Kokoda Trail. After the failure of this offensive the Australians fought their way back north over the trail, and then alongside the Americans expelled the Japanese from Buna and Gona at the end of 1942 and the start of 1943. Around 5,400 Japanese troops escaped from Buna and Gona and retired to Salamaua and Lae. After the end of this campaign the nearest Allied troops to Salamaua and Lae were based at Wau, in a valley parallel to the coast near Salamaua, where they had been observing the Japanese since they first arrived. General Adachi, the command of the Japanese Eighteenth Army, was determined to defend Salamaua and Lae, which were seen as a key part of the defences of Rabaul. In March the Japanese attempted to send eight transports from Rabaul to Lae, but all eight were sunk by Allied airpower (Battle of the Bismarck Sea, 2-4 March 1943). Only around 1,000 men reached Lae and Salamaua, and this marked the last Japanese attempt to ship large numbers of reinforcements into the Huon Gulf.

GEOGRAPHY

As always in New Guinea much of the fighting would be dominated by the geography of the local area. The coast runs north-west from the Gona/ Buna area into the Huon Gulf, where the Markham River flows into the sea. North of the river the Huon Peninsula juts out to the east for just over 50 miles, before turning north at Finschhafen. The coast then curves around to the north-west and runs in that direct for around 150 miles, reaching the splendidly named Astrolabe Bay. Bogadjim, at the head of the bay, was also the start of a trail south into the Ramu Valley, while just to the north was the important Japanese base of Madang.

About forty miles inland two river valleys ran parallel to the coast. The Markham River flows roughly south-east, flowing into the Huon Gulf near Lae. There is then a watershed before you reach the Ramu Valley. This river flows north-west, parallel to the coast, and eventually flows into the sea about half way between the Japanese bases at Madang and Wewak, west of Hansa Bay.

The area between the coast and the Markham and Ramu Valleys is filled with mountains. In the east the Cromwell Mountains fill the interior of the Huon Peninsula. In the centre of our area the Saruwaged Range fills the gap. In the west is the Finisterre Range, which eventually fades away into a flatter area some way to the west of Astrolab Bay. There were very few routes across the mountains, but the Japanese had built a trail from Bogadjim towards the Ramu Valley.

The Japanese had bases at Salamaua and Lae in the Huon Gulf, Finschhafen on the eastern tip of the peninsula, Sio on the northern coast and Madang to the nort of Astrolabe Bay. Madang was the HQ for the Eighteenth Army at the start of the campaign.

ALLIED PLAN

Early in 1943 the Allies produced a series of plans aimed as capturing, then later isolating, the Japanese base at Rabaul. The third of these was adopted as the Eklton III plan of 16 April 1943. Operation II of Eltkon III called for MacArthur's South-West Pacific Forces to capture Lae, followed by Salamaua and Finschhafen, and finally by Madang. Lae was to be attacked two months after the start of Cartwheel. Salamaua and Finschhafen were to be attacked six weeks later, and Madang two weeks after that. D-Day for Cartwheel was set for 30 June, so Lae was to be attacked at the end of August, Salamaua and Finschhafen in mid-November and Madang at the start of December. Although the overall framework of Cartwheel was followed, the exact order of events did change, as did the timing.

SALAMAUA-LAE

The first part of Operation Postern was the capture of Lae and Salamaua, at the head of the Huon Gulf. Work on this target began before Postern, with Australian troops from the 17th Brigade advancing from Wau and American troops landing at Nassau Bay on the night of 29-30 June (the same day as Operation I/ Operation Chronicle). The two forces combined and advanced north, taking Mubo village on 17 July, then capturing Mount Tambu, between Mubo and Salamaua, in mid August. General Adachi believed that if Salamaua fell then Lae would be lost, and so he sent 9,000 of his 11,000 men to Salamaua.

This meant that the Lae area was fairly weakly defended when Operation Postern got underway. On 4 September the Australian 9th Division landed on the coast east of Lae, and began to advance west. On 5 September US paratroops captured Nadzab, and on the following day the Australian 7th Division began to fly in and advanced east towards Lae.

This helped convince Adachi that Lae and Salamaua could no longer be held. He decided to withdraw his troops towards Finschhafen, at the tip of the Huon Peninsula. On 11 September American troops made an unopposed entry into Salamaua, and on 16 September troops from the Australian 7th Division captured Lae.

The fighting for Salamaua and Lae coast the Australians 500 dead and 1,300 wounded, the Americans 81 dead and 396 wounded and the Japanese 2,722 dead.

HUON PENINSULA AND FINISTERRE CAMPAIGNS

The second phase of the campaign saw the Allies advancing on two separate fronts. One force advanced up the Markham Valley then down the Ramu valley before turning north to reach the coast around Bogadjim (Finisterre Range Campaign). The second force followed the coast as it ran around the Huon Peninsula (Huon Peninsula campaign). This second campaign had the highest priority, and also faced the most determined Japanese opposition, at least to start with.

The western force moved first, reaching Kaiapit in the upper Markham by 20 September. Two days later the Australians landed north of Finschhafen, and began to push south towards the port, which fell on 2 October. Two days later the western force captured Dumpu in the Ramu valley.

On 16 October the Japanese launched a counterattack towards the Australian beachhead north of Finschhafen. They managed to break through to the coast, temporarily cutting the Australian position in half, but they then ran out of steam. On 19 October they were forced to abandon their positions on high ground near the beach, and soon afterwards they were forced back to their starting point. In the same month the western force got its first foothold on Shaggy Ridge, a dominating feature overlooking the Faria River, at the southern end of the best route across the mountains from the Ramu to the coast.

