An apology on the part of the Foundation and Toepfer’s family has been refused, since, says Wimmer, “no public apology can undo Alfred Toepfer’s individual responsibility or lessen his moral guilt. I find the concept of ‘apologizing’ for someone else’s guilt erroneous and not helpful […] it is likely to present a quick and hollow escape from a far more profound responsibility to learn the lessons from the past for the future.”In a letter to Pinto-Duschinsky published on its website, the foundation states that “as far as we know today, he did not participate directly or indirectly in the Holocaust, nor did he deny its existence.”Toepfer was never a member of the Nazi Party, and reportedly did not profit from wartime activities, which included the supplying of slaked lime to cover bodies in the Lodz ghetto in occupied Poland.Writing in the Standpoint, Pinto-Duschinsky warned of the danger of “greywashing” the Holocaust. He argued that “as long as the past is explained away, the moral basis for a new Europe cannot yet exist and British universities should not accept money tainted by denial”.Some, however, question the significance of the findings. Tom Kuhn, a fellow of St. Hugh’s and member of the Selection committee for the Hanseatic Scholarships, says that “the long and the short is that there is nothing new in the Standpoint article. Most of what has been published before has been the product of research funded by the Foundation itself. In my view the Foundation has, in recent years, been exemplary in confronting the history of its founder and putting the facts in the public domain[…] I don’t think an apology is either here or there.” Most of the details on Toepfer in Pinto-Duschinsky’s article had already been published in 2000 in a biography of Toepfer.“A boycott, of work aimed at international exchange and mutual understanding, does not seem a sensible way forward” said Kuhn.When questioned about this, Pinto-Duschinsky replied that “to say that an apology for Toepfer’s odious acts is ‘neither here nor there’ is morally flippant. It is incorrect that there is nothing new in my publication. It reveals vital findings. And the case against the University’s involvement with the Toepfer foundation has nothing to do with an academic boycott.”Many former students of Oxford are now having to come to terms with the fact that the source of funds from which they benefited are “severely tainted” by the history of their founding donor.Daniel Johnson, Editor of Standpoint and former recipient of the Hanseatic Scholarship, said “Those who administered [Toepfer’s] legacy have a duty to offer an apology to all those who were misled” adding that “Oxford…can continue to endorse the Hanseatic Scholarships only if their problematic provenance is fully and openly acknowledged”.Toepfer died in 1993, aged 99. In 1993, 1996 and 1999, protests led to the abandonment of annual prizes awarded by the Universities of Vienna and Strasbourg.No such decision was made at Oxford. The competition for the Hanseatic Prize was held last term, despite the ongoing review of Oxford’s position.Among the findings published in the April issue of Standpoint magazine, Dr. Pinto-Duschinsky reveals that Toepfer was closely associated with numerous convicted Nazis, notably SS Brigadier Edmund Veesenmeyer, the German diplomat in Budapest during the Holocaust overseeing the deportation of Jews to Auschwitz.Toepfer employed Barbara Hacke, the personal secretary to Veesenmayer from 1940-1945, as his own secretary, and Veesenmayer too was employed by Toepfer after his release from Landesberg castle, where he had been imprisoned for war crimes.Pinto-Duschinsky’s investigations also describe the case of Hartmann Lauterbacher, a former SS Major-General and former head of the Hitler Youth. Lauterbacher was in hiding having escaped from Italian custody. A request was made that Toepfer contact an associate in Buenos Aires asking him to help Lauterbacher set up a new life in Argentina. A copy of Toepfer’s letter of recommendation, dated 2 October 1950, survives in the Alfred Toepfer Foundation.The Foundation accepts the truth of all of these findings. Ansgar Wimmer, its CEO, told Cherwell, “for more than ten years this foundation has been actively trying to promote transparency and to face its past in a responsible manner. No one at our foundation today trivialises any aspect of Alfred Toepfer’s biography.” In a letter to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Newspaper, Dr. Pinto-Duschinsky calls for the foundation to recognize the “unvarnished truth” about their founder. Arguing that “truth and apology are among the essentials of reconciliation”. Fresh doubts have been cast over Alfred Toepfer, the controversial German multi-millionaire whose foundation provides prizes for Oxford students.An investigation carried out by Dr. Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, Britain’s leading expert on the funding of political parties and elections, has exposed evidence that Toepfer supported the Third Reich.According to the investigation, Toepfer took known Nazi war criminals into his employment, and assisted a high-ranking SS officer to flee justice.Toepfer set up the prestigious Shakespeare Prize in 1937, which has been awarded to numerous high profile British personalities, including Tom Stoppard, Simon Rattle and, more recently, Richard Dawkins. The Prize was discontinued in 2006.The Alfred Toepfer foundation also works in cooperation with Oxford University on the Hanseatic Scholarship programme, an annual prize worth €15,000 for graduates or final-year undergraduates of Oxford or Cambridge. The prize was originally set up through a collaboration between German officials, and senior figures at the Taylorian institute, in an effort to promote Anglo-German relations.The impact that these findings will have on Oxford University’s link to the Alfred Toepfer Foundation is as yet unclear.A statement from the University says that Pinto-Duschinsky’s material “will be reviewed by a special sub-committee of Oxford University’s Committee to Review Donations comprising representatives from the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. The sub-committee will also consider the response of the Toepfer Foundation to these representations.”The sub-committee will meet on June 14 with Pinto-Duschinsky and with the chief executive of the Alfred Toepfer foundation.
September 21, 2020
Hodgson was successful with his third kick at goal before Saracens scored another excellent try – Goode and Hodgson making enterprising runs to provide Strettle with an easy touchdown. Connacht suffered a further blow when White was sin-binned for stamping on Barritt in a ruck, with the TMO deciding that a yellow card was a sufficient punishment. This proved costly as with the last play of the half, Brits finished off a line-out drive to give Saracens an 18-6 interval lead. Within two minutes of the restart, the bonus point was in the bag. From inside his own 22, Goode ran brilliantly to evade five defenders before feeding Taylor, whose pass sent Strettle in his for his second try. White returned but it made no difference as the irrepressible Goode again tore apart the visitors’ defence to score a superb solo try. With the game won, Saracens made a raft of changes with five substitutions in quick succession but it did not stop their flow with Kruis forcing his way over for the try which Hodgson converted to loud cheers. Hodgson was replaced by Farrell but this was soon reversed as Farrell left the field with a cut head. However Saracens continued on the rampage with replacements, Wyles, Wray and Johnston all scoring tries before Strettle and Ashton crossed to ensure Connacht were routed. However, Toulouse finished top of Pool Three – leaving Saracens qualifying as one of the best two runners-up and facing a difficult away tie in the next round. Saracens scored 11 tries through David Strettle (3), Chris Ashton (2), Alex Goode, Chris Wyles, Jackson Wray, George Kruis, James Johnston, and Schalk Brits. Had Charlie Hodgson not missed eight difficult kicks, the hosts would have won by an even bigger margin. Hodgson’s misses and two penalties from Dan Parks allowed the Irish to remain in contention for much of the first half – but it was all one-way traffic after Connacht prop Nathan White had picked up a yellow card. Brits and the Vunipola brothers, Mako and Billy, were at the heart of a dominant home pack which enabled star performer Goode and Brad Barritt to impress in the back line. Hodgson was selected at fly-half for the hosts with Owen Farrell on the bench. Duncan Taylor was included in the centre in place of Wyles and there were recalls to the starting line-up for forwards Matt Stevens, Kruis and Ernst Joubert. Connacht opted for experience with Parks, Gavin Duffy and Michael Swift back in the side – and Parks made no mistake with an early penalty. Hodgson was wide with a long-range penalty attempt but soon after the home side led with a well-crafted try. From a scrum 35 metres out, Barritt and Mako Vunipola made penetrative runs which put the visitors’ defence on the back foot. The ball was recycled and a neat pass from Hodgson gave Ashton just enough room for the wing to squeeze in at the corner. Hodgson missed the conversion and declined to attempt a kickable penalty as Saracens chose a more attacking option – but they were not rewarded as Billy Vunipola was unable to force his way over from a line-out five metres out. Despite having the better of the opening quarter, Saracens trailed 6-5 at the end of it after Parks kicked his second penalty. Press Association Saracens crushed Connacht 64-6 to make sure of their place in the Heineken Cup quarter-finals.