Late October saw the Australians go onto the offensive around Finschhafen. On 29 October they began an attack towards Sattelberg, a Japanese position to the west of the beachhead, from where the counterattack had been launched. The Japanese held on for almost a month, but Sattelberg was finally captured on 25 November. The Australians then turned north and captured Wareo (26 November-10 December 1943), the last Japanese inland position near Finschhafen. This removed the main threat to the Australian beachhead and allowed them to begin a drive around the northern coast of the peninsula.

The Japanese also launched a minor counterattack in the Ramu, beginning on 8 December (Battle of Dumpu). This saw them push the Australians back a short distance from their positions west of Dumpu. The biggest attack came on the night of 12-13 December, and forced the Australians to pull back a little further, but the attack had coast the Japanese so many men that they were unable to follow up, and instead they were forced back to their starting positions. This freed up the Australians to attack the Japanese positions on Shaggy Ridge. At the top of the ridge there were four individual summits, starting at 'the pimple' Despite the difficulties caused by the mountainous terrain the Pimple fell to the Australians on 27 December. The Japanese still held the fourth and highest of the summits, but were unable to push the Australians back.

The nature of the campaign changed on 2 January 1944 when US forces landed at Saidor, on the coast west of the advancing Australian forces on the Huon. The end of the operation was something of an anti-climax. After the Allied landings at Saidor the Japanese decided to evacuate their remaining troops from the area. The Japanese 20th and 51st Divisions moved inland and then carried out an impressive but costly march through the Finisterre Range, eventually reaching Madang in mid-February. Only half of the 20,000 men who set out reached Madang.

The key battle in the Finisterre range came at the end of January when the Australians carried out a three pronged assault on the Kankiryo saddle, at the top of the Faria Valley. The saddle was captured on 26 January 1944 and the last Japanese position on Crater Hill was taken on 1 February. The Japanese then began a fighting retreat back towards the coast, but on 13 April the advancing Australians reached Bogadjim on the north coast. By then patrols from the two wings of the Allied advance had met up in the mountains. By now the Japanese had decided to abandon Madang as well, and in mid-April General Adachi's men began to pull back west, heading for Wewak. On 24 April Australian troops made an unopposed entry into Madang.

The fall of Madang marked the effective end of Operation Postern. The aims of Operation II of Elkton III had been achieved, and the New Guinea side of the Vitiaz had been secured. The next part of the plan, Operation III, had already begun. This called for the invasion of the western end of New Britain, on the opposite side of the strait. The plan was implemented as Operation Dexterity. This began with a diversionary landing at Arawe on 15 December, before the main landings took place at Cape Gloucester on 26 December.

General Adachi's men had suffered heavy losses as they escaped from Sio and Madang, but their suffering was not yet over. As they prepared to defend the major base at Wewak, the allies were preparing to bypass them once again. In April 1944 the Allies carried out Operation Reckless, the invasions of Hollandia and Aitape. Adachi was now trapped between two Allied forces. He decided to try and break out to the west, and in late June attacked the American lines on the Driniumor River. After the failure of this attack he retreated back to Wewak. The Japanese were then left along until the spring of 1945 when the Australians began an costly offensive that eventually forced Adachi to retreat into the mountains. When he finally surrendered on 13 September 1945 only 13,500 of the 30,000 men who had originally been bypassed were still alive.

WWII Home Page | WWII Subject Index | WWII Books | WWII Links | Day by Day

_HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:_ Rickard, J (20 January 2015), _Operation Postern - Markham Valley/ Huon Peninsula Campaign, 4 September 1943-24 April 1944_ , http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/operation_postern_markham_huon.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------

question: What does the text say about WWI?

question: Summarize the Allies' plan.

answer: As part of Operation Cartwheel, Allied forces enacted the Eklton III plan to capture and isolate the Japanese base at Rabaul in April of 1943. Operation II of Eltkon III called for MacArthur's South-West Pacific Forces to capture Lae, followed by Salamaua and Finschhafen, and then Madang. Lae was to be attacked two months after the start of Cartwheel. Salamaua and Finschhafen were to be attacked six weeks later, and Madang two weeks after that. D-Day for Cartwheel was set for 30 June, so Lae was to be attacked at the end of August, Salamaua and Finschhafen in mid-November and Madang at the start of December.

question: What does the text say about the Soviet Union?


text:
[The former headquarters of the Ta-Ching Government Bank in Beijing in 2014.]

The TA-CHING GOVERNMENT BANK (), known as the TA-CHING BANK OF THE MINISTRY OF REVENUE (大清戶部銀行) from 1905 to 1908, was the name of the Bank of China as a government agency of the Manchu Qing dynasty until the empire's dissolution in 1911. It was originally created to serve as the central bank of China in 1905, originally as a division of the Ministry of Revenue, and would serve as the country's _de facto_ central bank until the establishment of the Central Bank of China in 1924.

The Ta-Ching Government Bank was the first national bank in the history of China and served as both the country's central bank as well as a commercial bank to finance projects. It issued banknotes that were intended to unify the Qing dynasty's currency system.

The Ta-Ching Government Bank evolved into the Bank of China in Mainland China and the Mega International Commercial Bank in Taiwan.

History

[The former Shanghai office of the Ta-Ching Government Bank, photographed in 2017.]

During the later part of the Qing dynasty era there was a discussion on whether or not the imperial Chinese government would have to establish a national bank which it finally did in 1905. Peng Shu (彭述) stated before the introduction of new banknotes that the national bank would have to keep sufficient reserves in “touchable” money (現金) at all times. The large number of private notes that were being produced all over the empire was to be restricted by introducing a stamp duty (印花稅). The reformer Liang Qichao campaigned for the government of the Qing dynasty to emulate the Western world and Japan by embracing the gold standard, unify refractory the currencies of China, and issue government-backed banknotes with a ⅓ metallic reserve.[1] In 1904 the Ministry of Revenue had officially authorised the creation of a central bank.[2] At the time of its established, China was still on the silver standard.[3] The Ta-Ching Government Bank was primarily created to help finance government deficits by issuing paper money.[4]

At the end of 1905 the Ta-Ching Bank of the Ministry of Revenue (大清戶部銀行) was founded, and the production of the banknotes was entrusted to the prints of the Beiyang Newspaper (北洋報局) in Northern China.[5] The Ta-Ching Government Bank was the earliest officially opened national bank in China, and it opened its first office in the capital city of Beijing on September 27, 1905 (Guangxu 31).[6] The newly established national bank had a dual nature of being both a central bank and a commercial bank.[7][8]

In 1906 the government of the Qing dynasty sent students to Japan to be educated about modern printing techniques, with the aim to have the Shanghai Commercial Press print the cheques of the Ministry's Bank.[9] The Shanghai branch of the Ta-Ching Government Bank was located at 3-5, Hankou Road.[10] In 1907 it opened its Jinan branch.[11]

In 1912 the Ta-Ching Government bank was renamed to the Bank of China by government charter of the new Republican government.[12] After the Chinese Civil War ended in 1949, the Bank of China effectively split into two operations. Part of the bank relocated to Taiwan with the Kuomintang (KMT) government, and was privatised in 1971 to become the INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL BANK OF CHINA (). In 2002, it merged with Chiao Tung Bank () to become the Mega International Commercial Bank. The Mainland operation is the current entity known as the Bank of China.

Banknotes

[A 10 dollar banknote issued by the Ta-Ching Government Bank depicting Zaifeng, Prince Chun issued in 1910.]

The Ta-Ching Bank of the Ministry of Revenue were still issuing two different types of banknotes, one series was denominated in “tael” (兩), these were known as the Yinliang Piao (銀兩票) and had the denominations of 1 tael, 5 taels, 10 taels, 50 taels, and 100 taels.[13] The other series was denominated in “yuan” and were known as Yinyuan Piao (銀元票) and were issued in the denominations of 1 yuan, 5 yuan, 10 yuan, 50 yuan, and 100 yuan.[14] In the year 1907 the Ta-Ching Bank of the Ministry of Revenue was renamed to the “Ta-Ching Government Bank” (大清銀行), accordingly the inscription on all banknotes had to be changed to reflect this.[15] Because there is no advanced engraving technology for banknotes in China at the time and the banknotes that were printed by the Beiyang Newspaper's commercial press were both expensive to make and easy to imitate, the government of the Qing dynasty had later commissioned the American Bank Note Company to print new banknotes for the Ta-Ching Government Bank.[16]

Following the Chinese tradition of issuing new money in a new reign, the Xuantong administration had the design of the official Ta-Ching Government Bank paper notes somewhat changed to herald in the new emperor.[17] The new design was inspired by the designs of the banknotes of the United States dollar of this era; some banknotes showed the portrait of Li Hongzhang, and others depicted that of Zaifeng, Prince Chun who at the time was the current Chinese Minister of Finance.[18] At the eve of the Xinhai Revolution in 1911, there were 5,400,000 tael worth of Yinliang banknotes circulating in China, and 12,400,000 yuan in Yinyuan banknotes.[19]

[1] Hou Houji (侯厚吉), Wu Qijing (吴其敬) (1982) _Zhongguo jindai jingji sixiang shigao_ (中國近代經濟思想史稿). Heilongjiang renminchubanshe, Harbin, vol. 3, pp. 322–339. (in Mandarin Chinese).

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14] Bruce, Colin - Standard Catalog of World Paper Money, Volume 1, Iola, Wisconsin 2005, Krause Publications.

[15]

[16] 孙浩. 美钞公司档案中李鸿章像大清银行兑换券承印始末[J]. 中国钱币, 2013(6):9-12. (in Mandarin Chinese).

[17]

[18]

[19]

title: Ta-Ching Government Bank

question: What is the purpose of Ta-Ching Government Bank today?

answer: The Ta-Ching bank doesn't exist today as it was merged with the International Commercial Bank of China in 2002 to become the Mega International Commercial Bank in Taiwan.

question: What is 'touchable money'?

answer: Though not explicitly stated it would be logical to assume that it's money that is physical currency i.e. notes and coins.

question: How are the pictures on banknotes decided in China?

answer: When there is a new reign the new Emperor is put on the note.

question: Summarize the history of Ta-Ching Bank in 3 sentences.

answer: The imperial Chinese government established China's first national bank in 1905 , which established banknotes as a part of national currency. It helped to solidify the Gold Standard in China. The bank was eventually became the International Commercial Bank of China in 1971 and merged with Chiao Tung Bank to become the Mega International Commercial Bank in 2002.


text:
(UPDATED BELOW)

Last week, North Korea tested a nuclear weapon, and the US - the country with the world's largest stockpile of that weapon and the only one in history to use it - led the condemnation (US allies with large nuclear stockpiles, such as Britain and Israel, vocally joined in). Responding to unnamed commentators who apparently noted this contradiction, National Review's Charles Cooke voiced these two assertions:

[cooke tweet]

He followed that with this:

[cooke tweet]

Nobody can reasonably dispute that North Korea is governed by a monstrous regime and that it would be better if they lacked a nuclear weapons capability. That isn't what interests me about this. What interests me here is that highlighted claim: that the US "is the greatest country in world history", and therefore is entitled to do that which other countries are not.