December 21, 2019
Two Donegal members of the Oireachtas were denied the full amount of one of their annual allowances last year because of their poor attendance record at Leinster House.Sinn Féin’s Pearse Doherty and Thomas Pringle of Independents4Change were paid less than the standard travel and accommodation allowance (TAA) for not attending the Dáil or Seanad for the required minimum of 120 days.The Houses of the Oireachtas said refunds totalling just over €9,737 were repaid by the eight members who did not achieve their full recorded attendance. Deputy Thomas PringleThe TAA is based on the distance travelled from their normal residence by Oireachtas members to Leinster House and ranges from €9,000 to members based in Dublin up to €34,065 for those in band 12 who live more than 360km away.Members must repay 1 per cent of the allowance for each day less than the required number attended, while TDs and Senators can also voluntarily choose not to accept the full allowance.Two Donegal Oireachtas members denied full allowance over poor attendance was last modified: July 8th, 2019 by Staff WriterShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)
December 17, 2019
Lost may be an ironic name for a geocache, but not when you consider the popular TV show. In case you don’t know about the show, here’s a quick summary: the series took place on a mysterious, deserted, jungle island with secrets continuously uncovered by the cast as the plot progressed. One of the most groundbreaking discoveries was the DHARMA Initiative, and it could be a one for you too — if you find the geocache. The first step is to read the message on the cache page to prepare for your journey, the second step is to download the ZIP file which contains a secret website URL with instructions from DHARMA. Only once you’re at the location can you find the missing piece to the next web URL and move on to the next stage. At each site, there are different puzzles that lead you through each step of the journey. At the final, the Letterbox contains a journal, some SWAG, likely trackables, and one DHARMA stamp, which is a symbol of pride for completing this cache.Whether you’re a fan of multi-stage geocaches or the TV show, this cache is a hidden treasure to add to your bucket list. If you’re planning a trip, the cache owner heeds caution not to do this mission alone, and you’ll want to prepare accordingly ahead of time. Cache experiences like this are always nice to share with friends or family anyways.Does this sound like a mission you want to sign up for?Continue to explore some of the most amazing geocaches around the world.Check out all of the Geocaches of the Week on the Geocaching blog. If you would like to nominate a Geocache of the Week, fill out this form.Share with your Friends:More The Difficulty and Terrain on Lost – DHARMA Initiative are intimidating, set at 4.5 of 5. It is a clever and laborious 7-stage Letterbox Hybrid that was “uncovered” near Brno, Czechia by Cache Owner mitak. Climb into secret hatches, explore the underground tunnels, and hike through a wilderness forest to get to each DHARMA station (Swan, Pearl, Flame, Arrow, Hydra, and Staff). Letterbox HybridGC11EJJby mitak SharePrint RelatedNew country souvenir, Peru, with Geocache of the Week: Letterbox-Peru: Salkantay Pass!January 16, 2019In “Community”Underground — Geocache of the WeekFebruary 7, 2018In “Community”Selfie Letterbox — Geocache of the WeekMay 23, 2018In “Community” Difficulty:4.5Terrain:4.5 Location:Jihomoravský kraj, CzechiaN 49° 11.583′ E 016° 33.805′
September 30, 2019
Kevin Durant rejected the notion that Dwyane Wade is one of the top 10 players in the NBA.In an interview with CineSport, Durant was discussing Sports Illustrated’s list of the NBA’s top players, and stated that his former teammate Harden should be on the list. The Oklahoma City forward Durant is ranked No. 2; Miami guard Wade landed in the No. 8 spot.When asked who should have been left out to make room for Harden, Durant replies hastely that, “Dwyane Wade” didn’t deserve to be on the list.That sparked a rebuttal from Wade, who responded immediately via Twitter and Instagram:“Don’t believe me just watch,” he posted along with an image.Durant tweeted Wade back saying:“Show me don’t tweet me..”The NBA season starts in six weeks, so the Heat’s Wade and the Thunder’s Durant will get to ‘show and prove’ when they face off in January.