This declaration always genuinely fascinates me. Note how it's insufficient to claim the mere mantle of Greatest Country on the Planet. It's way beyond that: the Greatest Country Ever to Exist in All of Human History (why not The Greatest Ever in All of the Solar Systems?). The very notion that this distinction could be objectively or even meaningfully measured is absurd. But the desire to believe it is so strong, the need to proclaim one's own unprecedented superiority so compelling, that it's hardly controversial to say it despite how nonsensical it is. The opposite is true: it has been vested with the status of orthodoxy.

What I'm always so curious about is the thought process behind this formulation. Depending on how you count, there are 179 countries on the planet. The probability that you will happen to be born into The Objectively Greatest One, to the extent there is such a thing, is less than 1%. As the US accounts for roughly 5% of the world's population, the probability that you will be born into it is 1/20. Those are fairly long odds for the happenstance of being born into the Greatest Country on Earth.

But if you extend the claim to the Greatest Country that Has Ever Existed in All of Human History, then the probability is minute: that you will happen to be born not only into the greatest country on earth, but will be born at the precise historical time when the greatest of all the countries ever to exist is thriving. It's similar to winning the lottery: something so mathematically improbable that while our intense desire to believe it may lead us on an emotional level wildly to overestimate its likelihood, our rational faculties should tell us that it is unlikely in the extreme and therefore to doubt seriously that it will happen.

Do people who wave the Greatest Country in All of Human History flag engage that thought process at all? I'm asking this genuinely. Given the sheer improbability that it is true, do they search for more likely explanations for why they believe this?

In particular, given that human beings' perceptions are shaped by the assumptions of their culture and thus have a natural inclination to view their own culture as superior, isn't it infinitely more likely that people view their society as objectively superior because they're inculcated from birth in all sorts of overt and subtle ways to believe this rather than because it's objectively true? It's akin to those who believe in their own great luck that they just happened to be born into the single religion that is the One True One rather than suspecting that they believe this because they were taught to from birth.

At the very least, the tendency of the human brain to view the world from a self-centered perspective should render suspect any beliefs that affirm the objective superiority of oneself and one's own group, tribe, nation, etc. The "truths" we're taught to believe from birth - whether nationalistic, religious, or cultural - should be the ones treated with the greatest skepticism if we continue to embrace them in adulthood, precisely because the probability is so great that we've embraced them because we were trained to, or because our subjective influences led us to them, and not because we've rationally assessed them to be true (or, as in the case of the British Cooke, what we were taught to believe about western nations closely aligned to our own).

That doesn't mean that what we're taught to believe from childhood is wrong or should be presumed erroneous. We may get lucky and be trained from the start to believe what is actually true. That's possible. But we should at least regard those precepts with great suspicion, to subject them to particularly rigorous scrutiny, especially when it comes to those that teach us to believe in our own objective superiority or that of the group to which we belong. So potent is the subjective prism, especially when it's implanted in childhood, that I'm always astounded at some people's certainty of their own objective superiority ("the greatest country in world history").

It's certainly true that Americans are justifiably proud of certain nationalistic attributes: class mobility, ethnic diversity, religious freedom, large immigrant populations, life-improving technological discoveries, a commitment to some basic liberties such as free speech and press, historical progress in correcting some of its worst crimes. But all of those virtues are found in equal if not, at this point,greater quantity in numerous other countries. Add to that mix America's shameful attributes - its historic crimes of land theft, genocide, slavery and racism, its sprawling penal state, the company it keeps on certain human rights abuses, the aggressive attack on Iraq, the creation of a worldwide torture regime, its pervasive support for the world's worst tyrannies - and it becomes not just untenable, but laughable, to lavish it with that title.

This is more than just an intellectual exercise. This belief in America's unparalleled greatness has immense impact. It is not hyperbole to say that the sentiment expressed by Cooke is the overarching belief system of the US political and media class, the primary premise shaping political discourse. Politicians of all types routinely recite the same claim, and Cooke's tweet was quickly re-tweeted by a variety of commentators and self-proclaimed foreign policy experts from across the spectrum.

Note that Cooke did not merely declare America's superiority, but rather used it to affirm a principle: as a result of its objective superiority, the US has the right to do things that other nations do not. This self-affirming belief - _I can do X because I'm Good and you are barred from X because you are Bad_ - is the universally invoked justification for all aggression. It's the crux of hypocrisy. And most significantly of all, it is the violent enemy of law: the idea that everyone is bound by the same set of rules and restraints.

This eagerness to declare oneself exempt from the rules to which others are bound, on the grounds of one's own objective superiority, is always the animating sentiment behind nationalistic criminality. Here's what Orwell said about that in Notes on Nationalism:

  "All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency_. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them_, and there is almost no kind of outrage — torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians — which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by 'our' side . . . The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."

Preserving this warped morality, this nationalistic prerogative, is, far and away, the primary objective of America's foreign policy community, composed of its political offices, media outlets, and (especially) think tanks. What Cooke expressed here - that the US, due to its objective superiority, is not bound by the same rules as others - is the most cherished and aggressively guarded principle in that circle. Conversely, the notion that the US should be bound by the same rules as everyone else is the most scorned and marginalized.

Last week, the Princeton professor Cornel West denounced Presidents Nixon, Bush and Obama as "war criminals", saying that "they have killed innocent people in the name of the struggle for freedom, but they're suspending the law, very much like Wall Street criminals". West specifically cited Obama's covert drone wars and killing of innocent people, including children. What West was doing there was rather straightforward: applying the same legal and moral rules to US aggression that he has applied to other countries and which the US applies to non-friendly, disobedient regimes.

In other words, West did exactly that which is most scorned and taboo in DC policy circles. And thus he had to be attacked, belittled and dismissed as irrelevant. Andrew Exum, the Afghanistan War advocate and Senior Fellow at the Center for New American Security, eagerly volunteered for the task:

[exum tweet]

Note that there's no effort to engage Professor West's arguments. It's pure ad hominem (in the classic sense of the logical fallacy): "who is "Cornell [_sic_] West" to think that anything he says should be even listened to by "national security professionals"? It's a declaration of exclusion: West is not a member in good standing of DC's Foreign Policy Community, and therefore his views can and should be ignored as Unserious and inconsequential.

Leave aside the inane honorific of "national security professional" (is there a licensing agency for that?). Leave aside the noxious and pompous view that the views of non-national-security-professionals - whatever that means - should be ignored when it comes to militarism, US foreign policy and war crimes. And also leave aside the fact that the vast majority of so-called "national security professionals" have been disastrously wrong about virtually everything of significance over the last decade at least, including when most of them used their platforms and influence not only to persuade others to support the greatest crime of our generation - the aggressive attack on Iraq - but also to scorn war opponents as too Unserious to merit attention. As Samantha Power put it in 2007:

  "It was Washington's conventional wisdom that led us into the worst strategic blunder in the history of US foreign policy. The rush to invade Iraq was a position advocated by not only the Bush Administration, but also by editorial pages, the foreign policy establishment of both parties, and majorities in both houses of Congress."

Given that history, if one wants to employ ad hominems: one should be listened to more, not less, if one is denied the title of "national security professional".

The key point is what constitutes West's transgression. His real crime is that he tacitly assumed that the US should be subjected to the same rules and constraints as all other nations in the world, that he rejected the notion that America has the right to do what others nations may not. And this is the premise - that there are any legal or moral constraints on the US's right to use force in the world - that is the prime taboo thought in the circles of DC Seriousness. That's why West, the Princeton professor, got mocked as someone too silly to pay attention to: because he rejected that most cherished American license that is grounded in the self-loving exceptionalism so purely distilled by Cooke.

West made a moral and legal argument, and US "national security professionals" simply do not recognize morality or legality when it comes to US aggression. That's why our foreign policy discourse so rarely includes any discussion of those considerations. A US president can be a "war criminal" only if legal and moral rules apply to his actions on equal terms as all other world leaders, and that is precisely the idea that is completely anathema to everything "national security professionals" believe (it also happens to be the central principle the Nuremberg Tribunal sought to affirm: "while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment").

US foreign policy analysts are permitted to question the tactics of the US government and military (_will bombing these places succeed in the goals?_). They are permitted to argue that certain policies will not advance American interests (_drones may be ineffective in stopping Terrorism_). But what they are absolutely barred from doing - upon pain of being expelled from the circles of Seriousness - is to argue that there are any legal or moral rules that restrict US aggression, and especially to argue that the US is bound by the same set of rules which it seeks to impose on others (recall the intense attacks on Howard Dean, led by John Kerry, when Dean suggested in 2003 that the US should support a system of universally applied rules because "we won't always have the strongest military": the very idea that the US should think of itself as subject to the same rules as the rest of the world is pure heresy).

In 2009, Les Gelb - the former Pentagon and State Department official and Chairman Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations: the ultimate "national security professional" - wrote an extraordinary essay in the journal Democracy explaining why he and so many others in his circle supported the attack on Iraq. This is what he blamed it on:

  _unfortunate tendencies within the foreign policy community, namely the disposition and incentives to support wars to retain political and professional credibility_."

That someone like Les Gelb says that "national security professionals" have career incentives to support US wars "to retain political and professional credibility" is amazing, yet clearly true. When I interviewed Gelb in 2010 regarding that quote, he elaborated that DC foreign policy experts - "national security professionals" - know that they can retain relevance in and access to key government circles only if they affirm the unfettered right of the US to use force whenever and however it wants. They can question tactics, but never the supreme prerogative of the US, the unchallengeable truth of American exceptionalism.

In sum, think tank "scholars" don't get invited to important meetings by "national security professionals" in DC if they point out that the US is committing war crimes and that the US president is a war criminal. They don't get invited to those meetings if they argue that the US should be bound by the same rules and laws it imposes on others when it comes to the use of force. They don't get invited if they ask US political officials to imagine how they would react if some other country were routinely bombing US soil with drones and cruise missiles and assassinating whatever Americans they wanted to in secret and without trial. As the reaction to Cornel West shows, making those arguments triggers nothing but ridicule and exclusion.

One gets invited to those meetings only if one blindly affirms the right of the US to do whatever it wants, and then devotes oneself to the pragmatic question of how that unfettered license can best be exploited to promote national interests. The culture of DC think tanks, "international relations" professionals, and foreign policy commenters breeds allegiance to these American prerogatives and US power centers - incentivizes reflexive defenses of US government actions - because, as Gelb says, that is the only way to advance one's careerist goals as a "national security professional". If you see a 20-something aspiring "foreign policy expert" or "international relations professional" in DC, what you'll view, with some rare exceptions, is a mindlessly loyal defender of US force and prerogatives. It's what that culture, by design, breeds and demands.