September 29, 2019
There’s a new team atop FiveThirtyEight’s NFL Elo rankings this week, and it’s the one we discussed in this space last time around — the red-hot New Orleans Saints. Fresh off an impressive victory over the Los Angeles Rams, New Orleans turned around and walloped the Bengals 51-14 in Cincinnati. Based on how they’ve been playing recently, there’s no team more deserving of the No. 1 slot than Dem Saints.However, New Orleans is also the fourth different team to hold the top spot in Elo so far this year, joining the Patriots, Eagles and Chiefs. That’s tied for the most handoffs of the No. 1 spot through Week 10 of a season since 2002 (when five separate teams held No. 1 to that point in the schedule). So we still don’t have a great sense of who exactly will be meeting up in Atlanta in February. In fact, there’s still a decent chance it might just be the two teams that are scheduled this week for an epic Monday Night Football clash — the Chiefs and Rams.Both teams sport 9-1 records, and they have similar strengths and weaknesses. According to Pro-Football-Reference.com’s Simple Rating System (SRS) metric, the Chiefs rank second in the league on offense and 19th on defense; the Rams rank third in offense and 14th on defense. K.C. is led by a couple of 23-year-olds: quarterback Patrick Mahomes, who leads the NFL in passing yards, and running back Kareem Hunt, who ranks fourth in rushing. L.A.’s pair are both 24: QB Jared Goff (second in passing yards) and RB Todd Gurley (first in rushing).A nationally televised matchup between two exciting, young, star-studded teams in opposite conferences is sure to have a Super Bowl feel to it. And our model does give the Chiefs the AFC’s best odds of winning the Super Bowl, while considering the Rams to be the NFC’s second-most likely winner (behind New Orleans). But it also bears remembering that prospective “Super Bowl previews” on the midseason calendar usually don’t predict the actual Super Bowl very well (though they do often come close).To gather a sample of similarly huge AFC-NFC showdowns from seasons past, I filtered our database of games for ones that:Happened in Week 5 of a season or later (to give Elo time to “catch up” with how good each team is).Featured two Top 5 NFL teams at the moment of the game, according to Elo.Matched up teams from opposite conferences.Going back to the start of the current NFL playoff format in 1990, there have been 36 regular-season games that could have been considered Super Bowl previews, according to the rules laid out above. Of those, only two — Bills-Giants in December 1990 and 49ers-Chargers in December 1994 — ended up actually foreshadowing the Super Bowl to come. (The Giants flipped their regular-season loss on its head, while the 49ers obliterated the Chargers both times.)There have been plenty more regular-season games where the eventual Super Bowl combatants met months beforehand — think Patriots-Rams in 2001 or Giants-Patriots in 2007. But few were hyping those as potential Super Bowl previews at the time (even if coaches had their occasional premonitions about meeting up in the postseason). And on the flip side, when it comes to games highlighted for their Super Bowl potential, the exact matchup often finds a way to get derailed over the remainder of the season.Of those 36 regular-season matchups in our data-set, 23 did contain at least one of the eventual conference champions — so the odds aren’t bad that either K.C. or L.A. will make their way to Atlanta on Feb. 3. 199615DEN1GNB2✓GNB AFCNFC DAL25.512.5ATL21.711.323.81535 Less playoff success7856196 PHI26.49.2NO98.51.610.81634 More playoff success100%97%75%58% 20076NWE1✓DAL5NWE MIN62.9%±17.5CHI70.1%±17.034.51565 NO64NO71NO 51, CIN 14+2.6– The best matchups of Week 11Week 11 games by ranking of average Elo ratings (using the harmonic mean) plus ranking of total potential swing for the two teams’ playoff chances, according to FiveThirtyEight’s NFL predictions 199716DEN3✓SFO2SFO 199015BUF3✓NYG2✓BUF CAR70.813.9DET3.63.417.21525 Another week, another loss for the readers against Elo, which now has beaten the field in nine of 10 weeks so far this season. This time, it was the Patriots’ surprising road loss to the Tennessee Titans that ended up costing readers the whole week — on average, they lost 16.6 points in that matchup, in a week where they lost by 12.5 total points. However, even though the readers have followed up their lone win of the season in Week 7 with three more losses in a row, they are getting better: In the season’s first six weeks, they lost by an average of 38.9 points per week; over the past three weeks, they’ve only lost by an average of 8.6 points.Among those readers who aren’t mired in a losing streak, congrats to David Ryborz, who topped all identified users in Week 10 with 148.6 points, and to Brian Hake, who continues to lead the season-long leaderboard with 808.4 points. Thanks to everyone who has been playing — and if you haven’t, be sure to get in on the action! You can make picks now and still try your luck against Elo, even if you haven’t played yet.Check out our latest NFL predictions. Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com Elo’s dumbest (and smartest) picks of Week 10Average difference between points won by readers and by Elo in Week 10 matchups in FiveThirtyEight’s NFL prediction game NYJ63NYJ64BUF 41, NYJ 10-2.9– 20089TEN2GNB5TEN 20049PIT4PHI1✓PIT One of these teams might be special. The other, not so muchHow each team in a midseason “Super Bowl preview” game fared, on average, by the level it reached in the playoffs. 201015BAL5NOR2BAL Team ACurrentAvg. Chg*Team BCurrentAvg. Chg*Total ChangeGame Quality KC99.90.1LAR>99.9<0.10.11661 TEN62.517.7IND11.89.827.51506 LAC91.95.8DEN22.214.171.124519 20158DEN3✓GNB2DEN Playoff %Playoff % TB1.71.5NYG0.20.11.61398 199313MIA4DAL1✓MIA 199517PIT4✓GNB5GNB CIN34.217.2BAL24.413.230.41511 19998DEN5MIN2MIN PICKWIN PROB.PICKWIN PROB.ResultREADERS’ NET PTS 200612NWE3CHI5✓NWE WSH66.412.9HOU126.96.36.199507 Game quality is the harmonic mean of the Elo ratings for the two teams in a given matchup.*Average change is weighted by the likelihood of a win or loss. (Ties are excluded.)Source: ESPN Show more rowsSource: pro-Football-Reference.com 199110HOU4WAS1✓WAS SeasonWeekTeamElo RkMade SB?TeamElo RkMade SB?Won NE63NE74TEN 34, NE 10-16.6– 199415SDG4✓SFO2✓SFO PIT61PIT57PIT 52, CAR 21-5.4– GB23.113.0SEA29.112.725.61515 Share of teams reaching round 201610NWE1✓SEA3SEA ATL78ATL76CLE 28, ATL 16+0.8– 199513KAN3DAL1✓DAL 20088PIT3✓NYG4NYG Home teams are in bold.The scoring system is nonlinear, so readers’ average points don’t necessarily match the number of points that would be given to the average reader prediction. CHI65CHI67CHI 34, DET 22-0.1– 19926KAN5PHI3KAN In the grand scope of the NFL universe, having slightly better than a coin-flip’s odds to make the divisional round of the playoffs isn’t too bad an outcome. But for a pair of teams coming into a midseason game with Super Bowl aspirations, it is striking how rare it is for both to ultimately make significant playoff runs. Instead, one usually is left behind along the road to the championship. And, in case you were wondering, the winner of the Super Bowl preview advanced deeper into the postseason just 60 percent of the time, so it’s tough to say which team will be which, regardless of who wins the “preview.”Either way, this Rams-Chiefs game will treat the fans to some points. The over-under on the game is 63½ points — one of the highest point totals in NFL history. And according to our matchup quality metric (determined by the harmonic mean of the teams’ Elo ratings in each game), this is also the best game of the entire NFL season so far. The only factor holding this particular Super Bowl preview back might be game importance — i.e., how likely it is to swing either team’s odds of making the playoffs. Both teams have all but clinched playoff spots, so K.C.