In that crowd, Cooke's tweets aren't the slightest bit controversial. They're axioms, from which all valid conclusions flow.

This belief in the unfettered legal and moral right of the US to use force anywhere in the world for any reason it wants is sustained only by this belief in objective US superiority, this myth of American exceptionalism. And the results are exactly what one would expect from an approach grounded in a belief system so patently irrational.

UPDATE

Cooke has a mostly thoughtful reply, here. I don't have time this afternoon to respond in detail, so I'll leave it to readers to decide if you think he's offered a satisfactory explanation for what he thinks. Just two notes: (1) I explicitly said I was not contesting the view that North Korea's government is totalitarian and horrific, and (2) I wasn't suggesting that Cooke himself believes that the US has the right to use force anywhere it wants and for whatever reasons, only that the premise of American exceptionalism he endorses is the necessary ingredient for that belief and is typically the animating principle behind it. I quoted Cooke because, as he himself suggests, what he wrote is a pure distillation of a widely held view in US political discourse.

Related to all of this, Harvard professor Stephen Walt (is he a national security professional or someone to whom such professionals should listen?) wrote a post on this topic in late, 2011 entitled "The Myth of American Exceptionalism" (see, in particular, the numerous examples he cites of people of influence espousing what Cooke wrote here).

question: What does the text say about North Korea?

answer: That it tested a nuclear weapon a week before the text was written. It is a wide held belief that North Korea's government who is totalitarian and horrific should not have nuclear weapons capability.

question: What does the text say about how North Korea views the US?

question: What does the text say about the probability to be born in the US (The Greatest Country on Earth)?

answer: The text says that the probability that one would be born in the US is less than 1% because there are 179 countries on the planet. Given that the US accounts for 5% of the world's population, the probability is 1/20. More than this, the probability to be born in the US at the moment it is thriving is so minute it can be compared to winning the lottery.

question: What does the text say about people having the tendency to view their own cultures as superior?

answer: The text says that humans view their own cultures as superior because they are shaped from birth by the assumptions of the culture around them. They tend to do this not because it is objectively true but because it is a natural inclination. Given this premise, humans should be skeptical of any beliefs taught from birth. This does not mean that the beliefs are wrong but we should make a habit of scrutinizing them.


text:
KAROLINA LEGAARD JENSEN (born May 8, 2003) is a Danish female curler from Kastrup.[1][2]

Personal life

As of 2020, Jensen is a student. Her mother is fellow curler Angelina Jensen and her aunt is Camilla Jensen.[3]

Teams

Women's

+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Season | Skip   | Third  | Second | Lead   | Altern | Coach  | Events |
|        |        |        |        |        | ate    |        |        |
+========+========+========+========+========+========+========+========+
| 2019–2 | Mathil | Jasmin | Karoli | My     | Gabrie | Mikael | (7th)  |
| 0      | de     | Lander | na     | Larsen | lla    | Qvist  | WJBCC  |
|        | Halse  |        | Jensen |        | Qvist  |        | 2019   |
|        |        |        |        |        |        |        | (Dec)  |
|        |        |        |        |        |        |        |  (6th) |
+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Mixed

  Season    Skip               Third             Second            Lead                       Alternate   Coach             Events
  --------- ------------------ ----------------- ----------------- -------------------------- ----------- ----------------- ------------------------
  2018–19   Karolina Jensen    Kilian Jacobsen   Gabriella Qvist   Sean Søndergaard-Nielsen               Angelina Jensen   EYOWF 2019 (5th)[4][5]
  2019–20   Jonathan Vilandt   Karolina Jensen   Kilian Thune      Natalie Wiksten                        Lars Vilandt      WYOG 2020 (13th)

Mixed doubles

  Season    Male          Female            Coach             Events
  --------- ------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------------
  2019–20   Zhai Zhixin   Karolina Jensen   Lars Vilandt[6]   WYOG 2020 (13th)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

title: Karolina Jensen

question: What sport does Karolina Legaard Jensen play?

answer: Karolina Legaard Jensen is a curler.

question: What country is Karolina Legaard Jensen from?

answer: Denmark.


text:
The _ORDENE DE CHEVALERIE_ (or _ORDRE DE CHEVALERIE_) is an anonymous Old French poem written around 1220. The story of the poem is a fiction based on historical persons and events in and around the Kingdom of Jerusalem before the Third Crusade. The title translates to _Order of Knighthood_.

It is one of the earliest and most influential surviving didactic texts devoted to chivalry and it achieved a wide reception both in France and elsewhere. It is an explicitly Christian work that seeks “to assign to knighthood its proper place in a Christian society”.

Synopsis and background

In the poem, Prince Hugh II of Tiberias (_Hue de Tabarie_) is captured in a skirmish by Saladin, king of Egypt. During his captivity he instructs Saladin in the order of chivalry and leads him through the stages of becoming a knight, although he refuses to give him the accolade. In the end, Hugh asks Saladin to give him money to pay his ransom and the king instructs his emirs to give money to Hugh, who thereby pays his ransom and has money to spare.

This fictional account seems to be based on the conflation of a historical event and a legendary one regarded as historical at the end of the 12th century. In 1178 or 1179, Hugh of Tiberias, who was also prince of Galilee, was captured in a skirmish by the troops of Saladin on the banks of the Litani River not far from Beaufort Castle. He was soon released. This event seems to have been merged with the legend that Lord Humphrey II of Toron, a vassal of Hugh, so impressed Saladin as a warrior that the latter asked to be knighted by him. A desire to increase the prestige of the house of saint-Omer may have motivated the poet to transfer the legend of the knighting of Saladin from Hugh's vassal to Hugh himself.

Manuscripts and reception

A prose version of the poem appeared early. The poem (or its prose version) survives in whole or in part in ten medieval manuscripts, a further five modern ones and has been printed at least five times. The prose version is also found inserted into two manuscripts of the _Estoire d'Eracles_ and its continuations. The medievalist Pierre Legrand d'Aussy published a prose adaptation of the poem in 1779. Georges Bataille wrote his doctoral thesis on the poem in 1922, but it was never deposited in the École nationale des chartes.

It is difficult to trace the influence of the _Ordene de chevalerie_ on the chivalric tradition. It has been claimed without evidence as a source for Ramon Llull's _Book on the Order of Chivalry_. Nonetheless, the text was quite popular. It probably drew inspiration from Chrétien de Troyes, especially _Le Conte du Graal_.

Language and author

The language of the poem is Old French of the Francien variety with Picard characteristics. The earliest and most reliable manuscripts were copied by scribes of a similar background to the poet, preserving the Franco-Picard nature of the poem, but there is also an Anglo-Norman manuscript group copied by scribes who have in some places altered the text in conformity with the Anglo-Norman dialect.

Earlier scholars erroneously believed that the poem was written by its hero, Hugh. In fact, the poet appears not to have been a knight but rather a cleric and possibly even a priest. The tone of the poem has been likened to that of a sermon and Bataille went so far as to suggest that it may have been designed to be read publicly in church. Judging by his language and his choice of hero, the poet was probably from the vicinity of Saint-Omer.

Notes

Bibliography

Works cited

-   -   -

Further reading

-   -   -

title: Ordene de chevalerie

question: What is the plot of the Ordene de chevalerie?

answer: It's a Christian poem about chivalry, where Prince Hugh II of Tiberias is captured by Saladin, the king of Egypt. Hugh teaches the tenets of chivalry to Saladin, who is so impressed that he orders his emirs to pay for Hugh's ransom so that Hugh can be free. The plot is a loose adaptation of real-life events around the end of the 12th century, where Hugh's vassal is thought to have instructed Saladin on chivalry.

question: What does the text say about the infidels slain during the crusades?


text:
**Okay, so I wrote this for a story competition run by my school's annual publication, and while I don't sit down and write stories much this is my favourite that I've written.**

The body in the trunk should be alright, because it’s minus twenty-five. It’s morbid, but you can always rely on a Canadian winter for these kinds of things. The client’s only an hour away.

I get to thinking that this should probably be my last job. I’m tired of hiding and tired of working, maybe even tired of killing, and the gritty details that come with it. I’ve never had a ‘home’, nor an office. Where the hell do you put a bureau of contract killers? It’s time to move on.
I can’t pretend it has nothing to do with Eve – but believe me, I’ve tried. She’s being trying to get hold of me for as long as she could talk, and I’ve ignored her until now. But now – she’s in Canada, I’m in Canada – hell, I like Canada. Even now, when it’s snowing so hard that the light freezes as it comes out of my headlights. It suits me. I’m beginning to feel uncomfortable having left her without a father all this time, so I guess the least I could do is help her out with some of the money I’ve made.

I not thinking about that. There’s a diner ahead. I’ll stop and eat.
I park in the bay by the door, where they’ve cleared the path. I take off my boots, and select a pair at random from the five I have in a bag in the back seat. It’s the little forensic details, like the soles of your sneakers, that kill you, but I like to keep the lab coat cops guessing. I’ve been in this job for thirty years, and I’ve sussed it down to three rules: plan ahead; no collateral damage; keep it clean. That means one dead guy, one bullet, zero witnesses, and a thousand alibis. Anyone in this business will tell you the same. I’ve heard a few mentions of a fourth rule – the ‘Dead Man’s Rule’ - but it’s a myth. There’s nothing confusing about contract killing – it’s the most meticulous, clear headed, straight forward job in the world. It’s like being an accountant; pushing bullets instead of pushing pennies.

I carry on driving. My Range Rover slices through the blizzard like hollow points through a brain. I hit a bump, and I hear a clanging coming from the trunk. It’s probably nothing, but I’ll check it out anyway. I open the trunk, and am suddenly reminded of why I want to retire. My tire iron got itself stuck inside Darth Vader’s helmet. These jobs are the worst.
I was given an address, but how was I supposed to know that the job was at a goddamn Star Wars convention. I didn’t have a costume, which meant that, in a reversal of roles, I stood out like a sore thumb in a room full of Jedi’s and Stormtroopers. I had enough information to distinguish my target from the rest of the Dark Lords, and followed him until I could get a moment alone. It was impossible: there were people everywhere. I finally got him alone when he went to the restroom. I locked the door of the men’s room when everyone else was gone except him: I had him alone.