-L.A. drops to sixth place among Week 11 games once we account for a mix of matchup importance and quality: GB61GB69GB 31, MIA 12+3.9– 199013BUF3✓PHI5BUF 20026NWE4GNB5GNB 199512OAK4DAL1✓DAL 20136NWE2NOR5NWE 199714KAN4SFO1KAN LAC76LAC82LAC 20, OAK 6+1.2– 199116KAN5SFO3SFO Three of the last four midseason Super Bowl previews featured 50 percent of the eventual Super Bowl matchup: New England and Atlanta played at foggy Foxboro in Week 7 last season (itself a Super Bowl rematch), and the Patriots later went to the Super Bowl. Seattle and New England reprised their own earlier Super Bowl matchup in Week 10 of 2016, and the Pats also went to that season’s Super Bowl. And in 2015, the Broncos used a Week 8 win over the Packers as a stepping-stone along their Super Bowl path. The exception in that stretch was Arizona-Cincinnati in Week 11 of 2015 — which sounds like an absurd potential Super Bowl, except that both teams were a combined 15-3 going into the contest, long before an injury to Andy Dalton ruined Cincy’s season.But if one team tends to emerge from these kinds of games on a championship path, the other usually stalls out well before the Super Bowl. Here’s a breakdown of how often each team in our sample of games ends up making each round of the playoffs, depending on how much playoff success they had: 20177NWE1✓ATL3NWE 20035IND5TAM1IND PHI74PHI73DAL 27, PHI 20-0.5– ARI0.10.1OAK<0.1<0.10.11354 SF67%SF62%NYG 27, SF 23+4.7– But even if it won’t change the playoff race or give us a sneak peek at Super Bowl LIII, the Rams and Chiefs’ tilt should be fun. And once it’s over, we can look ahead to Week 16’s Saints-Steelers battle for yet another potential Super Bowl preview … that probably won’t contain both conference champs, either.FiveThirtyEight vs. the readersYou can check out FiveThirtyEight’s Elo ratings in our NFL prediction interactive, which simulates the rest of the season 100,000 times, to track how likely each team is to make the playoffs and win the Super Bowl. On top of that, you can also pick against the Elo algorithm in our prediction game. You’ll be playing for bragging rights, and the chance to climb up our giant leaderboard.Using data from the game, here are the games in which Elo made its best — and worst — predictions against the reader picks last week: 19979NWE4GNB1✓GNB OUR PREDICTION (ELO)READERS’ PREDICTION 199317HOU4SFO2HOU 201811KAN2LAR4? 19927KAN4DAL5✓DAL IND56IND52IND 29, JAX 26-5.0– 201215NWE1SFO3✓SFO TB54WSH51WSH 16, TB 3+3.8– LAR69LAR74LAR 36, SEA 31+1.1– 20147DEN1SFO3DEN 200017IND4MIN5IND KC88KC93KC 26, ARI 14-0.1– 201511CIN4ARI3ARI PIT92.35.8JAX2.52.38.01547 20155CIN5SEA4CIN Team that had …Wild CardDivisionalConf. ChampSuper Bowl 20015BAL1GNB4GNB A brief history of regular-season “Super Bowl previews”NFL games after Week 4 in which both teams ranked among the Top 5 in FiveThirtyEight’s Elo ratings and were in opposite conferences, since 1990 200912NWE3NOR2✓NOR
September 13, 2019
While recent news coverage has focused on privatized family housing, many service members and military families live off base.ADC wants to learn more about how communities, regions and states are planning, developing and maintaining quality, affordable housing outside the gate. We are looking for examples of plans, initiatives, organizations or people advancing these issues locally and specific outcomes that have been achieved.Has your community, region or state implemented successful strategies to tackle the issues of affordability or quality? Do you know thought leaders on this topic who might be valuable for ADC to learn from? Please send your ideas or comments to [email protected] Army Depot photo by Thomas Robbins ADC AUTHOR