My vantage point wasn’t exactly a sniper’s nest, but perched on the john in the neighbouring cubicle, I could shoot the Dark Lord as he was having a leak. It’s not the noblest way to die, but I don’t deal in honourable deaths. As I pulled the trigger, he looked up, and the bullet hit him in the neck. He grasped at his throat, in some vain attempt to dislodge it from his windpipe. The blood painted the wall of the cubicle. It didn’t splatter, it was a crimson fountain. I was mesmerised by it: for the first time in thirty years, I hadn’t got a clean shot. I eradicated those thoughts by leaving my second shot in the right place this time. He slumped over, unravelled the toilet paper on his way down with an outstretched hand which he had pointed at me. His bloody hand left a print on the paper, a graffitied insignia of a dying man. I tore it off and flushed it. The fire exit in the toilet led to the secluded bay I parked my Rover in, so no one saw me dump the body in the trunk. Keep it clean.
By the time I was alone on the highway, the two bullets had been removed with a pair of tweezers and thrown down a drain in Toronto, my gun was buried in Lake Superior, and Darth Vader had been disrobed and his bloody clothes were now ashes on the highway. I kept the helmet next to him in the trunk, and set off on the twenty hour journey to Winnipeg. I don’t deal in contaminated corpses. I deal in 9mm holes and untraceable kills. That’s how I get by on three rules.
The road unwinds in front of me, and Winnipeg glows around the bend. Somewhere among those bare, snowy trees and tower blocks is Eve, and she’s been waiting for me for thirty years. I’ve already planned my route. I’ll meet my client in Tuxedo, we’ll conclude our business, and I’ll turn left from his home so I can carry straight on to Woodhaven. That’s where she told me she’s been living for the past five years. One left turn.

The client’s home looks expensive. Tuxedo is fittingly the ‘black tie’ district of Winnipeg, where all the suits live. It’s where Eve tells me she’s going to live once she makes enough money. I could help her here. I’ve got enough cash. I can settle down with her in Tuxedo, learn all about what I’ve missed over thirty years.

I don’t know what the guy wants with the nerd, and I don’t care. His Rolex glistens in my headlights, and he gives me a signal to back into his garage. I do, but only so the trunk goes under. I’m not trapping myself in a client’s house. I step out, and embrace the cold again. We crowd round the trunk like children crowd round a fire. When I open it, his look is not one that says ‘ten thousand dollars’. It says something which my ears block out, but that my eyes read for me. It can’t be. I’ve never broken a rule. The wrong body. The wrong goddamn Darth Vader.
His eyes look to me for an explanation, while his hand looks to his jacket for a gun. My brain can’t get one to him in time, and his fingers react with a flash of gunpowder. My jaw is the victim.

I punch the gun from his hand, and scrape it from the ground. It has my splattered blood on it. Now it has his blood on it too. He falls to the ground with a clack as his watch cracks against the concrete. I hit him where he road map. I hit him where he meant to hit me. Blood carries the broken glass with it along the edges of the tiles in a sanguine road map. I hit him where he meant to hit me.

There is a scream from behind, one that slices through me. The Client’s wife stares straight through me at her dead husband. I raise my gun, but don’t have the energy to fire. The girl runs off, and cries for help. One left turn, and it’ll all be over.

I think about my options. I can’t carry on working, because I have no energy, no passion for the job anymore. I can’t settle down because I’m a wanted man, that woman saw me.

I think about Eve. How can I go to her and say I haven’t been her father for thirty years because I’ve been killing people. I can’t give my blood stained earnings and tell her to buy a house. I pray to God she’ll forgive me, but I don’t have a God to pray to. I don’t know what the right thing to do is, because my moral compass is broke. Just one left turn.

I realise the flaw with my rules. There is a fourth rule. There is a Dead Man’s Rule. It’s not a rule that can be broken, it’s a law of physics, an unbreakable rule: in this job, no matter how many rules you have, and no matter how long you last, you’re going to end up dead. If not dead in the most literal sense, then dead inside. That’s when you learn the Dead Man’s Rule. I’m stuck in a loop, dead on the inside. I’ve nowhere to go, and if I were to die now, it wouldn’t make any difference to how I live my life. I’ve reached my expiry date.

The car starts up first time.

I turn right.

title: Dead Man's Rule

question: What does the story say about assassin school?

question: What does the story say about the narrator?

answer: The narrator is a contract killer. He doesn't have a home or an office but drives a Range Rover and has done well for himself. He has been in the killing business for thirty years and is contemplating retirement because he's tired of hiding, working, and maybe even killing - including the gritty details that come with it. Another factor for him wanting to quit is his daughter, Eve, who has been trying to get a hold of him for as long as she could talk. The narrator plans to settle down in Canada because Eve lives there. He wants to spend time with her to make up for all those years he wasn't around, maybe even help her financially with all the money he's made. The narrator goes by three rules: plan ahead, no collateral damage, and keep it clean. This means one dead guy, one bullet, zero witnesses, and a thousand alibis.

question: Summarize the primary source of tension in the story.

answer: The primary source of tension in the story is the narrator's desire to call it quits as a contract killer after thirty years on the job. He is tired of working and wants to spend time with his daughter to make up for the lost time. As a result, he has somewhat lost his focus while on the job and he ends up killing the wrong guy. This causes a cascade of events that prevent him from seeing his daughter and dooms him to a life of a wanted man.

question: What does the story say about the Dead Man's Rule?

answer: The "Dead Man's Rule" is the fourth rule of contract killing. It's an unbreakable rule and follows the laws of physics. The Dead Man's Rule is that in the contract killing business, no matter how many rules a killer has, no matter how long they last, they are still going to end up dead. If not dead in the literal sense, then dead inside. It feels like being stuck in a loop while dead on the inside. It serves as an expiration date for contract killers. The narrator initially thought it was a myth up until his last job, which he bungled.